<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://community.whathifi.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>How HDMI should have been from the start?</title><link>http://community.whathifi.com/blogs/home-cinema/archive/2009/02/04/how-hdmi-should-have-been-from-the-start.aspx</link><description>Regulars on our Forums may have noticed that I'm not HDMI's biggest fan. Actually, let me be a bit more specific: I've no problem with the connection system itself, carrying everything from hi-def pictures to hi-rez sound – well, unless you have Sky+HD</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP3 (Debug Build: 20423.1)</generator><item><title>re: How HDMI should have been from the start?</title><link>http://community.whathifi.com/blogs/home-cinema/archive/2009/02/04/how-hdmi-should-have-been-from-the-start.aspx#198001</link><pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 21:43:09 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">4268cb68-fb71-468f-8e55-5b063adbd477:198001</guid><dc:creator>visionary</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;you mean like RJ45 connectors have been all along?&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: How HDMI should have been from the start?</title><link>http://community.whathifi.com/blogs/home-cinema/archive/2009/02/04/how-hdmi-should-have-been-from-the-start.aspx#198271</link><pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2009 11:13:41 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">4268cb68-fb71-468f-8e55-5b063adbd477:198271</guid><dc:creator>Andrew Everard</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes, exactly the point I was making.&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: How HDMI should have been from the start?</title><link>http://community.whathifi.com/blogs/home-cinema/archive/2009/02/04/how-hdmi-should-have-been-from-the-start.aspx#199351</link><pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 15:19:25 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">4268cb68-fb71-468f-8e55-5b063adbd477:199351</guid><dc:creator>timwileman</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;just wait, an audiophile grade version will be along soon... &amp;nbsp; :-)&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: How HDMI should have been from the start?</title><link>http://community.whathifi.com/blogs/home-cinema/archive/2009/02/04/how-hdmi-should-have-been-from-the-start.aspx#199366</link><pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 15:45:09 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">4268cb68-fb71-468f-8e55-5b063adbd477:199366</guid><dc:creator>scottdrinksbeer</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;just out of curiosity, is the belkin cable shown in the pictures used to highlight the fact the holder will work with any old cable, or is that the cable used to testing new kit you get in? My thinkings being Belkin is a budget'ish brand, if its good enough for you guys.... maybe the expensive ones are a abit placebo effect?&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: How HDMI should have been from the start?</title><link>http://community.whathifi.com/blogs/home-cinema/archive/2009/02/04/how-hdmi-should-have-been-from-the-start.aspx#200263</link><pubDate>Sat, 07 Feb 2009 22:16:50 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">4268cb68-fb71-468f-8e55-5b063adbd477:200263</guid><dc:creator>Will Harris</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;The worms are out!!!..... ooo quick get them back in the jar!! Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: How HDMI should have been from the start?</title><link>http://community.whathifi.com/blogs/home-cinema/archive/2009/02/04/how-hdmi-should-have-been-from-the-start.aspx#200307</link><pubDate>Sat, 07 Feb 2009 23:19:36 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">4268cb68-fb71-468f-8e55-5b063adbd477:200307</guid><dc:creator>Andrew Everard</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Pictures supplied by Blue Echo. Nothing to read into them, Move along, ladies and gentlemen, nothing more to see...&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item></channel></rss>