or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Inside Apple's iPad: VGA video output
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Inside Apple's iPad: VGA video output - Page 3

post #81 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffharris View Post

Releasing a device with an incompatible Dock Connector would have been a bad idea when they're trying to create new product category. It seems as though Apple is taking a price-hit on the iPad to move them, so they decided to stick with the standard iPod Dock Connector to...

A. Retain compatibility with the zillion Dock Connector compatible devices already on the market.
B. To keep costs down.

I bet that Apple would have preferred to go with a digital video interface of some sort, but why kill interoperability with how many hundreds of millions of existing devices and accessories?

Eventually, the iOS devices will get digital video out.

Good point, but: the pinout diagram of the Dock Connector here shows half a dozen lines associated with Firewire. In that firewire seems to be pretty thoroughly deprecated, I would think Apple could repurpose those connectors for digital video, with the caveat that firewire equipped iPods (of which I doubt there are still a great many in service) would not be compatible.

Unless a lot of peripherals are using the firewire data bus for some obscure reason?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #82 of 166
The incorrect use of "crippled" bothers me. Verizon would take a phone that was designed and built with certain features and remove them before selling. That is crippling.


Quote:
Originally Posted by gin_tonic View Post

Who is lying?

The person who said that HDMI has a higher max resolution than DisplayPort?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #83 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fernando View Post

Just wanted to relay a bit of information one of Apple's Systems Engineers gave to us during his monthly presentation at our school:

VGA output on the iPad is application specific.

It won't be the same as what Jobs and company showed on stage where seemingly everything was projected on screen (that was something custom for the stage as with other past products).

Each developer will need to [optionally] include a system call to output video for their specific app.

In the case of the iPad, Keynote is a video output ready app.

Ouch, that's stupid. I don't think a developer should have to turn it on or be allowed to disable a video out like that. An exception might be if the dev wants to use it as a second screen rather than just mirror the internal screen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob55 View Post

Think of it from Apple's perspective. If they enabled 720p video out from the iPad, then it would compete with one of their own existing products. Since the AppleTV probably doesn't see much in the way of sales, even a little bit of competition from the iPad could spell doom for it.

Sorry, I don't buy that one bit, very different product, very different form factor, very different controls and use model. I don't see anyone stringing a cable from a device on their lap to their TV or getting up to to control it. Apple's tech specs page doesn't mention remote compatibility either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pt109 View Post

Good point. But the ePub standard is all about reflow and taking the "paper size" out of publishing. I just don't see extending the length of a "page" as a longterm problem. I just think the 4:3 screen size is one of a number of compromises Apple shrewdly made for the 1.0 product. As with the iPod, there can be an indefinite stream of "new, improved" models: HD for movies, camera for vid conferencing, new sensors for better gameplay, and always, always faster silicon and more memory. In Steve's vision there will be demand for the next year's model for another 5-10 years. I suspect he's right.

The problem with just taking the page length out of the equation is, if you're referring to a specific paragraph, how will you communicate to someone where it is?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

I think that's reading quite a bit into things. The simple fact is, VGA is the dominant (by a VERY wide margin) connector on projectors. Blame the PC/Windows crowd - display port is a much more modern and sane standard but the majority of PC laptops still come with VGA ports. Until that changes, don't expect to see projectors with display port any time soon. And once they show up with display port, there are still going to be millions of legacy projectors with only VGA out there. VGA will be around for a long time

VGA seems to be easily able to run longer lengths without getting too expensive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KenC View Post

I agree, I've never seen a WXGA, aka 720p, presentation. All presentations are in a 4 by 3 format, so the two sizes used are XGA, 1024 x 768 and SVGA, 800 x 600. The iPad has an iWorks suite. Clearly you can make Keynotes, and it stands to reason you can present Keynotes, so XGA video out thru a VGA connector makes complete sense.

WXGA is more commonly referring to 1366x 768. It expands the horizontal axis by another third, keeping the vertical axis the same.
post #84 of 166
Im also sad that I won't be able to do jobsian ipad demos on my tv it would be similar to the Archos which is a crap device execpt when used on the TV.
post #85 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Always with the lying.

DP v1.2 21.6Gbps, 3840 x 2400 @ 60Hz

... and many other features that HDMI can't compete with.

But he's part right too. Apple's current Macs don't support that resolution, Apple state 2560x1600 is their max.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The person who said that HDMI has a higher max resolution than DisplayPort?

That higher max isn't useful except for movies, it's likely not relevant outside that use.
post #86 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

But he's part right too. Apple's current Macs don't support that resolution, Apple state 2560x1600 is their max.

That higher max isn't useful except for movies, it's likely not relevant outside that use.

I don't recall him mentioning Macs at all, just that HDMI has better specs than DP, which isn't true. If he was focusing on Macs, then what is the point of bringing up anything outside of DVI since Macs have never had HDMI? There aren't any.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #87 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The person who said that HDMI has a higher max resolution than DisplayPort?

Sometimes you need to think first before blaming somebody for lying. Check this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_connectors and look at the max resolution column.

By the way, which current Apple products have full-size DisplayPort? I recall, most of them have Mini DisplayPort: the port is capable of driving resolutions up to 2560x1600 only.
American centrism dominates 50% of the population here. That half don't think outside the box ... or perhaps just don't think. © digitalclips
Reply
American centrism dominates 50% of the population here. That half don't think outside the box ... or perhaps just don't think. © digitalclips
Reply
post #88 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Until recently it wasn't even possible to hook into most hotel TV's, and even now it's still pretty rare. And most of the time my laptop or the display on the iPad will be a thousand times better than what is in the hotel room anyway.

As for a friends house, a DVD isn't HD, very few of my friends have BlueRay, and they are usually the ones providing the video content anyway if we are going to watch a movie. Beyond movies, there are multiple ways to get to video but just as I have never used my iPod or iPhone to show video, I can't imagine using the iPad to either. But if I wanted to, amazingly the plasma's, LCD's and even my HD CRT RPTV all have VGA inputs. My sisters newest LCD only has DVI, but a cheap VGA to DVI dongle fixes that.

Bottom line - if portable HD video is your thing, the Archos seems like a much better solution for you. Thankfully I'm glad Apple didn't focus on movie playback. I think it's a grossly overblown use case and a 16:9 screen would be much more awkward than 4:3.

Granted, the iPad wouldn't be the best way to take video to a friend's house. I'd rather have an iPod to do it, but iPods are stuck with SD output only in which case I'd rather own the DVD because it would be better quality than Apple's SD. (And while DVD isn't HD, if you have a good scaler in your TV, a DVD can look damn near as good as Apple's highly compressed 720p.)

Regardless, the point is that Apple's HD video content isn't currently portable, which is one reason I won't buy it. And while many HDTVs have VGA inputs, it remains to be seen if the iPad can support outputing its VGA video in that aspect ratio. Even if it's not 720p, can it ouput video in a 16:9 aspect ratio? Or will I end up with black bars on all four sides of my video (ie, horizontal bars because the iPad had to fit the video into it's 4:3 aspect ratio and vertical bars because my TV had to fit the resulting 4:3 output to it's 16:9 aspect ratio)? My old PPC mini, which used to be my HTPC, could output video over VGA in a 16:9 ratio. If the iPad can also, it would be a way to make Apple's HD video portable.

And note that your "cheap VGA to DVI dongle" isn't really DVI in the "digital" video interface sense of the acronym. It's really a VGA to DVI-I adaptor. DVI-I carries both an analog and digital signal. And the VGA adaptor will only include the analog signal. So if you hook it up to a DVI-D (digital only) device, or if you connect a DVI-HDMI adaptor, you'll be starring at a blank screen.

I suspect one reason the iPad (and all iPods/iPhone) are limited to analog video output are either technical (trying to get a digital video signal through the dock connector) or licensing (displaying an HD video over a digital connection requires HDCP be implemented).
post #89 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by gin_tonic View Post

Sometimes you need to think first before blaming somebody for lying. Check this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_connectors and look at the max resolution column.

You did qualify your post with "Wiki says that" so i apologize with for my comment about you lying. Wikipedia is incorrect. The specs for DP v1.2 are as I stated and much more.

Quote:
By the way, which current Apple products have full-size DisplayPort? I recall, most of them have Mini DisplayPort: the port is capable of driving resolutions up to 2560x1600 only.

You'e referring to the DP connector type. There are no limitations in throughput based on DP standard or mDP connector types for DisplayPort. Note that it's still the DisplayPort digital standard even when the port is mDP. Just like with USB-A and USB-B connector types still allowing for USB2.0 throughput.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #90 of 166
Whats wrong with VGA? My cheap 1920:1080 flatscreen has it and it works just fine with my MacBook Pro via the miniDP to VGA adapter? Sure I woun't be able to watch BlueRay movies on it but it works just fine for DVD-Movies and large spreadsheets .

I guess like Windows, VGA still is just good enough for most of us?
post #91 of 166
I don't think you made it clear how inferior you think non-Apple technology is! And how far the mighty Jobs had to bend his knees in order to get a mere VGA output in the iPad. (Oh, I mean, XGA. Yeah, I know everybody calls it XGA!)
post #92 of 166
Shame, I was hoping for a media dock that had a HDMI output to connect to the TV, stereo connectors for audio, and a remote control to control it from the sofa.

Think of a Squeezebox on steroids.

VGA is better than nothing (and VGA isn't restricted to 1024x768, I don't see why other applications can't request 1280x720 unless Apple limit the APIs) I guess.
post #93 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpcg View Post

Whats wrong with VGA? My cheap 1920:1080 flatscreen has it and it works just fine with my MacBook Pro via the miniDP to VGA adapter? Sure I woun't be able to watch BlueRay movies on it but it works just fine for DVD-Movies and large spreadsheets .

I guess like Windows, VGA still is just good enough for most of us?

I resurrected an old computer recently, so I tried that a month ago, it didn't work so well. It does depend a little on the quality of the cable and the ports, there is digital to analog to digital conversion going on. The digital connectors generally seem to be a lot more resilient against distortions, especially when you're running it at such a high resolution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I don't recall him mentioning Macs at all, just that HDMI has better specs than DP, which isn't true. If he was focusing on Macs, then what is the point of bringing up anything outside of DVI since Macs have never had HDMI? There aren't any.

You're right, though I generally treat DVI and HDMI interchangeably, and haven't had any issues arrise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gin_tonic View Post

Sometimes you need to think first before blaming somebody for lying. Check this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_connectors and look at the max resolution column.

By the way, which current Apple products have full-size DisplayPort? I recall, most of them have Mini DisplayPort: the port is capable of driving resolutions up to 2560x1600 only.

DP1.2 is only a few weeks old. An article that predates that ratification is going to be a bit out of date. mDP is now a VESA-ratified port connector. As far as I can tell, it can support all the features the big one can, except for a mechanical lock.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amdahl View Post

I don't think you made it clear how inferior you think non-Apple technology is! And how far the mighty Jobs had to bend his knees in order to get a mere VGA output in the iPad. (Oh, I mean, XGA. Yeah, I know everybody calls it XGA!)

VGA is usually used as the informal term for the connector. XGA is a term for a specific screen resolution.
post #94 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by benice View Post

This is well said, especially the last two bits.

And for all the apologists for Apple and the iPad, saying its about cost and compatability its just not that simple. My laptop doesn't do VGA out and guess what? It's also more likely to be hooked up to a projector to deliver a talk than it ever is to be connected to a widescreen TV. Projectors are what laptops are meant to be connected to and yet they've evolved to modern standards. And with the iPad we hear they're going to be great for lectures, but we also know the lecturers like showing videos on TVs as well. If they roll in a TV made this century as far as I can tell its not to be able to hook up to the iPad at all.

Another issue that's inevitably going to come up if Apple fixed it so external video output is decent quality is the fact that the iPad will only play a tiny amount of video that is in circulation. Want to use the iPad to present a talk that has anything other than Quicktime video? ... not gonna happen either.

I underlined two points that are completely wrong.

For the first one, I direct you to the Apple store. As it stands right now, the iPad cannot output HD video (although it can process and playback 720p video), but it can most certainly connect to TV's made in this century as they typically come with hdmi and component inputs. For that matter, most HDTV's have VGA input as well.

For the second point, you are correct that the iPad features limited video codecs, but it is not Quicktime only. .h264 is also supported and is the most common format available.

Since those points basically encompass your entire argument, nothing you said really has much basis in reality, and here you are talking to the Apple apologists like you are somehow better than them, you just swing the other way, missing reality by just as much.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #95 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

I underlined two points that are completely wrong.

For the first one, I direct you to the Apple store. As it stands right now, the iPad cannot output HD video (although it can process and playback 720p video), but it can most certainly connect to TV's made in this century as they typically come with hdmi and component inputs. For that matter, most HDTV's have VGA input as well.

The only reason the iPad will work with modern HDTVs is that they feature a "legacy VGA connector". iPad doesn't do HDMI, and who wants to view 480i (or 480p) on their shiny HDTV that can do 1080p?
post #96 of 166
I'm glad it has vga output. I'm anxious to shut some of my geek friends up. To be fair, they don't know what it has so they can't talk up something they don't know exists yet, but again, to be fair this is a good example of "don't talk about what you don't know about."

I've seen a few people make a comment about this specifically and call the ipad junk.

I won't be buying one, but at least Apple isn't completely ignoring what people want.
post #97 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

I underlined two points that are completely wrong.

For the first one, I direct you to the Apple store. As it stands right now, the iPad cannot output HD video (although it can process and playback 720p video), but it can most certainly connect to TV's made in this century as they typically come with hdmi and component inputs. For that matter, most HDTV's have VGA input as well.

For the second point, you are correct that the iPad features limited video codecs, but it is not Quicktime only. .h264 is also supported and is the most common format available.

Since those points basically encompass your entire argument, nothing you said really has much basis in reality, and here you are talking to the Apple apologists like you are somehow better than them, you just swing the other way, missing reality by just as much.

Question is, will the iPad let you output local HD content at all, thru component or VGA. The iPhone doesn't let you store/playback these files, so there's no basis for comparison. Will they give an error when connected to a TV?
post #98 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig View Post

The only reason the iPad will work with modern HDTVs is that they feature a "legacy VGA connector". iPad doesn't do HDMI, and who wants to view 480i (or 480p) on their shiny HDTV that can do 1080p?

Clearly you didn't follow my link, or read what I wrote. HDTVs typically come with two connector types in addition to a legacy VGA port. HDMI and component. Component cables are fully capable of transmitting 1080p video, so I wouldn't really consider them legacy quite yet.

Of course I'd rather have an HD signal, but at this point you are not only ignoring the major part of my argument, but also taking my post out of context. The context was that I was replying to someone who said the iPad is not cpable of transmitting to a modern TV. Which is untrue. I was simply stating why that was the case. I never said hdmi or a 720p or greater signal wouldn't be nice.

I do find it odd that Apple is not allowing 720p video through the component cable even though the iPad can render it. This is either being done due to bandwidth limitations of the dock connector or for consistency reasons. i'm hoping it's the latter.

Right now the iPad does not have a video dock and the iPhone/iPod Touch video dock is intentionally out of date (old apple remote). I have a sneaking suspicion that a new dock is in the works, perhaps with the vaunted hdmi output you want. My only question is one of the timing. Would they update the firmware on the iPod touch and the iPhone to playback 720p video (they are capable) or would they save this dock for the iPad and the next generation of iPhone/iPod touch? Hoping for the former, expecting the latter.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #99 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

Question is, will the iPad let you output local HD content at all, thru component or VGA. The iPhone doesn't let you store/playback these files, so there's no basis for comparison. Will they give an error when connected to a TV?

Why wouldn't it?
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #100 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

I do find it odd that Apple is not allowing 720p video through the component cable even though the iPad can render it. This is either being done due to bandwidth limitations of the dock connector or for consistency reasons. i'm hoping it's the latter.

Since the composite and component cables are for playing back media and the iPad is the first handheld to also play protected HD iTS video, perhaps they can't contractually push HD analog signals. Can you push iTS HD from a Mac via analog video out?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #101 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Since the composite and component cables are for playing back media and the iPad is the first handheld to also play protected iTS video, perhaps they can't contractually push HD analog signals. Can you push iTS HD from a Mac via analog video out?

That could be the reason.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #102 of 166
I'm surprised that no-one here has mentioned Light Peak. There's a newer version of that Apple I/O Chart in this article that shows Light Peak.

The VGA output makes sense as an interim measure, prior to giving some future iPad more versatile digital output via LightPeak.
post #103 of 166
The only thing I can contemplate requiring a connection to a projector would be a business presentation. And the only evidence of any app which would do this so far is keynote. If that is not a specific use case.... And a very narrow one at that.

We are talking about the maintenance of a legacy connector so this point is entirely relevant given th justification for it's upkeep.
post #104 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteS View Post

The VGA output makes sense as an interim measure, prior to giving some future iPad more versatile digital output via LightPeak.

If projectors are still using VGA connectors then I don't think LightPeak is the next step for them or the iPad. We don't even have FW1600 or USB3.0 in any Macs so I wouldn't expect LightPeak for a long time. Macs first, accessory devices later. Plus, Intel says it will be ready in 2010 with no actual date set, but then there is the time it takes for adoption.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #105 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

If projectors are still using VGA connectors then I don't think LightPeak is the next step for them or the iPad. We don't even have FW1600 or USB3.0 in any Macs so I wouldn't expect LightPeak for a long time. Macs first, accessory devices later. Plus, Intel says it will be ready in 2010 with no actual date set, but then there is the time it takes for adoption.

I would expect that a LightPeak would make FW1600 and up unnecessary. That might be true of much of the need for USB3 as well.
post #106 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I would expect that a LightPeak would make FW1600 and up unnecessary. That might be true of much of the need for USB3 as well.

If a faster tech that is developed years later automatically obsolesces other tech then we wouldn't be talking about VGA on the iPad.

I'd expect LightPeak to be a port on Macs at first, along with FW and USB. I have doubts about FW being updated since none of their iDevices can even sync or charge through them anymore, but I would expect USB3.0 to come. Hopefully with the next professional Mac releases.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #107 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmansfield View Post

Does anyone know yet if it offers an extended desktop?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

That's a great point, and we probably won't know until it ships.

It will for sure. I think that was confirmed by some Apple guy during the iPad event, and anyway the SDK sports clear support for the feature - developers can easily paint a second "window" with different content on the external display.
post #108 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig View Post

The only reason the iPad will work with modern HDTVs is that they feature a "legacy VGA connector". iPad doesn't do HDMI, and who wants to view 480i (or 480p) on their shiny HDTV that can do 1080p?

I thought most of the point of this article was about making presentations using a projector. I really don't think an iPad is a good way to play entertainment media on a TV, it's just the wrong form factor. Ideally, it could do a decent job of at least sending TV video if it had a digital video connector, but then, iPad doesn't have a remote port, so it's either a matter of having it on your lap so you can control it, with a long video cord, or getting up and walking to the TV every time you need to do anything.
post #109 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I thought most of the point of this article was about making presentations using a projector. I really don't think an iPad is a good way to play entertainment media on a TV, it's just the wrong form factor. Ideally, it could do a decent job of at least sending TV video if it had a digital video connector, but then, iPad doesn't have a remote port, so it's either a matter of having it on your lap so you can control it, with a long video cord, or getting up and walking to the TV every time you need to do anything.

The iPhone should be the remote obviously

Hopefully that becomes a possibility at some point. It would help for presenting too.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #110 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by normis View Post

for the really slow readers of this thread, I will try again:

HDTV style resolutions like 720p have no relation to HDMI. HDMI can also output VGA resolutions, so this argument is irrelevant.

They chose VGA for other reasons, probably price.

Not only that but HDMI is really just DVI with audio and DVI can handle far greater resolutions than the 1330 resolution that is 1080P.

That being said for the market the iPad is aiming for VGA makes more sense. I would have liked to see Display Port then you could hook up to anything but Apple wants to keep the amount of ports simple and considering the Dock Connector can't handle the DVI output there you go.
post #111 of 166
Of note i regret the use of an offensive term here
forgive me
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #112 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post

Here's a tip; maybe this will help you;

There is no such thing as a product without omitted features. None.

book

clock

wall

floor

sea floor

loose change

number 9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #113 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob55 View Post

Not for nothing, but I doubt they could have included a VGA connector on the iPad and still maintained it's streamlined shape. Sure, it's a way to get us to buy accessories, but then what company doesn't do that.

what ever connector we are forced >> we will find a way to port ipad content out to the world
i only wanted 1080p level or higher

and i will buy any product that has an apple on it
ANY

i will crush any product that contains msft

law of nature


peace 9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #114 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivan.rnn01 View Post

Apple's official tech specs say "with Dock Connector to VGA Adapter", which explains pretty much everything meaningful.


Yep. And it's for projectors. That's how Apple will pitch the iPad to businesses- as a presentation machine.
post #115 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

Yep. And it's for projectors. That's how Apple will pitch the iPad to businesses- as a presentation machine.

Of all the projectors I looked at all had VGA ports. That includes all the high-end HD projectors, even a Dell with DisplayPort.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #116 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

VGA is usually used as the informal term for the connector. XGA is a term for a specific screen resolution.

No, XGA is the name for a specific IBM adapter. Nobody else used the term, because it was IBM's. When there was a need for a higher resolution, the rest of the industry just increased their clock frequency (thereby matching IBMs, because the math is all the same) and they were done. No fancy 'XGA' name needed.

This is where the 'multi-sync' monitor came from. Instead of creating a monitor that only worked at certain frequencies, it would just look for a signal along a continuum of plausible frequencies, and lock on to it when found.

IBM was busy trying to re-invent new names for the same standards. That's why 'PS/2' mouse and keyboard connectors are compatible with the original big DIN keyboard connectors and serial mice with nothing more than a direct adapter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MCA_IBM_XGA-2.jpg
post #117 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amdahl View Post

No, XGA is the name for a specific IBM adapter. Nobody else used the term, because it was IBM's. When there was a need for a higher resolution, the rest of the industry just increased their clock frequency (thereby matching IBMs, because the math is all the same) and they were done. No fancy 'XGA' name needed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MCA_IBM_XGA-2.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XGA
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #118 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XGA

Thanks for the material. Inside, you'll see a line that basically spells it out. XGA is an IBM product, not the name for the standard in use by PCs then, or now:

"XGA hardware was not cloned as extensively as VGA hardware. Nevertheless, at least one graphics company made several XGA-compatible chips, the IIT AGX."

Quote:
Like its predecessor (the IBM 8514), XGA offered fixed function hardware acceleration to offload processing of 2D drawing tasks. XGA and 8514 could offload line-draw, bitmap-copy (bitblt), and color-fill operations from the host CPU. XGA's acceleration was faster than 8514's, and more comprehensive in that it supported more drawing primitives and XGA's 16 bits per pixel (65,536 color) display-mode.

A resolution standard would not include 'fixed function hardware acceleration to offload processing of 2D drawing tasks.'

You can also read the IBM press release announcement of the XGA adapter card here:

http://ibmmuseum.com/ohlandl/video/190-182.txt

It was a proprietary card that was almost compatible with VGA (not register compatible). In terms of resolutions, it is exactly the same as VGA at the frequency VGA uses for the same resolutions.

You Apple guys are falling for 20 year old IBM propaganda. How interesting!
post #119 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amdahl View Post

Thanks for the material. Inside, you'll see a line that basically spells it out. XGA is an IBM product, not the name for the standard in use by PCs then, or now:

"XGA hardware was not cloned as extensively as VGA hardware. Nevertheless, at least one graphics company made several XGA-compatible chips, the IIT AGX."

You can also read the IBM press release announcement of the XGA adapter card here:

http://ibmmuseum.com/ohlandl/video/190-182.txt

It was a proprietary card that was almost compatible with VGA (not register compatible). In terms of resolutions, it is exactly the same as VGA at the frequency VGA uses for the same resolutions.

You Apple guys are falling for 20 year old IBM propaganda. How interesting!

I'm not sure what you are gettting at or why you keep comparing the display standard to hardware. IBM created the XGA display standard, just like VESA, Intel, Apple etc. all create standards.

It's not a big deal that IBM invented it. You do realize that IBM had to make new HW to run the super high resolution of XGA, right?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #120 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I'm not sure what you are gettting at or why you keep comparing the display standard to hardware. IBM created the XGA display standard, just like VESA, Intel, Apple etc. all create standards.

It's not a big deal that IBM invented it. You do realize that IBM had to make new HW to run the super high resolution of XGA, right?

IBM invented VGA. And I will give them credit for that all day long. And if you want to call 1024x768 as VGA or Super VGA, I'm fine with that.

But XGA is not a new display standard, except in the delusional eyes of 1990 IBM, and within the framework of their failed attempt to recapture control of the PC market they had lost with the entire 'PS/2', Micro-Channel, and 'OS/2' product line. XGA is VGA with a new name; an IBM name. Nothing more.

Proof: According to the IBM press release I linked to, the XGA adapter could do 1024x768 resolution with the 8507, 8514, 8515, and 8604 monitors. The 8514 was introduced in 1987, the same time VGA was introduced, and three years before IBM marketing came up with the XGA card. If 1024x768 is a new resolution standard, how can a three year old VGA product support it?

More proof: XGA was introduced in the press release in October 1990. This July 16, 1990 Infoworld review looks at a pile of VGA cards that do 1024x768. Hmm... I guess they aren't XGA, are they? Google Books link to Info World article. And just to save you the trouble of reading it, XGA isn't mentioned once in the entire article... because IBM marketing hasn't "invented" it yet.

The article also mentions that NEC Multisync 5D monitors support 1280x1024 resolution. And all of this before IBM saved us all by 'inventing' the 1024x768 standard?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Inside Apple's iPad: VGA video output