or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple prepping first Macs with HDMI - sources
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple prepping first Macs with HDMI - sources - Page 3

post #81 of 194
All I can say is Apple had best firmware update the existing Mini DisplayPort Macs to add audio over the port! If not, there will be many angry customers...
post #82 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by columbus View Post

Turning the Notebooks and Mac Minis into stealth Apple TV units to play iTunes content.

I'm kind of hoping ALL miniDPs can output video and sound one day through an adaptor (I have a '08 MacBook Pro), but this doesn't sound too hopeful from the article.

Since all the products are rumored to get quad cores in the laptop. Add in a decent high Cpu and dedicated gpu with hdmi and they will sell like hot cakes.

The mac user would finally have a somewhat portable that propels 780p plus audio. I can see these purchased for many studios. But they really need a good graphic chipand recent CPU.
post #83 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

It would be nice to have sound in the same cable to be able to drop what should be a superfluous cable. This can be done with DisplayPort though, Apple just needs to support DP audio, as well as offer the audio signaling for HDMI adapter.

Amen.
post #84 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by macmondo View Post

"An unannounced version of the Mac mini has been spotted with an HDMI connector instead of a DVI."
they say: has been spotted

they didn't say it's just illustration.

"More specifically, prototypes of a new Mac mini Apple's smallest and most affordable system, commonly employed by tech savvy Mac users as an ad-hoc living room media server, has been making the rounds with an HDMI port in place of its legacy DVI connector, according to two people familiar with the matter."

There is no mention of AI having obtained images of the mac mini in the article. They have two sources telling them that an hdmi connector is there. That is it. If you look at the image, it has an AppleInsider watermark which means they are laying claim to the photoshopped image as their own. I'm sorry they didn't connect the dots for you.
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 #85 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

They also didn't state that the image shown was the unit that was spotted. It's irrelevant as is the image as long as the information in the article is true.

I can't agree with you at all.

The way the images are presented with their captions implies this is a picture of the Mini that was spotted. That's bad journalism.

Of course, I don't consider AI to be journalists (or even close), but even so they should do better at informing us whether a picture is real or fake.
post #86 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post

All I can say is Apple had best firmware update the existing Mini DisplayPort Macs to add audio over the port! If not, there will be many angry customers...

More likely inconvenienced rather than angry.

The TOSLINK adapters cost about 2 bucks. I don't consider optical cables a hassle, even on a bad day as it's a single cable. I agree that it would be nice if the Mini DisplayPort supported audio though.

I'm more interested as to whether or not the HDMI connector will also support the audio channel. That is of more interest to me than audio over the DisplayPort.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #87 of 194
I've spent about $6000 in the last year setting up computers in my bedroom, family room and bar. All pulling media from the same library on a server and all connected to hdtvs via hdmi.

I wanted to use mac minis but no hdmi meant no way.

Each htpc setup now has cable box, dell studio slim and surround reciever.
boxee runs the media, Onkyo runs sound and Samsung splays it all up on big screens.
Everything works together and is awesome. The dell computers are powerful enough to rip my DVD and BR discs or just pop one in and play it. I would have happily done without the BR support if I could have used mac minis, but I don't mess with silly adapters...ever.
post #88 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

I can't agree with you at all.

The way the images are presented with their captions implies this is a picture of the Mini that was spotted. That's bad journalism.

Of course, I don't consider AI to be journalists (or even close), but even so they should do better at informing us whether a picture is real or fake.

The image is irrelevant. I don't think anyone here needs to know what an HDMI connector looks like. You seem the be the only person excited by the fact that the image is a mock-up. Mock-ups are used all of the time for electronics. It doesn't matter if you 'agree with me' or not. No where in the article does it claim that the image is an actual image of this new hardware. You made that assumption on your own.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #89 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

I can't agree with you at all.

The way the images are presented with their captions implies this is a picture of the Mini that was spotted. That's bad journalism.

Of course, I don't consider AI to be journalists (or even close), but even so they should do better at informing us whether a picture is real or fake.

I agree, though it should be relatively plain to see that it's not a real photo with just a tiny bit of deduction. For one, the upper photo may have been a rendering anyway, it was taken from Apple's site. No "spy photo" looks like that, ever.
post #90 of 194
Bring us BLU-RAY!!

also the ability to show content on virtually all HDTV's. a great forward progress. and no i don't think Display port is HDMI's equal. THERE IS NO AUDIO.

HDMI is a versatile electronics output. so lets get to use it.

also.... bring on Blu-Ray. its time

we want it in iMac's, Mac Pro's, and of course those photo bugs like myself, on MBP.
post #91 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

BluRay, like Flash, is just a placeholder, while better things develop.

To not understand this, is to be left behind. I don't care that average AV heads don't get it, I'm just glad Apple does.

Being able to see more than 3 years into the future is why Apple is where they are, with what they have.

This takes the thesis to an absurd limit. All technology is a placeholder for future technology. The issue here seems to be the business model (rather than a technology issue) that all video is to be streamed without an option to purchase the content in disk format. Regardless of what Apple does or does not support there will be massive amounts of BluRay content produced just like there was for the previous DVD, Laserdisc, and VHS formats. Disabling access to this content doesn't seem like a customer friendly practice. The result for me is that I purchase products from competing vendors (like Sony and LG).
post #92 of 194
As someone who just recently had to make a backup of my iTunes library on a boatload of D/L DVD+R discs, I would welcome BD+R or any other method. I realize this is slightly off-topic to the HDMI issue, but Apple should either add a feature to iTunes to dump a full backup of a library to an external HDD or provide an optical drive that is capable of accommodating a larger capacity recordable media.

The backup was needed to port the library to a new Mac Mini.
post #93 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Apple has many reasons and their pushing the blame on other because of tricky licensing isn't the crux of problem, it's just a scape goat that tries to make Apple look like the victum, as any decent company should do.

On one front, they are pushing their convenient streaming option which is why they haven't at elast added AACS support to their OS and then let users deal with BRDs themselves, internally or externally.

So I removed your other comments as you keep referring to "notebooks". Valid points, by my question was around Mac Pros and iMacs. This is a different space, entirely. Power consumption arguments do not hold water when it is constantly "plugged in"! The size of a drive does not count.

Apple's alternative is not good enough. The quality is not there. If they up the quality; the bandwidth is not there (as I previously stated).

So...Apple choose not too. They are behind, not because of "technology or adoption" issues...because they can't sell the content. That will leave more than a few folks frustrated, IMO.

FYI - http://hd.engadget.com/2010/01/18/bl...rcent-in-2009/

Two points to note:

1) This is a product bought by the average consumer in the worst recession for a long time
2) Blu-Ray is a Premium product

Imagine the numbers if the recession had not hit?
post #94 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchelljd View Post

also the ability to show content on virtually all HDTV's. a great forward progress. and no i don't think Display port is HDMI's equal. THERE IS NO AUDIO.

Both DisplayPort and HDMI support audio. Apple doesn't offer audio output on their mDP jacks. While it's a bit disappointing, that doesn't mean they can't add it for later machines.
post #95 of 194
Bah Humbug! There isn't much point in offering HDMI (which one, 1.3, or the new 1.4?) if they're not offering Blu-Ray.
post #96 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Bah Humbug! There isn't much point in offering HDMI (which one, 1.3, or the new 1.4?) if they're not offering Blu-Ray.

I disagree. I have no use for Blu-Ray on my MediaPC as I already have a standalone player for that. If the new HDMI port does offer audio out, it is a small convenience at least.

I do wish I could easily replace the drive on my iMac though. I may pop in a BD-Rom (I don't need write capability).

The new 27" uses a 12.7 mm drive or a 9.5 mm?
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #97 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by warp View Post

As someone who just recently had to make a backup of my iTunes library on a boatload of D/L DVD+R discs, I would welcome BD+R or any other method. I realize this is slightly off-topic to the HDMI issue, but Apple should either add a feature to iTunes to dump a full backup of a library to an external HDD or provide an optical drive that is capable of accommodating a larger capacity recordable media.

The backup was needed to port the library to a new Mac Mini.

I don't think many people use BD to make backups, even on Windows computers. I usually don't even see blank BD disks for sale in most locations. I'd much rather backup to a hard drive than optical disks at this point in time. Time machine will provide an automatic backup of your library. If you want to do it manually, it is pretty easy to drag the folder/folders containing your library onto an external disk.
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 #98 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

I can't agree with you at all.

The way the images are presented with their captions implies this is a picture of the Mini that was spotted. That's bad journalism.

Of course, I don't consider AI to be journalists (or even close), but even so they should do better at informing us whether a picture is real or fake.

journalists or not, they are on google news and they are my #1 source for Apple news lol.

Just take any kind of rumor about an apple product with a grain of salt.
post #99 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

Thanks troll.

Yes, the trolling is increasing at an exponential rate on Apple centric blogs like AppleInsider, MacRumors, MacNN, MacWorld, etc. On AppleInsider, for example, the troll posts sometimes outnumber the positive or constructive ones. Right here we are seeing new members with only one or two posts that are obvious trolls. They came for the express purpose of posting FUDl, probably on marching orders from their employers. This can mean only one thing. Apple has finally gotten under their skins and they're scared to death of the success. What else can explain the compulsion to post FUD, innuendo, and outright falsehoods on web sites that cover a computing platform they do not use and have no intention of using? Really, what else?

From Hamlet, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." That about sums it up as far as the trolls go. This is probably a good thing for Apple. It means they're doing it right.
post #100 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdbryan View Post

This takes the thesis to an absurd limit. All technology is a placeholder for future technology. The issue here seems to be the business model (rather than a technology issue) that all video is to be streamed without an option to purchase the content in disk format. Regardless of what Apple does or does not support there will be massive amounts of BluRay content produced just like there was for the previous DVD, Laserdisc, and VHS formats. Disabling access to this content doesn't seem like a customer friendly practice. The result for me is that I purchase products from competing vendors (like Sony and LG).

That's fine. The result for me, and many other people, is that I choose from the plethora of other options. The lack of BluRay on the Mac doesn't phase me in the slightest, and I'm big on HD content. I have FIOS for the best HDTV I can get. I download or rent HD content online all the time.

And if I can't find something particular anywhere else, I make the occasional trip to blockbuster for a bluray disc that I watch from the PS3. That happens maybe once every 1-2 months.

Denying access to a niche product is not denying access at all. Its a feature you want, that isn't present.
post #101 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

I disagree. I have no use for Blu-Ray on my MediaPC as I already have a standalone player for that. If the new HDMI port does offer audio out, it is a small convenience at least.

I do wish I could easily replace the drive on my iMac though. I may pop in a BD-Rom (I don't need write capability).

The new 27" uses a 12.7 mm drive or a 9.5 mm?

The whole point is to simplify, not to make things more complex. I'd like everything on one device. I'd like to get my Blu-Ray disks into my computer, just as I've got music, Tv shows and, so far, some DVDs. I've got too many electronic devices in my system already.
post #102 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

Quote:
I also find it ironic that Steve Jobs in on the Blu-ray board!


More like smart. Because he's getting the facts first hand. When he says that there's issues, that the licensing is too expensive and complex, he knows. Not 'he heard'

What is Apple doing as a member of the Blu-ray board? Smart would be for Steve Jobs to use Apple's position and influence to improve these issues rather than just sitting there and bitching about it, all the while trying to undermine Blu-ray. How would Apple like its own board members publicly making negative comments about Apple?
post #103 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

What is Apple doing as a member of the Blu-ray board? Smart would be for Steve Jobs to use Apple's position and influence to improve these issues rather than just sitting there and bitching about it, all the while trying to undermine Blu-ray. How would Apple like its own board members publicly making negative comments about Apple?

Sadly, there are no issues left to resolve. They have all been done; the licensing issue (originally referred to by SJ as a "bag of hurt"), were simplified. Technical challenges..whilst I am not in the know...every other manufacturer has found a solution - without increasing the price.

I think it is simple: Blu-ray competes with the Apple online store and they would not be able to charge more to absorb the licensing. That's it.

Oh - SJ got his seat as part of the Disney/Pixar Studios acquisition. Amazing that a company like Disney would allow him to do this! Having kids, Blu-ray movies are big in our house...especially Disney ones.
post #104 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleggy View Post

Sadly, there are no issues left to resolve. They have all been done; the licensing issue (originally referred to by SJ as a "bag of hurt"), were simplified. Technical challenges..whilst I am not in the know...every other manufacturer has found a solution - without increasing the price.

I think it is simple: Blu-ray competes with the Apple online store and they would not be able to charge more to absorb the licensing. That's it.

That seems to be pretty much it. Jobs wants downloads to prevail. It's their new business model, and they're going to follow that road no matter what. I just hope that at some point he won't have a choice, and will do it.
post #105 of 194
what are these expensive licensing issues? you can get blu-ray as an option on every cheapo dell and HP computer. It's $100 or so for the drive and the player software is included.

there have been blu-ray software players since the windows XP days. all you needed was a graphics card with HDCP compliant drivers. nvidia and ATI both made their drivers for all their cards hdcp compliant years ago
post #106 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleggy View Post

Sadly, there are no issues left to resolve. They have all been done; the licensing issue (originally referred to by SJ as a "bag of hurt"), were simplified. Technical challenges..whilst I am not in the know...every other manufacturer has found a solution - without increasing the price.

I think it is simple: Blu-ray competes with the Apple online store and they would not be able to charge more to absorb the licensing. That's it.

Oh - SJ got his seat as part of the Disney/Pixar Studios acquisition. Amazing that a company like Disney would allow him to do this! Having kids, Blu-ray movies are big in our house...especially Disney ones.

I have disputed this argument countless times... Here we go again: BR does NOT compete with the ITS. Just like CDs and DVDs don't compete with the ITS (following your logic, Apple would have to leave the Superdrive out of their computers entirely - not just because it's obsolete, though it is, but because it competes with the ITS). The ITS is all about convenience, not quality - you'll get a digital download, which is convenient because you don't have to leave your house to get a new movie, but its quality will be pretty terrible compared to BR (720p with compression artefacts). BR, on the other hand, is all about quality. The customer who downloads a movie in the ITS is not the same kind of customer who's interested in buying a BR and watching it on a great FullHD-screen. Just saying.

You anti-BR people should also consider the facts that digital distribution only exists in a very rudimentary form (no 1080p!) in ONE SINGLE COUNTRY so far. Only one subset of Apple-users, namely Americans, can buy movies from Apple at this point in time. This just proves that digital distribution still has a veeery long way to go. I agree that it's the future, but that future is at least five years away, and until it arrives (worldwide availability of ITS-movies in 1080p or better), Blu-Ray is king.

And please don't act like Apple are trailblazers eschewing a stillborn technology. If they were truly serious about the death of optical media yadda yadda yadda they should just go ahead and put their money where their mouth is, which means getting rid of the obsolete Superdrive and preparing the user for a future without optical drives in computers. As much as I want BR, I'd really respect that move and it would open up a lot of new and exciting possibilities. However, they're still putting that obsolete piece of junk into every Mac except the MBA, which indicates to me that they're not very serious about all this. They're just lazy, or they don't care.
post #107 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

what are these expensive licensing issues? you can get blu-ray as an option on every cheapo dell and HP computer. It's $100 or so for the drive and the player software is included.

there have been blu-ray software players since the windows XP days. all you needed was a graphics card with HDCP compliant drivers. nvidia and ATI both made their drivers for all their cards hdcp compliant years ago

I think most of that is just smoke and mirrors. The additional cost (or even the option for it) would be pretty minimal I would think. They could easily make the BD optional so the end user decides to upgrade and pays the additional costs. The hardware is standard SATA/ATAPI. They woudl have to build the capability into OS X which may not be as trivial, but you would think they already have something on a shelf somewhere to do this.

I think melgross has it right. It would cut into Apple's iTunes movie profit. The drives themselves are not substantially different than typical optical drives, other than the laser being used, and all of that is 'black-box' for the OS. It just has to detect an ATAPI SATA drive there, be that DVD-RW, or BD-RW.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #108 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkettpolitur View Post

I have disputed this argument countless times... Here we go again: BR does NOT compete with the ITS. Just like CDs and DVDs don't compete with the ITS (following your logic, Apple would have to leave the Superdrive out of their computers entirely - not just because it's obsolete, though it is, but because it competes with the ITS). The ITS is all about convenience, not quality - you'll get a digital download, which is convenient because you don't have to leave your house to get a new movie, but its quality will be pretty terrible compared to BR (720p with compression artefacts). BR, on the other hand, is all about quality. The customer who downloads a movie in the ITS is not the same kind of customer who's interested in buying a BR and watching it on a great FullHD-screen. Just saying.

You anti-BR people should also consider the facts that digital distribution only exists in a very rudimentary form (no 1080p!) in ONE SINGLE COUNTRY so far. Only one subset of Apple-users, namely Americans, can buy movies from Apple at this point in time. This just proves that digital distribution still has a veeery long way to go. I agree that it's the future, but that future is at least five years away, and until it arrives (worldwide availability of ITS-movies in 1080p or better), Blu-Ray is king.

And please don't act like Apple are trailblazers eschewing a stillborn technology. If they were truly serious about the death of optical media yadda yadda yadda they should just go ahead and put their money where their mouth is, which means getting rid of the obsolete Superdrive and preparing the user for a future without optical drives in computers. As much as I want BR, I'd really respect that move and it would open up a lot of new and exciting possibilities. However, they're still putting that obsolete piece of junk into every Mac except the MBA, which indicates to me that they're not very serious about all this. They're just lazy, or they don't care.

Hmmm. CD's do compete with iTunes. What iTunes does very well, and why I converted, was the ability to download one track and not an entire album.

If all I could do was download albums in iTunes...I'd buy the CD.

I believe the SuperDrive was included with Mac's before the Store allowed movie downloads. Perhaps they will remove it in the future to stop the competition.

That said; the SuperDrive does have it's place (I'd also favor a separate external drive though - including blu-ray). Let's say you go and buy FCP. How you going to install it? Download? No chance! Way to big.
post #109 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

what are these expensive licensing issues? you can get blu-ray as an option on every cheapo dell and HP computer. It's $100 or so for the drive and the player software is included.

there have been blu-ray software players since the windows XP days. all you needed was a graphics card with HDCP compliant drivers. nvidia and ATI both made their drivers for all their cards hdcp compliant years ago

You're quoting the price of a 1/2 height (~1.75" thick) desktop BD reader, most of Apple's computers don't have space for them inside. I can't find a 9.5mm *slot loading* drive that would work in an Apple notebook.

Apple hardware supports HDCP, you can install Windows on a Mac Pro and play BD content just fine. I wonder if Apple doesn't offer a way for third party software makers to use HDCP in OS X.
post #110 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elijahg View Post

I had this exact problem. If you scroll to the top of the list of resolutions in Display preferences (with your TV plugged in), you'll see the proper HDTV resolutions, 720i, 1080i, 1080p, etc. They even have a little TV icon next to them, shame they're hidden. Make sure your TV doesn't have some kind of screen zooming on too.

It sounds like you are suffering from overscan.

Due to legacy reasons, some TVs don't show the entire screen image. Part of the screen image is off beyond the visible borders of the screen. Some fine tuning with the driver/desktop settings perhaps?

10% overscan is typical. Results vary depending on TV + video chipset.
post #111 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

BluRay, like Flash, is just a placeholder, while better things develop.

To not understand this, is to be left behind. I don't care that average AV heads don't get it, I'm just glad Apple does.

Being able to see more than 3 years into the future is why Apple is where they are, with what they have.

That doesn't alter the fact that you are depriving yourself while you wait. The problems that arise with BluRay don't disappear just because the physical media does. Apple will probably have to make the same compromises that Microsoft has in this regard.

Meanwhile, if you really want there are infact workarounds.
post #112 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleggy View Post

Hmmm. CD's do compete with iTunes. What iTunes does very well, and why I converted, was the ability to download one track and not an entire album.

If all I could do was download albums in iTunes...I'd buy the CD.

I believe the SuperDrive was included with Mac's before the Store allowed movie downloads. Perhaps they will remove it in the future to stop the competition.

That said; the SuperDrive does have it's place (I'd also favor a separate external drive though - including blu-ray). Let's say you go and buy FCP. How you going to install it? Download? No chance! Way to big.

No, they don't compete. I would even go as far as saying they're completely different products. When I'm really interested in a particular album, I will always buy it on CD - the quality is unrivalled by Apple's digital files, I'm getting a nice booklet, and the physical medium will last me longer than the digital copy. I only buy from the ITS when I need the convenience and don't really care about the quality (e.g. when I'm interested in one particular song).

It would be the same for movies (if Apple even offered them where I live). I'd be content with the iTunes-quality when I'm really just interested in a movie to pass the time, but any film I really care about I'd still get on BR (unless of course the ITS suddenly offers digital copies in 1080p).

And software, OS X and FCP included, could be distributed on SD-cards. But hey, you're preaching to the choir, I still WANT an optical drive - but it should be able to read BR. The Superdrive is simply obsolete, I don't care about DVDs. They're dead, last-gen.
post #113 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

The whole point is to simplify, not to make things more complex. I'd like everything on one device. I'd like to get my Blu-Ray disks into my computer, just as I've got music, Tv shows and, so far, some DVDs. I've got too many electronic devices in my system already.

What's simpler than a hard drive? Optical media was always inherently more complex than random access disks. The same goes for tapes. If you can just drag files over and not worry about some sort of hidden mastering process, then the whole thing is much better. It will be more robust because it is simpler. It will also be easier.

A bus powered USB drive is like a gigantic floppy drive and about the same size too.

You can use on any machine with a USB port. ALL of your Macs will be able to use it. The same goes for PCs. Whereas PC BD-ROM drives are still rather unusual.

Then there's always the fun potential of disks not getting along with individual drives. There's bound to be some of that nonsense with bluray.
post #114 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by JEDIDIAH View Post

It sounds like you are suffering from overscan.

Due to legacy reasons, some TVs don't show the entire screen image. Part of the screen image is off beyond the visible borders of the screen. Some fine tuning with the driver/desktop settings perhaps?

10% overscan is typical. Results vary depending on TV + video chipset.

I think most TVs overscan by default. It's really annoying that it still happens, and even more annoying that some movies try to compensate for it, having a window boxing effect, a black border on ALL edges.

A lot of times, overscan goes away if you use the TV's DVI port, if it has one. If it's connected through a TV's HDMI port, the TV usually assumes it's movie content and overscans. Otherwise, you probably can work around it on the computer side, but it's less than ideal, because you're blanking out active signal area.
post #115 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I think most TVs overscan by default. It's really annoying that it still happens, and even more annoying that some movies try to compensate for it, having a window boxing effect, a black border on ALL edges.

A lot of times, overscan goes away if you use the TV's DVI port, if it has one. If it's connected through a TV's HDMI port, the TV usually assumes it's movie content and overscans. Otherwise, you probably can work around it on the computer side, but it's less than ideal, because you're blanking out active signal area.

The PC options just modify the front porch and back porch. You end up with a slightly 'smaller' desktop, but no image area is lost (for instance my HTPC has a resolution of 1824 x 1006). You just have a lower resolution. I use SwitchResX to create a custom monitor profile. I've had 4 HDTV's and only 1 gives the option to enable or disable overscan. I don't think that option is as common as you might think.

In any case, its easily worked around, and the software is free.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #116 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by tumme-totte View Post

Tried the other day to connect my MBP to a receiver thru a DVI-to-HDMI-cable. Works, but at least my ONKYO receiver and SHARP LCD-TV gave a couple of unwanted results. The Mac does a great discovery and notes that theres is a TV behind the cable. However, when trying to fit the picture to the screen it offers only two things:

a smaller but sharp picture including the whole desktop but a large black area around it
a picture filling the TV-screen which actually is to large leaving the outer limits of the desktop outside viewable area.

Can of course be something else, but just a DVI-to-HDMI adapter needs more than just pins.

I love this! Either they upgrade AppleTV with some more juice or the skip it and do something creative based on MacMini with HDMI output!!!


I think you will find that it works fine if you connect directly to your Sharp TV and bypass the Onkyo receiver entirely.

Regards,
Curtis
post #117 of 194
solipsism..

I have a theory on the matter, might sound crazy but still..

Maybe Apple holds off on the audio because of licensing issues concerning HDMI. I don't know how the licensing models look, but if they were to enable audio they would almost certainly have to sell an adapter for mDP to HDMI since that would be the sole purpose of the audio.

And maybe that would require HDMI licensing. A bag of hurt someone called it. Or was that Blue-Ray.?

Well. Who Knows.. except Steve.
post #118 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by warp View Post

As someone who just recently had to make a backup of my iTunes library on a boatload of D/L DVD+R discs, I would welcome BD+R or any other method. I realize this is slightly off-topic to the HDMI issue, but Apple should either add a feature to iTunes to dump a full backup of a library to an external HDD or provide an optical drive that is capable of accommodating a larger capacity recordable media.

The backup was needed to port the library to a new Mac Mini.


You could have used Time Machine with an external drive...
post #119 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by CurtisTheGeek View Post

You could have used Time Machine with an external drive...

Or the Finder.
post #120 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

The PC options just modify the front porch and back porch. You end up with a slightly 'smaller' desktop, but no image area is lost (for instance my HTPC has a resolution of 1824 x 1006). You just have a lower resolution.

Is it pixel perfect, meaning not scaled?
I think we're using different terms to mean the same idea. I'm pretty sure your computer is still sending out the same full 1920x1080 raster, the difference between that and your 1825x1006 is lost to empty data, ergo, you've just lost 240k pixels of image area.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple prepping first Macs with HDMI - sources