Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Intel

Intel Launches Wi-Di 172

Barence writes "Intel has launched a new display technology called Wi-Di at CES. Intel Wireless Display uses Wi-Fi to wirelessly transmit video from PCs running Intel's latest generation of Core processors to HD television sets. Televisions will require a special adapter made by companies such as Netgear — which will cost around $100 — to receive the wireless video signals. Intel also revealed its optical interconnect technology, Light Peak, will be in PCs 'in about a year.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel Launches Wi-Di

Comments Filter:
  • by mbrod ( 19122 ) on Friday January 08, 2010 @10:07AM (#30693794) Homepage Journal
    Apple started the concept but ceded it to Intel to develop it.

    http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/26/exclusive-apple-dictated-light-peak-creation-to-intel-could-be/
  • Re:Wi-Di (Score:4, Informative)

    by morgan_greywolf ( 835522 ) on Friday January 08, 2010 @10:56AM (#30694420) Homepage Journal

    Discussion of how to pronounce it reminds me of the little-known trivia about how the inventor of SCSI wanted it to be pronounced as the "Sexy Interface" rather than the "Scuzzy Interface".

    The inventor of SCSI was Larry Boucher at Shugart Associates (and later Adaptec). They've always pronounced it 'scuzzy'. Apple was the player that wanted it to be pronounced 'sexy' because they were (at the time) pushing SCSI as a technology that made their machines superior to IBM and the clone makers, who were generally not including SCSI interfaces. Apple used SCSI for HDDs, FDDs, and CD-ROMs, and the inclusion of SCSI on the Mac was the biggest reason why early scanners always used a SCSI interface, Other players in the early days of SCSI (around 1986 or so) included Commodore, who included in the Amiga, and Sun Microsystems, who included it in their Unix workstations and servers.

  • by Steauengeglase ( 512315 ) on Friday January 08, 2010 @11:03AM (#30694498)

    Because people have bought expensive HD sets with VGA/S-Video/HDMI and they want to use them as big, honkin' monitors in their living room without running cable.

  • Re:Why wouldn't... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anpheus ( 908711 ) on Friday January 08, 2010 @05:51PM (#30700620)

    The only reason we have to rely on either third party clouds or port forwarding, VPNs, and all this other mess is because IPv4 wasn't adequate in size or security.

    With IPv6, everyone will have globally routable IPs with IPSEC as a standard feature. We will see a wave of new devices and software to take advantage of this. Want to sync your phone with your laptop, and your laptop with your desktop? Easy. Even home users will be able to do it if the software exists, and it won't require a third party. You'd need to have your phone, desktop, and LAN in your local, "trusted" network at home, or manually copy enough info to set up the IPSEC, and then done. You take your laptop and phone on vacation, it gets its MIPv6 address, it then sets up a connection with your home IPv6 address. Your desktop doesn't need a VPN, it has strong certificates you transferred at home to do IPSEC. Your desktop doesn't need port forwarding, you set up your stateful firewall to allow IPSEC and existing connections in, but block all unsolicited, insecure connections. Your desktop doesn't even need DynDNS because the address space is large enough that you will almost certainly get a large, very large range of static IPs, and MIPv6 will even let your phone and laptop carry their IPs with them on supporting carriers. If that fails, you can set up DynDNS or something like that on your desktop, and never have to worry about it again.

    The reason we need globally unique IP addresses is because:

    1. NAT isn't security.
    2. NAT is just as much propping up the network security industry as Congress is propping up .

    Proper IPv6 will eliminate most of the need for VPNs, result in increased network resiliency and create new business opportunities. It's like going up a step on Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Yeah, we had fun scrounging around on the first couple layers, but making globally routable IPs standard gets you one step closer to self-actualization ;)

    And you're right, there is no reason a wireless screen has to talk to the outside world. That's why no one is recommending you remove stateful firewalls, no one is recommending you set your devices to promiscuously accept connections. Existing firewall technology, plus globally routable IPs, plus IPSEC equals win.

Anyone can make an omelet with eggs. The trick is to make one with none.

Working...