Enthsiasm about what?

An article from Embedded.com says there are three major methods transferring videos between PC and video display device at home. They are Wireless USB, UWB, wireless TCP/IP.
USB and UWB are more applicable to PC and PC peripherals and the 3rd one is more complicated and costly.

For a wired architecture as a baseline system, we have north bridge and south bridge:
North bridge:
High bandwidth memory chip, GPU
South bridge:
Eithernet, SATA, USB, PCI-E

For videos it is imperative to use GPU to accelerate the graphic processing.

For wireless video solutions:
Recently product of UWB has integrated support of USB, Video, Audio.

The UWB solution make the most cost effective, most viable solutions because it doesn't have to modify to much of the current architecture. Reduced the system cost and doesn't have the burden for other part of the system.

For USB wireless solutions:
Since the CPU has to spend more cycle on USB software, there is much more costly than UWB solutions. The USB latency and overhead will also significantly reduce the bandwith for video transferring on the air. Thus not as good as UWB.

For video over IP solutions:
Power burden, software management, complex software stacks. All increase the cost of this solution.

Component requirement comparison:

So developing a system that is optimized with the number of components is much obviously displayed.