What I mean by "handle" is the ability to maintain the high resolution rather than down-converted to 480p. I have read somewhere that component video connections are unable to maintain the true high resolution video signals at 720p and 1080i.
If that is not the case, the benefit of DVI and HDMI is lmited to the avoidance of redundance D/A conversions for possible pure digital signals. Right?
I'd guess that component video cables can handle 720p and 1080i signals just fine.
The bigger problem is the paranoid Hollywood types who do not want to "allow" 720p and 1080i over analog component video cables. They'd much prefer that you use some copy-perverted interface like DVI-HDCP.
Starting in 2005 (?), the FCC will require new HDTV tuners with analog (component video) outputs to downgrade 720p and 1080i signals before sending them to such outputs. There's no requirement in the Copyright Act that the FCC make such a rule, and this rule conflicts with fundamental principles laid out in the Supreme Court's Betamax decision. Not that either of those considerations stopped the FCC.
If you already have a HDTV-ready set, and you need a full-resolution tuner that can plug into one of your sets of component video inputs, be sure to get the tuner this year. You might not have a chance next year.
P.S. - And check the specs of the tuner carefully, to make sure that the manufacturer hasn't already included the forced resolution down-conversion "feature".
It was my understanding that it was Hollywood and other content providers that wanted the down conversion and that the FCC has yet to decide if they will allow it to happen. As far as I've read, the FCC is on our side on the "full HD via analog connections" issue and hollywood is against us.
I own an HD set without DVI and really hope the FCC comes down on the side of the consumer not the provider on this issue.
I too own an HD set without DVI inputs. This is the first I have heard of this situation. I beleive the record industry tried to outlaw tape recorders back in the 70's. Hopefully this effort will have the same result!
The FCC officials quoted there seem pretty happy about forcing copy protection flags into broadcast TV. When digital recording is possible, the recordings must be crippled so you can only play them back on the exact same device that made the recording. No playing back a tape of Sesame Street made in the family room in Junior's room, you scum-sucking pirate!
In re-reading the article, I don't see a requirement for the down-resolution of the converted analog signal for a flagged broadcast. However, the article uses the adjective "high-quality" in reference to digital output to devices that support copy protection, and does not use the adjective "high-quality" with respect to analog output. Why the difference in terminology?
Crap! I've read in the past that these decisions were not yet made. Since the FCC committee vote in that CNET article was 3-2 you can tell that this is a very undecided issue. One of the defenses to the Copyright/broadcast flag technology has been that the majority of HD capable TVs in use don't have HDCP chips installed. This will change as DVI with HDCP becomes standard but nearly ALL of the early adopters will pay the price.