For a while there it looked like Slimport would overtake MHL since adapters could actually run without extra power, can MHL USB/HDMI adapters even do that yet? These overlapping standards are getting sorta confusing regardless...
MHL requires adapters to connect to HDMI or DVI displays. The adapters include 3 plugs: MHL/micro-USB on one end, HDMI or DVI on the other, and a full-sized USB plug for power.
AFAIUI, you can connect without using the full-sized USB. You just won't be able to charge the phone while connected to the display. With the full-sized USB plugged in, the phone charges.
you forgot: vga one should not forget the many versions as each version offers more than the previous version of the cable. that is, you can't get 4k@60 w/o hdmi 2.0, ... so need both the source and sink to support at least that version and a matching cable.
Yes, he did and so did everyone else. VGA is dead, hopefully DVI follows it soon and full sized DisplayPort while we're at it (why do we need anything other than Mini DisplayPort?).
Unfortunately the shambling, rotting corpse that is VGA still staggers along... look at how many manufacturers put VGA outputs on their motherboards. At least it's been gone from graphics cards for a while.
Not to mention VGA inputs on data projectors (although I'm starting to find some with HDMI now). Full-size DP made an unwelcome appearance on a Dell laptop I got given, had to buy a special cable to turn it into HDMI.
VGA on motherboards is due to the continued corporate need for "backward compatible" systems - which tend to be as cheap as possible.
As someone else mentioned, many older (yet very expensive when bought, so unlikely to be replaced soon,) projectors are VGA-only. Plus some of the more insane low-end LCD desktop monitors that only have VGA. (Or VGA+one other, so if you want to share between systems, you have to use VGA for one.)
VGA needs to die. DVI needs to die. full-size DisplayPort needs to die. All "computers" should use miniDP, all "home theater" devices should use HDMI. Mobile computing devices can use USB type C with an HDMI/MHL adapter. (MHL really should continue to just be a "rides along on existing connectors" standard, not a separate plug!)
Likewise, USB type C should take over as the "non-display/not ultra-high-speed" connector of choice for all computing devices. A new high-end laptop should have two Thunderbolt (aka mini DisplayPort physically) ports, and 2-4 USB type C ports. And that's it. (And Thunderbolt should add charging without changing the connector.) Charging over any port, outbound power delivery over any port. (Run that mobile monitor directly from the laptop; charge the laptop from the single cable from the monitor, etc.)
They need to fix digital connections first. They still don't work right.
My 27" Dell monitor (2560x1440) is 100% reliable with VGA. With DisplayPort it loses connection to the computer frequently. DVI is a little better, but it still isn't what I would call great. Yes, the image is slightly better with the digital connections compared to analog, but what good is it if it can't be trusted?
My 28" Dell 4K monitor only works on a couple of my computers. Neither the DisplayPort nor HDMI connection works consistently with any computer I connect it to.
On my Macs, it only works at 1080p, with both DP and HDMI. I've never gotten it to run at its full resolution; it isn't even a selectable option. That same monitor on my newest Dell laptop, HDMI will display the full 4K resolution for a couple of minutes, but then it cuts out completely and has to be reconnected to come back. And while it is actually displaying an image it has random flashing pixels all over the place. On another (nearly 5-year old laptop) the same monitor mostly works with DisplayPort, but it will eventually lose connection with that one as well after an hour or so. The same monitor will occasionally show an image when connected to my GeForce 760 card (via DisplayPort; HDMI only operates at 1080p on that one), but then it loses connection and the only way to fix it is to reboot the computer. I'm pretty confident that VGA wouldn't have any of those problems, just because it is super simple.
None of it is cable related; I've tried many different cables, all with identical results.
HDMI, DisplayPort, and even DVI might work okay under "normal" conditions (say, 1080p60), but they seriously break down when pushed, even within their designed specs. VGA was so simple it doesn't have these problems. Not that I'm wishing VGA would come back, just that manufacturers get these problems resolved so that VGA can go away and not be missed. Digital is better, but only when it works.
I accidentally found out that every time the phone was synching with the tower the DELL monitor lost connection on DisplayPort. Apparently there are two things working at similar frequency and the interference from the phone's emission f*cks up DisplayPort. Who would have known ?
Kinda like how USB 3.0 frequency emission can screw with 2.4GHz signals (like wireless mice), Intel has a whole white paper on it and Logitech forums quite a few related threads. It's kinda mind boggling that kinda common scenario wasn't preemptively tested for... Hopefully it's something Type C might address.
VGA sticks around because it is simple and digital connections still don't always work right.
I couldn't tell you how many times I've had a DisplayPort connection not work at all (or cut in and out), or an HDMI connection not be able to negotiate and display random noise. It happens all of the time. Digital protocols have gotten very complicated, and with complication comes problems.
VGA just works. It might not be technically as good as the newer digital connections, but it is reliable.
Add to that that most digital connections don't work past about 30 feet, there's still a place for VGA (which I've run out to 200 feet without issue). I've never gotten HDMI to work past 50 feet even with the best cable, or DisplayPort to be reliable past about 30 feet. Amplifiers help, but don't cure the problem. The projector in my office (brand new with a very high quality cable) cuts out with HDMI frequently, but the VGA connection always works. Both cables are 25 feet long.
There's still a place for good old simple analog. Added complexity can be a curse rather than a blessing.
Reading the article I thought, "How long do these cables really need to be? Can't we just push speeds higher and use shorter cables?" Reading your comment reminded me that lots of PC scenarios have the display much farther from the source than, say, a Bluray player or cable box. I even thought about putting my PC in the room over and snaking the cables to my bedroom to cut down on noise, and that would be hard for a very high speed signal rate cable.
As soon as DisplayPort can support 2160p (4k) at more than 60 Hz, I will be looking for a GPU and monitor that can handle it. As of right now, my monitor is limited to D-DVI for 1440p at greater than 60 Hz.
Actually, back in September the VESA group announced that they had successfully created an implementation of the "Alternate Mode" for USB c as well. So if anything this is a great start to a new year with MORE interfaces gaining cross compatibility with each other. Though the DP implementation of using USB C allows for 100 watts. But still, the more common interconnects the merrier.
I could see a future where GPUs just have SMHL and USB C connections on them. And not only that but we could potentially power a lot of these monitors over the same cables. Talk about a reduction in clutter.
Mhl was designed to charge phones and power streaming sticks. DP has some nice functions and is royalty free (which you would think if you were selling a TV set would make it a no brainer) but I have still yet to purchase a TV, or computer monitor with even one DP on it. Until DP offers more than 500ma it is not an equivalent tech to mhl. To further complicate these standards in order to achieve maximum bandwidth cable lengths are limited 3 ft. There aren't many devices where a 3' cable would work for me. 4 or 5 would be more reasonable. They really need to focus more on lossless compression (which is a part of the DP standard but rarely is used).
60W, 20V @ 3A, according to Wikipedia (downloading docs to quickly check if true). 100W max is for type A connectors only, C is slightly more limited. But still enough. But afaik this requires USB cabling, (m)DP will not work. So, all monitors might be actually DP soon, yet have no (m)DP connector :) Funny days ahead :P
I hadn't even HEARD of this MHL thing until today. What is up with the hate for DisplayPort from manufacturers? It's free for crying out loud, how is it that HDMI is still on everything despite being superseded long ago?
MHL was pretty popular on phones for a while before everyone started doing wireless mirroring, specially on the Android side (if you're an iOS user it might explain why you've never heard of it)... It superseded micro HDMI which required a second port, MHL just shares the micro USB port.
Then Nexus devices and a couple others started using SlimPort instead... And eventually most mobile users just went to various wireless methods, by the time MHL actually started appearing in TVs the market didn't care a whole lot. I'm not sure how common it is anymore that someone hooks up their phone/tablet via cables...
It's a great thing to have if you're in hotels a lot tho, and I imagine as tablets get more powerful there'll be more of a reason to hook them up to desktop displays... Seems like MHL is trying to compete with DP & HDMI, meh.
MHL and HDMI complement each other, they don't necessarily compete. MHL-to-HDMI cables are quite common and inexpensive. As are MHL-to-DVI cables. I have a set of each at home that I used quite frequently with my LG Optimus G.
Unfortunately, I upgraded to an LG G2 ... which uses SlimPort instead of MHL, thus rendering those cables useless. There are SlimPort-to-HDMI adapters, but I haven't bothered getting any yet.
How is Displayport insufficient? DP1.3 RIGHT NOW has enough bandwidth for 8k30p, or 8k60p 4:2:0. This will only be able to do 4k60p, unless you gang 6 of them together. HDMI 2.0, the latest and greatest, can also only do 4k60p max. By the time 8k comes to mobile devices, or even consumer equipment, I'm sure Displayport will have been updated.
Really getting tired of a new standard being introduced all the time. Should be focusing on improving existing ones, and when they cannot be improved any further, completely replacing them. Easier said than done I know, but good gravy.
The reason you're seeing new standards lately is because technologies are improving at a faster pace than the standard bodies making the decisions.
They are doing SMHL because HDMI standards aren't catching up fast enough and it would be faster to come up with a new standard than the convince HDMI's list of companies to pace it up.
The more companies you have supporting your standards, the slower it will get to implement newer versions of the standard because each company has something they want.
That's pretty much why Apple gave up on many standards to go with their own and now they're probably not happy with Thunderbolt because it is in the hands of Intel.
Apple would be wise next time to keep everything to themselves.
8K TV can't come soon enough for me. I recently had a cornea transplant from a golden eagle and whilst sitting in an IMAX theatre the other day I thought to myself "This image is so grainy and pixelated I can barely see what's happening" and so I passed the time sneering at the proles next to me who thought the picture was "good enough".
Imax really is kinda crap, especially if you sit in the first few rows. 8K will be great for screens of size 100-130", and you sit 6' from them.* What I'm truly more interested in are the modular displays that can be connected almost seamlessly (both Google and Microsoft bought companies that specialized in that area, iirc). Then, you cover your walls in them and BOOM! The Matrix.
It's not ridiculous at all, it's a good thing we're seeing a standard for the next decade. SHML available now means as you upgrade your TV and devices in the next decade, you can reuse your cable and so on without going through different standards.
The market would be completely different if USB standard body had USB 3.1 ready to go 5 years ago, Apple would have no reason to do TB, and so on.
Think about how long it takes for hardware to catch up to the standards, it's a chicken-egg issue. You really need a new standard ready for the hardware to implement before the actual need arises.
I sure hope when 8k TVs/monitors appear we won't be still using cables??? You have a direct line of sight between you (and your phone) and your TV, why not go wireless?
Cables remain the fastest way to get a large amount of data through any interfaces, think about how much data you need to push 8K worth of data without degrading the quality.
Wireless simply will never catch up to wire connection's reliability, speed, and consistency.
Most people that want to get something from their phone to their TV aren't pushig 8K content tho, and probably won't be for years, more like music/photos and random YouTube... And in cases where you're streaming high res stuff, the Cast/DIAL model where the phone merely cues something for the STB to play on the TV makes more sense.
Seriously, I'm a nerd so I like having an MHL/Slimport/whatever port on my phone even if I rarely use it, I'd wager the majority of the market has no earthly idea what MHL is tho and couldn't care less about hooking a phone or tablet to a TV... They jumped on Airplay and other forms of wireless mirroring already.
This almost seems like a bid for MHL to stay relevant amongst all the competing standards, HDMI body clearly messed up if they even gave them that opening.
I use it on my Nexus phone/tablet occasionally, and I like that the SP dongle doesn't NEED a separate USB power source. Every USB/HDMI dongle I ever tried for MHL required a third power cable or it wouldn't work at all, SP can charge the phone if you add the third cable but doesn't need it.
FFS, someone just make a generic 50 pin cable for everything A/V, PC, whatever digital, and standardize everything from this point. Then, the HW can be configured to used it however it sees fit, and at least we'll have a standard cable.
So i just can display video from MHL phone on any HDMI TV, i need also support of MHL in TV? Is this realy needed, is there some converter or something like that?
I believe you may not need an MHL capable TV. What I understand from some user is that it will still display content from your phone, but will not charge it. Sounds good, but I wonder how long can the phone battery hold up since I heard it drains battery quite fast. This I cannot verify since I could not get it to work. Lol.
You can get MHL-to-DVI and MHL-to-HDMI adapters. They are fairly inexpensive (under $10 US). Then you can connect your phone/tablet to anything with a DVI/HDMI port.
There are also SlimPort-to-HDMI adapters for phones using SP.
I feel there are simply too many display ports. And to be honest, when I was reading this article, I was thinking to myself what is the adoption rate of MHL 3 for example. I think one of the main problem is that different phone/ tablet manufacturers may or may not adopt MHL, not to mention the many different MHL versions. You might have gotten a MHL 3 cable and realized it does not work on your phone. Considering the fact that the cable is not really that cheap, some people stop trying. For me, I usually go for tablets with mini HDMI port to save myself from the hassle.
All this talk about cables is ignoring the bigger picture: USB Type-C can handle 2 to 4 frickin' lanes, SuperMHL, MHL, and DisplayPort 1.3.
Why not just put a bunch of USB Type C ports on a video card?
Adapters can handle every video connection on the market (and in the FUTURE), and video card companies have a direct incentive to add USB 3.1 controller chips onto their boards.
This is even more important when you consider that video cards have less need for heavy PCI express performance than ever before (Vertex and Shader Storage Buffer Objects, substantially more memory for textures and virtual texturing, better texture compression, etc.), why not take the excess from your PCI Express 3.0 x16 slot and use it for extra USB ports?
USB Type C is replacing every port that we've ever needed on a video card, motherboard, etc. I'm all kinds of stoked for the future.
Haven't read through all the comments, but has anyone mentioned how A/V receivers are supposed to cope with this?
I'm actually okay with the idea behind superMHL considering how badly shortsighted, and frankly incompetent, the HDMI Licensing group has behaved. The bandwidth to support 8K@120fps 4:2:0 is what HDMI 2.0 and the still-not-released DisplayPort 1.3 should support -- headroom that's far enough into the future to give consumers breathing room.
I would actually have zero problems buying an expensive A/V receiver that has all superMHL ports provided cable adapters will allow all my devices to connect -- and be able to perform the HDCP handshake as needed.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
68 Comments
Back to Article
FITCamaro - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Great so now we have DVI, HDMI, DisplayPort, and MHL. Graphics cards are running out of room to put ports.danbob999 - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
don't forget the mini version of these, as well as VGA, which is still not 100% phased outalso on mobile phones we have slimport.
Impulses - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
For a while there it looked like Slimport would overtake MHL since adapters could actually run without extra power, can MHL USB/HDMI adapters even do that yet? These overlapping standards are getting sorta confusing regardless...SleepyFE - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
MHL doesn't need adapters, that's why they made it. Also you get power from the TV or monitor, which was a major selling point for MHL.phoenix_rizzen - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
MHL requires adapters to connect to HDMI or DVI displays. The adapters include 3 plugs: MHL/micro-USB on one end, HDMI or DVI on the other, and a full-sized USB plug for power.AFAIUI, you can connect without using the full-sized USB. You just won't be able to charge the phone while connected to the display. With the full-sized USB plugged in, the phone charges.
SleepyFE - Thursday, January 8, 2015 - link
Aren't there passive adapters aka cable with micro-USB on ine side and HDMI on the other?phoenix_rizzen - Thursday, January 8, 2015 - link
There are two different types:MHL-to-HDMI cable that includes a full-sized USB plug to charge the device while plugged int the TV:
http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=108&cp_i...
MHL-to-HDMI adapter, with a port for plugging in your normal micro-USB charging cable:
http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=108&cp_i...
Either way, you need a separate connection for power to charge the phone.
XZerg - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
you forgot: vgaone should not forget the many versions as each version offers more than the previous version of the cable. that is, you can't get 4k@60 w/o hdmi 2.0, ... so need both the source and sink to support at least that version and a matching cable.
fun for people to get lost in.
Flunk - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Yes, he did and so did everyone else. VGA is dead, hopefully DVI follows it soon and full sized DisplayPort while we're at it (why do we need anything other than Mini DisplayPort?).The_Assimilator - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Unfortunately the shambling, rotting corpse that is VGA still staggers along... look at how many manufacturers put VGA outputs on their motherboards. At least it's been gone from graphics cards for a while.stephenbrooks - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Not to mention VGA inputs on data projectors (although I'm starting to find some with HDMI now). Full-size DP made an unwelcome appearance on a Dell laptop I got given, had to buy a special cable to turn it into HDMI.CharonPDX - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
VGA on motherboards is due to the continued corporate need for "backward compatible" systems - which tend to be as cheap as possible.As someone else mentioned, many older (yet very expensive when bought, so unlikely to be replaced soon,) projectors are VGA-only. Plus some of the more insane low-end LCD desktop monitors that only have VGA. (Or VGA+one other, so if you want to share between systems, you have to use VGA for one.)
VGA needs to die. DVI needs to die. full-size DisplayPort needs to die. All "computers" should use miniDP, all "home theater" devices should use HDMI. Mobile computing devices can use USB type C with an HDMI/MHL adapter. (MHL really should continue to just be a "rides along on existing connectors" standard, not a separate plug!)
Likewise, USB type C should take over as the "non-display/not ultra-high-speed" connector of choice for all computing devices. A new high-end laptop should have two Thunderbolt (aka mini DisplayPort physically) ports, and 2-4 USB type C ports. And that's it. (And Thunderbolt should add charging without changing the connector.) Charging over any port, outbound power delivery over any port. (Run that mobile monitor directly from the laptop; charge the laptop from the single cable from the monitor, etc.)
danbob999 - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
why should PC and TVs have different types of connectors?stephenbrooks - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Glue a fibre optic cable to a mains cord. The ultimate cable for maximum power and data.doubledeej - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
They need to fix digital connections first. They still don't work right.My 27" Dell monitor (2560x1440) is 100% reliable with VGA. With DisplayPort it loses connection to the computer frequently. DVI is a little better, but it still isn't what I would call great. Yes, the image is slightly better with the digital connections compared to analog, but what good is it if it can't be trusted?
My 28" Dell 4K monitor only works on a couple of my computers. Neither the DisplayPort nor HDMI connection works consistently with any computer I connect it to.
On my Macs, it only works at 1080p, with both DP and HDMI. I've never gotten it to run at its full resolution; it isn't even a selectable option. That same monitor on my newest Dell laptop, HDMI will display the full 4K resolution for a couple of minutes, but then it cuts out completely and has to be reconnected to come back. And while it is actually displaying an image it has random flashing pixels all over the place. On another (nearly 5-year old laptop) the same monitor mostly works with DisplayPort, but it will eventually lose connection with that one as well after an hour or so. The same monitor will occasionally show an image when connected to my GeForce 760 card (via DisplayPort; HDMI only operates at 1080p on that one), but then it loses connection and the only way to fix it is to reboot the computer. I'm pretty confident that VGA wouldn't have any of those problems, just because it is super simple.
None of it is cable related; I've tried many different cables, all with identical results.
HDMI, DisplayPort, and even DVI might work okay under "normal" conditions (say, 1080p60), but they seriously break down when pushed, even within their designed specs. VGA was so simple it doesn't have these problems. Not that I'm wishing VGA would come back, just that manufacturers get these problems resolved so that VGA can go away and not be missed. Digital is better, but only when it works.
wavetrex - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
Move your phone away from the monitor ;)I accidentally found out that every time the phone was synching with the tower the DELL monitor lost connection on DisplayPort. Apparently there are two things working at similar frequency and the interference from the phone's emission f*cks up DisplayPort. Who would have known ?
Impulses - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
Kinda like how USB 3.0 frequency emission can screw with 2.4GHz signals (like wireless mice), Intel has a whole white paper on it and Logitech forums quite a few related threads. It's kinda mind boggling that kinda common scenario wasn't preemptively tested for... Hopefully it's something Type C might address.profoundWHALE - Thursday, January 8, 2015 - link
USB 3.1 Type C already has Displayport...http://www.anandtech.com/show/8558/displayport-alt...
doubledeej - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
VGA sticks around because it is simple and digital connections still don't always work right.I couldn't tell you how many times I've had a DisplayPort connection not work at all (or cut in and out), or an HDMI connection not be able to negotiate and display random noise. It happens all of the time. Digital protocols have gotten very complicated, and with complication comes problems.
VGA just works. It might not be technically as good as the newer digital connections, but it is reliable.
Add to that that most digital connections don't work past about 30 feet, there's still a place for VGA (which I've run out to 200 feet without issue). I've never gotten HDMI to work past 50 feet even with the best cable, or DisplayPort to be reliable past about 30 feet. Amplifiers help, but don't cure the problem. The projector in my office (brand new with a very high quality cable) cuts out with HDMI frequently, but the VGA connection always works. Both cables are 25 feet long.
There's still a place for good old simple analog. Added complexity can be a curse rather than a blessing.
DiHydro - Friday, January 9, 2015 - link
Reading the article I thought, "How long do these cables really need to be? Can't we just push speeds higher and use shorter cables?" Reading your comment reminded me that lots of PC scenarios have the display much farther from the source than, say, a Bluray player or cable box. I even thought about putting my PC in the room over and snaking the cables to my bedroom to cut down on noise, and that would be hard for a very high speed signal rate cable.DiHydro - Friday, January 9, 2015 - link
As soon as DisplayPort can support 2160p (4k) at more than 60 Hz, I will be looking for a GPU and monitor that can handle it. As of right now, my monitor is limited to D-DVI for 1440p at greater than 60 Hz.imaheadcase - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Don't forget manufacturers decide for you want to put on a card to? Want display port on new card? screw you, take DVI and you will like it! :Ddjthomson - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
That they do but it's the consumer who makes the purchasing decision.Still, potential to be extremely frustrating if we start to see more differentiation in the features and I/O board partners are offering.
Sea Shadow - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Actually, back in September the VESA group announced that they had successfully created an implementation of the "Alternate Mode" for USB c as well. So if anything this is a great start to a new year with MORE interfaces gaining cross compatibility with each other. Though the DP implementation of using USB C allows for 100 watts. But still, the more common interconnects the merrier.I could see a future where GPUs just have SMHL and USB C connections on them. And not only that but we could potentially power a lot of these monitors over the same cables. Talk about a reduction in clutter.
tuxRoller - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
All you need is USB type c connector.Four lanes of 4K60 is future proof enough for the next decade, at least.
B3an - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Interesting. But why no comparison to DP 1.3 though?And isn't DP free to implement where as HDMI has a royalty fee, so what about SMHL?
hpglow - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Mhl was designed to charge phones and power streaming sticks. DP has some nice functions and is royalty free (which you would think if you were selling a TV set would make it a no brainer) but I have still yet to purchase a TV, or computer monitor with even one DP on it. Until DP offers more than 500ma it is not an equivalent tech to mhl. To further complicate these standards in order to achieve maximum bandwidth cable lengths are limited 3 ft. There aren't many devices where a 3' cable would work for me. 4 or 5 would be more reasonable. They really need to focus more on lossless compression (which is a part of the DP standard but rarely is used).Sea Shadow - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Actually DP over USB C supports 100w (IIRC 20v @ 5A).Zizy - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
60W, 20V @ 3A, according to Wikipedia (downloading docs to quickly check if true). 100W max is for type A connectors only, C is slightly more limited. But still enough.But afaik this requires USB cabling, (m)DP will not work. So, all monitors might be actually DP soon, yet have no (m)DP connector :) Funny days ahead :P
wiak - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
yet another cable standard in the cable jungle! :/cant we just have DisplayPort and call it done...
The_Assimilator - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
I hadn't even HEARD of this MHL thing until today. What is up with the hate for DisplayPort from manufacturers? It's free for crying out loud, how is it that HDMI is still on everything despite being superseded long ago?Impulses - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
MHL was pretty popular on phones for a while before everyone started doing wireless mirroring, specially on the Android side (if you're an iOS user it might explain why you've never heard of it)... It superseded micro HDMI which required a second port, MHL just shares the micro USB port.Then Nexus devices and a couple others started using SlimPort instead... And eventually most mobile users just went to various wireless methods, by the time MHL actually started appearing in TVs the market didn't care a whole lot. I'm not sure how common it is anymore that someone hooks up their phone/tablet via cables...
It's a great thing to have if you're in hotels a lot tho, and I imagine as tablets get more powerful there'll be more of a reason to hook them up to desktop displays... Seems like MHL is trying to compete with DP & HDMI, meh.
phoenix_rizzen - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
MHL and HDMI complement each other, they don't necessarily compete. MHL-to-HDMI cables are quite common and inexpensive. As are MHL-to-DVI cables. I have a set of each at home that I used quite frequently with my LG Optimus G.Unfortunately, I upgraded to an LG G2 ... which uses SlimPort instead of MHL, thus rendering those cables useless. There are SlimPort-to-HDMI adapters, but I haven't bothered getting any yet.
zepi - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Because DP is insufficient in terms of bandwidth. Even DP1.3 is not enough for 8K.2kfire - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
How is Displayport insufficient? DP1.3 RIGHT NOW has enough bandwidth for 8k30p, or 8k60p 4:2:0.This will only be able to do 4k60p, unless you gang 6 of them together. HDMI 2.0, the latest and greatest, can also only do 4k60p max.
By the time 8k comes to mobile devices, or even consumer equipment, I'm sure Displayport will have been updated.
Peeping Tom - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Really getting tired of a new standard being introduced all the time. Should be focusing on improving existing ones, and when they cannot be improved any further, completely replacing them. Easier said than done I know, but good gravy.MikhailT - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
The reason you're seeing new standards lately is because technologies are improving at a faster pace than the standard bodies making the decisions.They are doing SMHL because HDMI standards aren't catching up fast enough and it would be faster to come up with a new standard than the convince HDMI's list of companies to pace it up.
The more companies you have supporting your standards, the slower it will get to implement newer versions of the standard because each company has something they want.
That's pretty much why Apple gave up on many standards to go with their own and now they're probably not happy with Thunderbolt because it is in the hands of Intel.
Apple would be wise next time to keep everything to themselves.
Alchemy69 - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
8K TV can't come soon enough for me. I recently had a cornea transplant from a golden eagle and whilst sitting in an IMAX theatre the other day I thought to myself "This image is so grainy and pixelated I can barely see what's happening" and so I passed the time sneering at the proles next to me who thought the picture was "good enough".Flunk - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
8K, bah. Maybe if you're looking at a 5" screen. If it's not at least 2000dpi then it's CRAP!sheh - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Right on.2kfire - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
This gave me the lols. I would upvote if I could with +1 internets. :)tuxRoller - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
Imax really is kinda crap, especially if you sit in the first few rows.8K will be great for screens of size 100-130", and you sit 6' from them.*
What I'm truly more interested in are the modular displays that can be connected almost seamlessly (both Google and Microsoft bought companies that specialized in that area, iirc). Then, you cover your walls in them and BOOM! The Matrix.
* math calc estimates but you get the point
Dug - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Should have just used cat6 from the beginningphatboye - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
2 problems with cat6. 1) you cannot use it to charge your mobile devices and 2) the connector is to large for mobile devices.codylee - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
We need One Cord to Rule Them All.sheh - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
This is indeed getting ridiculous. A new standard for a market that's not going to be born until the next decade.HDMI, DP, USB-C, this.
And the obligatory: http://xkcd.com/927/
MikhailT - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
It's not ridiculous at all, it's a good thing we're seeing a standard for the next decade. SHML available now means as you upgrade your TV and devices in the next decade, you can reuse your cable and so on without going through different standards.The market would be completely different if USB standard body had USB 3.1 ready to go 5 years ago, Apple would have no reason to do TB, and so on.
Think about how long it takes for hardware to catch up to the standards, it's a chicken-egg issue. You really need a new standard ready for the hardware to implement before the actual need arises.
p1esk - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
I sure hope when 8k TVs/monitors appear we won't be still using cables??? You have a direct line of sight between you (and your phone) and your TV, why not go wireless?MikhailT - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Cables remain the fastest way to get a large amount of data through any interfaces, think about how much data you need to push 8K worth of data without degrading the quality.Wireless simply will never catch up to wire connection's reliability, speed, and consistency.
Impulses - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
Most people that want to get something from their phone to their TV aren't pushig 8K content tho, and probably won't be for years, more like music/photos and random YouTube... And in cases where you're streaming high res stuff, the Cast/DIAL model where the phone merely cues something for the STB to play on the TV makes more sense.Seriously, I'm a nerd so I like having an MHL/Slimport/whatever port on my phone even if I rarely use it, I'd wager the majority of the market has no earthly idea what MHL is tho and couldn't care less about hooking a phone or tablet to a TV... They jumped on Airplay and other forms of wireless mirroring already.
This almost seems like a bid for MHL to stay relevant amongst all the competing standards, HDMI body clearly messed up if they even gave them that opening.
toyotabedzrock - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
I don't understand why slimport or the display port via USB connector is not used as much.phatboye - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
slimport is proprietary2kfire - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
Slimport is a brand name. It's just the name Analogix uses for their myDP (mobility Displayport) adapters.myDP is NOT proprietary. It's a VESA standard.
Impulses - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
I use it on my Nexus phone/tablet occasionally, and I like that the SP dongle doesn't NEED a separate USB power source. Every USB/HDMI dongle I ever tried for MHL required a third power cable or it wouldn't work at all, SP can charge the phone if you add the third cable but doesn't need it.Railgun - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
FFS, someone just make a generic 50 pin cable for everything A/V, PC, whatever digital, and standardize everything from this point. Then, the HW can be configured to used it however it sees fit, and at least we'll have a standard cable.ruthan - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
So i just can display video from MHL phone on any HDMI TV, i need also support of MHL in TV? Is this realy needed, is there some converter or something like that?watzupken - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
I believe you may not need an MHL capable TV. What I understand from some user is that it will still display content from your phone, but will not charge it. Sounds good, but I wonder how long can the phone battery hold up since I heard it drains battery quite fast. This I cannot verify since I could not get it to work. Lol.phoenix_rizzen - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
You can get MHL-to-DVI and MHL-to-HDMI adapters. They are fairly inexpensive (under $10 US). Then you can connect your phone/tablet to anything with a DVI/HDMI port.There are also SlimPort-to-HDMI adapters for phones using SP.
angrypatm - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
usb3 for all and be done with it. let thunderbolt meet firewire in hell.watzupken - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
I feel there are simply too many display ports. And to be honest, when I was reading this article, I was thinking to myself what is the adoption rate of MHL 3 for example. I think one of the main problem is that different phone/ tablet manufacturers may or may not adopt MHL, not to mention the many different MHL versions. You might have gotten a MHL 3 cable and realized it does not work on your phone. Considering the fact that the cable is not really that cheap, some people stop trying. For me, I usually go for tablets with mini HDMI port to save myself from the hassle.poohbear - Tuesday, January 6, 2015 - link
only 8k support??? screw that, i'll wait for the 16k versions. still on 1440 here.Makaveli - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
pfft 16k.640k or go home :P
tuxRoller - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
"No one will ever need more that 640k." - Memukiex - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
All this talk about cables is ignoring the bigger picture: USB Type-C can handle 2 to 4 frickin' lanes, SuperMHL, MHL, and DisplayPort 1.3.Why not just put a bunch of USB Type C ports on a video card?
Adapters can handle every video connection on the market (and in the FUTURE), and video card companies have a direct incentive to add USB 3.1 controller chips onto their boards.
This is even more important when you consider that video cards have less need for heavy PCI express performance than ever before (Vertex and Shader Storage Buffer Objects, substantially more memory for textures and virtual texturing, better texture compression, etc.), why not take the excess from your PCI Express 3.0 x16 slot and use it for extra USB ports?
USB Type C is replacing every port that we've ever needed on a video card, motherboard, etc. I'm all kinds of stoked for the future.
MTEK - Wednesday, January 7, 2015 - link
Haven't read through all the comments, but has anyone mentioned how A/V receivers are supposed to cope with this?I'm actually okay with the idea behind superMHL considering how badly shortsighted, and frankly incompetent, the HDMI Licensing group has behaved. The bandwidth to support 8K@120fps 4:2:0 is what HDMI 2.0 and the still-not-released DisplayPort 1.3 should support -- headroom that's far enough into the future to give consumers breathing room.
I would actually have zero problems buying an expensive A/V receiver that has all superMHL ports provided cable adapters will allow all my devices to connect -- and be able to perform the HDCP handshake as needed.
zodiacfml - Saturday, January 10, 2015 - link
Too good to be true. This beats any type of standard except fiber in terms of bit rates and this comes with decent power for many devices.Its also overkill for battery powered devices as no device can put out such ridiculous bit rates. This just clearly competes with DP and HDMI.
MiKybZ - Thursday, January 15, 2015 - link
Does anyone know if Super Mhl supports Adaptive Sync?IEliteRetard - Sunday, January 26, 2020 - link
4 years later, HDMI 2 is still garbage and we have no other choice.Imagine having 4:4:4 4k 120Hz HDR single cable displays back in late 2015/2016
Makes me wonder if GPU manufacturers would've pushed for more performance so we wouldn't be struggling with 4k60 on $2,000 cards in 2019.
Also curious if anybody else will ever read and reply to this...