Comments
First we would like to thank Steve for bringing this to the table. As a consulting engineering company, InVisions Technology has prided itself not only on the strong drive to seek out, apply, and distribute new technologies but to provide a firm example of business ethics of which we are proud of. When dealing with many firms both in and out of the CE industry, client confidentially gets most of the attention. If it were not so our client base would have been destroy many years ago. We have incorporated the necessary resources both technically and legally to provide a secure and accurate testing service. It is what we are most proud of.
Since InVisions Technology takes such a strong roll in high speed digital signaling and the HDMI interface positions the firm as one of the largest knowledge base resources in our industry. The firm’s aggressive hunger for knowledge not only provides some of the best engineering in the world but also allows a high degree of field input and feedback.
There were countless requests for an improved method of determining these high speed products both in quality and integrity. Now, after over two years of field requests InVisions was willing to stick its neck out and take the hit for this service. Ever wonder why not one other engineering, manufacturer, or consulting firm even tried to provide a creative program to better the industry for the dealers, the installers, and the customers? Very simple, it’s called Passion, a passion to help move the CE world into these new technologies in a productive and seamless fashion. The program should tighten up the interface and provide a means for people to know rather than guess. I could never be more proud of the InVisions team including the engineers that have taken their personal time helping to get this off the ground. That my many friends is PASSION.
The single largest problem with Simplay HD testing has been a perceived conflict of interest associated with Silicon Image profiting from a testing program that is only needed because the HDMI technology they helped create is unreliable. This program had the opportunity to supplement/replace Simplay HD, but this glaring conflict jeopardizes “DPL”‘s credibility.
This is a different type of conflict, but I believe a serious one. Let’s imagine Panasonic created a “Plasma Performance Level” system that ranked plasma TV performance on a scale of 1-5. How could Pioneer, LG, Samsung, etc. submit one of their plasmas for performance testing, and trust that a Panasonic-owned company would fairly evaluate their plasmas?
The same principle applies here. I believe a company (InVisions) heavily involved in the manufacture and engineering side of the HDMI world has serious incentive to rate its partners and its own products better than competing products that are submitted for testing. If a partner’s HDMI swticher comes up as a “1” out of 5, that reflects badly on your skills and your partner, and the skeptic in me doesn’t believe that will be allowed to happen.
It’s simply a very problematic conflict, and I’m surprised no one else has pointed this out.
You didn’t really answer my question about conflict of interest, other than by saying that you hold your company to a high degree of business ethics. That is great, but I’m saying that it will look very suspicious the first time you rate your own product (or that of one of your close, undisclosed partners) higher than a well-established brand. It may very well be an accurate representation of the truth, but at that point, doubt will be cast upon the results due to the conflict of interest involved. The very fact that you do not disclose your partners (while a valid way to do business) casts even more suspicion on this method of testing, as your partners will obviously have inside information as to the things you are testing for.
Stephen,
I think you “doth protest too much”. Are you a manuracturer yourself?
As a member of the A/V community and user of HDMI products, I welcome someone actually using test equipment to rate something rather than someone’s “golden ear or golden eye” opinion like our industry has seen for many years. If you read what is being proposed, they are putting a signal through a cable and seeing what comes out the other end.
Also, I checked out the Spectrum product line. They don’t sell cables! This program is a cable testing program! What is your beef?
Thanks for your opinion Steve.
Steve:
Granted this can be a two edged sword, both from your perspective AND ours.
First; Jeff (and Invisions/Spectrum) have been very cognisant of the possibility that some might think that there is favortism.
for this reason the program is based on the products being purchesed at a retail level (on a regular basis) by mystery shoppers.
Secondly: The ratings are all about the math and can be tested by anyone with the proper equipment (and there are several other companies that are so equiped).
Now from our point of view;
We signed on to the program feeling that we have a good product (we don’t get many complaints fron the field), but not knowing for sure. Since the “DPL” press release was before any products have been tested and Ethereal (as well as other cable mfgr’s) have publicly signed on we could look like fools when the testing is done.
However I (we) think that it is worth the risk, if it turns out that we have a problem we will have much greater data with which to fix it.
Jeff (and Invisions/Spectrum) does design and produce several products for us (none of them cables) and I (we) are happy to share the glory with him (after all he IS much smarter than I am).
And when he approached us about this program (I was not the first he called dammit), we signed on without hesitation.
There are very few actual “high speed video” engineers working in “CE” and Jeff has been a godsend for us.
And we do expect there to be some “flak” about our familiarity with each other (we are friends as well), but the foundation of this program is that all results are verifiable and repeatable before rating level is awarded (they are also retested through out the year).
You will see more cable mfgr’s come on-line as the progam progresses (some of our toughest rivals are already on board) and if you have not had the oppertunity to hear Jeff speak/teach I would recommend that you do so while at CEDIA.
He has presentations at our (Ethereal) booth as well as several others (including ADI).
I will say that I do work in the CE industry, however, since these opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect the stance of my employer, I will abstain from identifying them.
I will say, though, I don’t work for Simplay or one of those associated companies.
Thank you, Brent and Jeff, for the added information. I think perhaps some of my consternation is because of the limited information available on the program at this point - and I understand this is because the program is being “launched” at CEDIA, so I do understand that lack of info is appropriate at this point.
Gabriel, it is my understanding from reading a different article, that this DPL system will ultimately be applied to video switchers and distribution amps as well. Spectrum does market a switcher and an extender device.
For the record, I applaud the apparent motive behind establishing this DPL system and I see the benefit for consumers and systems integrators.
I’m only concerned about the apparent conflict of interest that the company doing the testing is closely related to the manufacturer whose products are being tested.
Please don’t take this the wrong way. I’m not intending to call anyone a crook, or saying that the system is necessarily flawed by design - just that it leaves open the door for a lot of doubt to be cast on this system if/when, as will eventually occur, a big name, big dollar cable is shown to underperform compared to a small name, mid-dollar competitor’s good?
If doubt is cast upon the system (even if it is unfounded), it eliminates the effectiveness of the ratings, since trust is gone.
I suppose I’m just playing devil’s advocate here, as I see this being a potential problem for the DPL system.
Steve:
If there were a third party testing that actulaly did the job then Jeff would not be doing it(I think). This is an expensive process both for him (tectronics test hardware & time), us (up front and on going licencing) and all of the other mfgr’s involved.
And, as stated in an above post there will be added charges to the consumer (slight but there).
Of course one of the things that we talked about at the start was the expected response from the companies electing to not get involved (due to either cost, quality of product or other reasons).
We assume that claims of rigged results would start flying as soon as the “DPL” program was announced.
Because of this we have been very careful about appearences as well as letting everyone know about our connection (both personal and professional).
The biggest advantage of the “DPL” program is that is really ia all about the math and can be checked by anyone.
To the best of my knowledge any company displaying the “DPL” tested logo will have the test data available to the public.
Since you mentioned Simplay.
I will say that while we are tested and approved (with Simplay logo on our HDMI package), their testing is not near as complete as what Jeff is doing.
It is also my understanding that this (the “DPL” standard) will eventually be available to hardware mfgr’s.
Jeff has been around damn near forever and he pretty much knows eveybody that counts out there.
That being the case, him working for a company without a personal connection would be rarity and not likly to happen.
Along with us (Ethereal) he already works for many of our compettitors in some fashion. I only know this because I reconnise his handy work in other products. That and he frequently reminds me that we are not his only clients (usually when I ask him for some time). He however does not tell me who or what his is also working on (I assume that same NDA to our products)that is the cornerstone of any indipendent contractor.
I am not allowed to stop by their office without an appt. as some other mfgr. might be there (awkard).
Please note:
There is no way for me to run spell check on this doc. so there are misspelled words (sorry).
Brent McCall
Etheral Home Theater
(386) 846-7264
This lack of spell check sux (sorry Julie).
I even misspelled Ethereal under my name.
Brent McCall
Ethereal Home Theater
(386) 846-7264
Thanks again for your insight, Brent. Your point on this being an industry in which everyone knows everybody is well taken, and true.
The recent industry grumbling against Simplay bears out what you are saying as to its effectiveness (or lack thereof). I realize these are two different programs with at least partially different intentions.
Perhaps it would be best for me to personally postpone further judgment until the DPL program’s official announcement at CEDIA, when more information will be available.


















An HDMI cable with a DPL rating of "4" should work great in most situations, but if it costs the same as a "5", go with the bigger number. Certification marks are available for both category 1 and category 2 rated HDMI 1.3 cables.


So let me get this straight - InVisions, which is promoting and administering this HDMI testing program, has a sister company called Spectrum, which is linked from their website, which markets and SELLS HDMI products. One of these products is shockingly identical to Ethereal Home Theater’s “HDMI Restorer”...and Ethereal is a major supporter of InVisions’ new testing plan.
And now InVisions wants other manufacturers to submit to testing, when it’s in InVision’s apparent interest for Spectrum and Ethereal to sell more product…
Sounds like a conflict of interest to me.