Look... lets just clear the air about all of this:
HDMI is a consumer electronics minded standard. It is designed to hookup media devices for the playback of HD movies. The mostly widely adopted version of the HDMI standard is limited to 1920x1200 resolution. The latest standard will actually go up to 2650x1600. The standard is not capable to move beyond this (at this time). TVs and other media viewing products have no need to push beyond this level so more then likely this standard will stagnate from here (opinion).
DP is a standard for computers. It is designed to provide a great amount of throughput to push high-resolution high grade content. Its introductory support included 2650x1600 and can push much higher resolutions with the ability to grow. There are other important aspects to DP including the daisy chaining of displays (for multi-mon).
Now here is a big key.... the DP standard is royalty free! HDMI requires royalty. This makes DP a free standard where as HDMI not.
In the end... the truth is.... DP is for Computers and HDMI is for consumer electronics. The reading of the standards makes this very obvious and does not try to hide any aspect!
Here are a couple computers that have DP but no HDMI. Instead they offer a DP-to-HDMI adapter as an accessory. Being cheaper smaller and all-around better for computers we’ll eventually see an industry flip as we often do with Apple adopting a standard. Apple wasn’t the first to adopt USB, but they were the first to adopt it across the board.
Like said Dells are mostly precision workstations and the the displays are only sold through the business store.
Also, most video chipsets have have displayport capability for a couple generations now.
Mostly this, mostly that. The fact is that Dell has dozens of models that come with DP as standard, or can be upgraded to it. Most of these machines are pretty cheap by Apple standards.
Quote:
Not a firmware issue. Displayport isn't wired to the audio on the motherboard.
The only thing that obvious is that despite its advantages, displayport is failing to catch on.
I think I'll just give it the same timeframe as HDMI before I declare a "winner" .... that's fair, don't you think? .... but then, I don't have an "axe to grind", ... do you?
Not to the naked eye at six feet away which is where the majority of large screen displays will be viewed. Even still, the difference is splitting hairs.
So what? DisplayPort is for computers. I don't sit six feet away from my computer. People use computers for reasons other than watching movies on their living room TV.
We know DP as a technology is being readily adopted as the future display standard for computers, now we need to see if the diminutive mDP as a port interface will also be adopted now that it?s officially part of the spec.
Teckstudian logic would mean Macs would still have floppy drives over optical drives, serial and parallel ports over USB, and HDMI would have never been adopted because VGA would have been more ?universal?.
This annoys me so much I had to register to comment!
Its all very well making DisplayPort a standard if Apple themeselves supported it!. When I bought my MacBook Pro I explained to the nice man that I had a DisplayPort conected monitor and needed a mini-displayport to displayport cable, but Apple don't sell them! so making displayport a standard is no good if Apple themselves are not going to support it.
Lots of these cables are available from third parties. Go buy one.
I don't understand why people invent reasons to be angry at Apple. Do you feel better when you are angry at someone?
"*NOTE* AUDIO: This adapter will support audio only if your source device allows audio output through the Mini DisplayPorts interface. If you're not sure, please check with the manufacturer or website to confirm if your device allows audio out through the Mini-DP interface."
If what you're saying is true, then someone could develop a Mac kext to enable the audio...
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
It seems as though the pinouts carry it. It's up to the software to utilize it.
Well, saying they are all monitors is like saying all cars are automobiles lol. It's obvious that if the TV is capable of displaying a 1920x1080 digital image (or even 1280x720) then it can act as a computer monitor, but are all computer monitors HDTV's? Of course not.
He wasn't wrong in what he said, it just didn't do much for his argument.
When a typical large TV display cuts off inches from all edges of your desktop, I wouldn't classify that as a proper computer display. Even the most rudimentary PC display will always display edge to edge. Most TV's don't offer an option to turn off overscan or even acknowledge it's existence to the consumer. If they do offer adjustments anymore, they require a technical knowledge of the TV's program modes, which the typical consumer won't venture into let alone know exists.
On a PC monitor, one simply uses the supplied controls to adjust as desired.
I guess you don't always "get the obvious" so here it is again.
"You are becoming more like M$ every day ... never original, just more and more of the same crap. Being irrelevant is one thing, ..... now you're just becoming boring."
Here are a couple computers that have DP but no HDMI. Instead they offer a DP-to-HDMI adapter as an accessory. Being cheaper smaller and all-around better for computers we’ll eventually see an industry flip as we often do with Apple adopting a standard. Apple wasn’t the first to adopt USB, but they were the first to adopt it across the board.
Why require it when many applications don't need it? it would unnecessarily add cost to the implementation without any purpose. For instance, a display that has no audio capabilities wouldn't need it and it would just add to the cost of the display without benefit.
Look... lets just clear the air about all of this:
HDMI is a consumer electronics minded standard.
Which is basically a serial version of DVI, a computer connection standard.
Quote:
It is designed to hookup media devices for the playback of HD movies. The mostly widely adopted version of the HDMI standard is limited to 1920x1200 resolution. The latest standard will actually go up to 2650x1600. The standard is not capable to move beyond this (at this time). TVs and other media viewing products have no need to push beyond this level so more then likely this standard will stagnate from here (opinion).
4096×2160 in 1.4
Quote:
Now here is a big key.... the DP standard is royalty free! HDMI requires royalty. This makes DP a free standard where as HDMI not.
4 cents per device and $10,000 annually per company.
Quote:
In the end... the truth is.... DP is for Computers and HDMI is for consumer electronics.
In the end the truth is that its copout. Both DP and HDMI are designed and perfectly capable of doing both.
When a typical large TV display cuts off inches from all edges of your desktop, I wouldn't classify that as a properly computer display. Even the most rudimentary PC display will always display edge to edge. Most TV's don't offer an option to turn off overscan or even acknowledge it's existence to the consumer. If they do offer adjustments anymore, they require a technical knowledge of the TV's program modes, which the typical consumer won't venture into let alone know exists.
On a PC monitor, one simply uses the supplied controls to adjust as desired.
They are not the same.
In all fairness, when HDTv's are used through the computer DVI input, they don't overscan. At least, not the ones I've used.
The point is really that an HDTV is in the living room, and the computer is usually somewhere else. An HDTV is a family, long distance viewing device, and a computer is a single user, close viewing device.
In addition, the color, contrast, and other viewing features of an HDTV is not intended for computer use, but for viewing consumer entertainment standards.
While I MUST see all the pixel detail from my monitor, I don't need to see all of it on my HDTV. That's another difference.
Comments
Look... lets just clear the air about all of this:
HDMI is a consumer electronics minded standard. It is designed to hookup media devices for the playback of HD movies. The mostly widely adopted version of the HDMI standard is limited to 1920x1200 resolution. The latest standard will actually go up to 2650x1600. The standard is not capable to move beyond this (at this time). TVs and other media viewing products have no need to push beyond this level so more then likely this standard will stagnate from here (opinion).
DP is a standard for computers. It is designed to provide a great amount of throughput to push high-resolution high grade content. Its introductory support included 2650x1600 and can push much higher resolutions with the ability to grow. There are other important aspects to DP including the daisy chaining of displays (for multi-mon).
Now here is a big key.... the DP standard is royalty free! HDMI requires royalty. This makes DP a free standard where as HDMI not.
In the end... the truth is.... DP is for Computers and HDMI is for consumer electronics. The reading of the standards makes this very obvious and does not try to hide any aspect!
Good post
/thread
its also lower resolution
and has a licensing cost, unlike DisplayPort.
It will be HDMI 1.4 versus DP1.2.
HDMI 1.4: http://www.techradar.com/news/televi...to-know-626951 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Version_1.4
HDMI is consumer, DP is computer/professional.
I still think Apple should have also included a HDMI port on their computers, it not all then at least a few.
Like said Dells are mostly precision workstations and the the displays are only sold through the business store.
Also, most video chipsets have have displayport capability for a couple generations now.
Mostly this, mostly that. The fact is that Dell has dozens of models that come with DP as standard, or can be upgraded to it. Most of these machines are pretty cheap by Apple standards.
Not a firmware issue. Displayport isn't wired to the audio on the motherboard.
As far as I know, it is.
The only thing that obvious is that despite its advantages, displayport is failing to catch on.
I think I'll just give it the same timeframe as HDMI before I declare a "winner" .... that's fair, don't you think? .... but then, I don't have an "axe to grind", ... do you?
Not to the naked eye at six feet away which is where the majority of large screen displays will be viewed. Even still, the difference is splitting hairs.
So what? DisplayPort is for computers. I don't sit six feet away from my computer. People use computers for reasons other than watching movies on their living room TV.
We know DP as a technology is being readily adopted as the future display standard for computers, now we need to see if the diminutive mDP as a port interface will also be adopted now that it?s officially part of the spec.
Teckstudian logic would mean Macs would still have floppy drives over optical drives, serial and parallel ports over USB, and HDMI would have never been adopted because VGA would have been more ?universal?.
Don't forget his Paper Tiger dot matrix
Its available from Apple (in a unique form) and some workstations from HP and Dell and on third party video cards. Its stagnate.
Could you clear up that post?
This annoys me so much I had to register to comment!
Its all very well making DisplayPort a standard if Apple themeselves supported it!. When I bought my MacBook Pro I explained to the nice man that I had a DisplayPort conected monitor and needed a mini-displayport to displayport cable, but Apple don't sell them! so making displayport a standard is no good if Apple themselves are not going to support it.
Lots of these cables are available from third parties. Go buy one.
I don't understand why people invent reasons to be angry at Apple. Do you feel better when you are angry at someone?
http://www.monoprice.com/products/pr...seq=1&format=2
"*NOTE* AUDIO: This adapter will support audio only if your source device allows audio output through the Mini DisplayPorts interface. If you're not sure, please check with the manufacturer or website to confirm if your device allows audio out through the Mini-DP interface."
If what you're saying is true, then someone could develop a Mac kext to enable the audio...
It seems as though the pinouts carry it. It's up to the software to utilize it.
Well, saying they are all monitors is like saying all cars are automobiles lol. It's obvious that if the TV is capable of displaying a 1920x1080 digital image (or even 1280x720) then it can act as a computer monitor, but are all computer monitors HDTV's? Of course not.
He wasn't wrong in what he said, it just didn't do much for his argument.
When a typical large TV display cuts off inches from all edges of your desktop, I wouldn't classify that as a proper computer display. Even the most rudimentary PC display will always display edge to edge. Most TV's don't offer an option to turn off overscan or even acknowledge it's existence to the consumer. If they do offer adjustments anymore, they require a technical knowledge of the TV's program modes, which the typical consumer won't venture into let alone know exists.
On a PC monitor, one simply uses the supplied controls to adjust as desired.
They are not the same.
and your point?
I guess you don't always "get the obvious" so here it is again.
"You are becoming more like M$ every day ... never original, just more and more of the same crap. Being irrelevant is one thing, ..... now you're just becoming boring."
Quite a few monitors don't have HDMI.
Can you give a link stating that all monitors have HDMI?
Corrected- MOST.
Walk into J and R and see for yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort
Here are a couple computers that have DP but no HDMI. Instead they offer a DP-to-HDMI adapter as an accessory. Being cheaper smaller and all-around better for computers we’ll eventually see an industry flip as we often do with Apple adopting a standard. Apple wasn’t the first to adopt USB, but they were the first to adopt it across the board.
What I find interesting is the quotes I see in the brief paragraph describing each of the laptops.
First link: "featuring a premium design and a host of forward-thinking features"
Second link: "With this much bleeding edge technology at your fingertips"
In computers without an HDMI port.
For those that are curious, DisplayPort supports audio as part of it's standard. it's optional, but it's there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort
Just direct him to the 43 LCD monitors at newegg that don't have DVI or HDMI and be done with him
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...e=&srchInDesc=
MOST. I am changing it for crying out loud.
Audio needs to be changed to mandatory, IMHO.
Why require it when many applications don't need it? it would unnecessarily add cost to the implementation without any purpose. For instance, a display that has no audio capabilities wouldn't need it and it would just add to the cost of the display without benefit.
Look... lets just clear the air about all of this:
HDMI is a consumer electronics minded standard.
Which is basically a serial version of DVI, a computer connection standard.
It is designed to hookup media devices for the playback of HD movies. The mostly widely adopted version of the HDMI standard is limited to 1920x1200 resolution. The latest standard will actually go up to 2650x1600. The standard is not capable to move beyond this (at this time). TVs and other media viewing products have no need to push beyond this level so more then likely this standard will stagnate from here (opinion).
4096×2160 in 1.4
Now here is a big key.... the DP standard is royalty free! HDMI requires royalty. This makes DP a free standard where as HDMI not.
4 cents per device and $10,000 annually per company.
In the end... the truth is.... DP is for Computers and HDMI is for consumer electronics.
In the end the truth is that its copout. Both DP and HDMI are designed and perfectly capable of doing both.
When a typical large TV display cuts off inches from all edges of your desktop, I wouldn't classify that as a properly computer display. Even the most rudimentary PC display will always display edge to edge. Most TV's don't offer an option to turn off overscan or even acknowledge it's existence to the consumer. If they do offer adjustments anymore, they require a technical knowledge of the TV's program modes, which the typical consumer won't venture into let alone know exists.
On a PC monitor, one simply uses the supplied controls to adjust as desired.
They are not the same.
In all fairness, when HDTv's are used through the computer DVI input, they don't overscan. At least, not the ones I've used.
The point is really that an HDTV is in the living room, and the computer is usually somewhere else. An HDTV is a family, long distance viewing device, and a computer is a single user, close viewing device.
In addition, the color, contrast, and other viewing features of an HDTV is not intended for computer use, but for viewing consumer entertainment standards.
While I MUST see all the pixel detail from my monitor, I don't need to see all of it on my HDTV. That's another difference.