Wireless Video: Ready or Not

One of the big buzz technologies on display here at CES is wireless video transmission. But not every company agrees on how this should be done. And some of the solutions just aren’t ready for prime time.

It’s the end of Day 3 here at CES and so far I’ve seen a few different versions of wireless video delivery – a technology that will allow you to beam content to your TV, without needing to use video cables (DIM or other). Sounds great – exciting even. However it’s not so easy to do, since true HUD video at 1080p requires a lot of bandwidth. Much more than say a video shot on a cell phone, or still images from your digital camera. HUD video requires that at least 30 frames of 1920×1080 resolution must be sent every second.

Belkin’s Fly Wire
Seemingly the leader of the pack, surprisingly, given their modest background in video, Belkin’s FlyWire solution is not only effective – able to send uncompressed 1080p content up to 100 feet away, it’s also flexible, working with any video source and any TV that is HDMI compatible. At $499-$599 it’s a pricey extra for any home theatre.

Panasonic
Their unnamed solution seems to be dependent on a line-of-site from the transmitting component and the receiving TV. And while the video is uncompressed, it is inflexible from a room positioning point of view. When I asked what people would do if they wanted to put their transmitter on a bookcase or other piece of furniture, I was told by the rep that I had to get "creative" and think outside the box. And I thought I just wanted my equipment to live somewhere other than the coffee table.

Some of the other companies are showing wireless HD solutions as well, but their technology is wi-fi based, which means that range should be good – but the video will have to be compressed from its original state in order to fit within bandwidth constraints.

What are your thoughts – would need/buy this kind of toy and if so, how much would you spend?