I stated DP is a professional tool not for the consumers which is why the iMac deserves HDMI.
You've obviously never seen a blu-ray as you can, my friend, oh yes you can.
I know you can see the difference between Blu-Ray and DVD. You're the one that said if you sit far enough away from a display it doesn't matter what the resolution is.
And in your original statements, which I was responding to, you said nothing about DP being a professional tool...
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
HDMI is better- more universal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt
its also lower resolution
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 basically you're saying resolution on TV images makes a bigger difference and is more important than on computer displays? Even though we sit 10+ feet away from a TV but only a few from a computer display?
You're arguing in circles, which means you don't really know what you're talking about.
help me - I'm being attacked in the Apple MiniDP matrix!!!
You're the one that entered it and started throwing punches. Okay, so the punches were like those of a 6 year old girl, but still, the difference is splitting hairs; a punch is a punch. So you got attacked for it.
HDMI may be more ubiquitous, but it didn't get that way over night. It took time. Hanging on to something for that reason alone is fine if you're not interested in advancing something forward. Technology is constantly moving forward and that is all that's happening here. If you were around before HDMI (I can't imagine you were), this same thing happened and it will happen again sometime in the future.
Your arguing only shows that either you're not really serious and are just playing with everyone, or you're just a closed minded, naive person that doesn't like change.
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?
Sometimes I wish people here would display the same logic about new phones. Declaring the iphone the "winner" when a competitor has just emerged uses the same logic as declaring HDMI a winner when DP is getting started..
Sorry, am I reading this wrong? It most certainly has everything to do with the cable. The cable design spec of HDMI has bandwidth limitations before you get signal loss. There are only so many pulses you can send before you get signal loss.
DisplayPort design allows for more bandwidth - i.e. more pusles. It's that simple.
Nope, not reading me wrong. If I put an HDMI to DVI adapter on either end of an HDMI cable, and connected it to my video card on my computer, it most certainly is capable of displaying my video properly at resolutions higher than 1920x1200.
Adding audio to it might mess things up a bit though. I've never tried. I know some of the new video cards have audio input slots for the hdmi cable, I wonder how it effect's the card's max resolution.
Anyways, I was specifically speaking to the video part of it. An HDMI cable is just a simplified DVI cable.
Because they can't shove 7.1 channels into DP like HDMI (the more advance option for audio).
To me, it's a feature that audio and video are in separate cables. That way I get to pick and choose which device I prefer to use for audio and video separately. Rather than being forced in some scenarios to connect to a device which can separate the two streams for me.
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.
Its a couple business models and you're trying to twist it to to seem like every product they make have displayport.
To me, it's a feature that audio and video are in separate cables. That way I get to pick and choose which device I prefer to use for audio and video separately. Rather than being forced in some scenarios to connect to a device which can separate the two streams for me.
Modular design is a plus in my books.
Pre-amps and receivers allow you to output the digital audio separate from the video. They even allow separation of the channels into individual analog outputs to be sent to the amplifier.
Unless you're trying to with with resolutions higher than 1900x1200 while simultaneously trying to process audio from the same cable, there's no real logical reason to like modular over hdmi.
If you've got a display capable of higher than 1920x1200, then separating the video with DVI and an Optical cable is the best solution.
What's not obvious is how you think Display Port is currently used more than HDMI????????
It's not obvious. You can't make a statement, and then say that it's obvious you didn't mean exactly what you said.
And I NEVER said, nor hinted, that DP was used MORE than HDMI. Its a newer standard, and will take some time. I said that several times, but you won't respond to that.
Sometimes I wish people here would display the same logic about new phones. Declaring the iphone the "winner" when a competitor has just emerged uses the same logic as declaring HDMI a winner when DP is getting started..
Its been around a couple years now. If apple wasn't using it, none of you would be giving displayport a second thought. However, since Apple's using it can't be a failure.
Its a couple business models and you're trying to twist it to to seem like every product they make have displayport.
It's quite a few. And it's not only Dell. Almost any graphics card has it, or will be having it. So any computer that comes with a graphics card will have it by default.
I think it's a crying shame that all the manufacturers are dumping composite video. I mean really. The cables are cheap - you can't get more simple than a single RCA jack, and Radio Shack keeps them in stock! Just about every single TV ever made supports it, or you can get a cheap RF modulator at the Shack, too. Best of all, it's easy to route the audio to any radio or boom box with mono or stereo inputs, since it's on separate connectors!
Who needs better than 480i? My mom told me if I'm sitting so close I can see the scan lines I'll go blind. I can read the text in Zork just fine! The color rendering is pretty good. It even backwards-compatible with black-and-white displays! If its good enough for NTSC (Now that's a standard with staying power!), it's good enough for me.
Commodore totally has it right - when people catch on they are going to DOMINATE the market. There is nothing like playing Dig Dug on the big 27" living room TV!
Unfortunately, you won't escape that with DisplayPort. They wouldn't release a standard these days that didn't offer it as an option, although it is at least licensed separately.
"DRM protection
DisplayPort includes optional DPCP (DisplayPort Content Protection) copy-protection from Philips, which uses 128-bit AES encryption, with modern cryptography ciphers. It also features full authentication and session key establishment (each encryption session is independent). There is an independent revocation system. This portion of the standard is licensed separately. It also adds support for verifying the proximity of the receiver and transmitter, a technique intended to ensure users are not bypassing content protection system to send data out to distant, unauthorized users.
Its been around a couple years now. If apple wasn't using it, none of you would be giving displayport a second thought. However, since Apple's using it can't be a failure.
Look, be realistic. All standards take time. What about FW 3200 that some people are talking about? What about USB 3, what about SATA 6 Gbs? What about Light Peak?
A year from now, you will be saying that they've been around for almost two years, because we've known about them for a year now. But they will have really been out for just a few months at best.
Two years from now, they still will be new.
That's the way it works.
Why is it that even now, some new devices are still using HDMI 1.2?
When will 1.4 be on almost all new devices? About the end of 2011.
Comments
I stated DP is a professional tool not for the consumers which is why the iMac deserves HDMI.
You've obviously never seen a blu-ray as you can, my friend, oh yes you can.
I know you can see the difference between Blu-Ray and DVD. You're the one that said if you sit far enough away from a display it doesn't matter what the resolution is.
And in your original statements, which I was responding to, you said nothing about DP being a professional tool...
HDMI is better- more universal.
its also lower resolution
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 basically you're saying resolution on TV images makes a bigger difference and is more important than on computer displays? Even though we sit 10+ feet away from a TV but only a few from a computer display?
You're arguing in circles, which means you don't really know what you're talking about.
help me - I'm being attacked in the Apple MiniDP matrix!!!
You're the one that entered it and started throwing punches. Okay, so the punches were like those of a 6 year old girl, but still, the difference is splitting hairs; a punch is a punch. So you got attacked for it.
HDMI may be more ubiquitous, but it didn't get that way over night. It took time. Hanging on to something for that reason alone is fine if you're not interested in advancing something forward. Technology is constantly moving forward and that is all that's happening here. If you were around before HDMI (I can't imagine you were), this same thing happened and it will happen again sometime in the future.
Your arguing only shows that either you're not really serious and are just playing with everyone, or you're just a closed minded, naive person that doesn't like change.
FireWire wasn't "kicked to the curb" it is mostly used in higher-end or professional applications.
Only the FW400 port interface was kicked to the curb, but the ?sky is falling!? chicken heads are screaming that FireWire is dead.
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?
Sometimes I wish people here would display the same logic about new phones. Declaring the iphone the "winner" when a competitor has just emerged uses the same logic as declaring HDMI a winner when DP is getting started..
Sorry, am I reading this wrong? It most certainly has everything to do with the cable. The cable design spec of HDMI has bandwidth limitations before you get signal loss. There are only so many pulses you can send before you get signal loss.
DisplayPort design allows for more bandwidth - i.e. more pusles. It's that simple.
Nope, not reading me wrong. If I put an HDMI to DVI adapter on either end of an HDMI cable, and connected it to my video card on my computer, it most certainly is capable of displaying my video properly at resolutions higher than 1920x1200.
Adding audio to it might mess things up a bit though. I've never tried. I know some of the new video cards have audio input slots for the hdmi cable, I wonder how it effect's the card's max resolution.
Anyways, I was specifically speaking to the video part of it. An HDMI cable is just a simplified DVI cable.
Because they can't shove 7.1 channels into DP like HDMI (the more advance option for audio).
To me, it's a feature that audio and video are in separate cables. That way I get to pick and choose which device I prefer to use for audio and video separately. Rather than being forced in some scenarios to connect to a device which can separate the two streams for me.
Modular design is a plus in my books.
And how exactly is that cutting edge as it been around for ten years. Not to mention the amount of cameras that sync wirelessly now.
Nothing stays "cutting edge " forever ... trying to change tread topic are we? ... running out of "ammo" already?
No- you're the one misinformed. Is it 7.1?
What?
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.
Its a couple business models and you're trying to twist it to to seem like every product they make have displayport.
its also lower resolution
and DRM infested.
To me, it's a feature that audio and video are in separate cables. That way I get to pick and choose which device I prefer to use for audio and video separately. Rather than being forced in some scenarios to connect to a device which can separate the two streams for me.
Modular design is a plus in my books.
Pre-amps and receivers allow you to output the digital audio separate from the video. They even allow separation of the channels into individual analog outputs to be sent to the amplifier.
Unless you're trying to with with resolutions higher than 1900x1200 while simultaneously trying to process audio from the same cable, there's no real logical reason to like modular over hdmi.
If you've got a display capable of higher than 1920x1200, then separating the video with DVI and an Optical cable is the best solution.
It was obvious what I meant.
What's not obvious is how you think Display Port is currently used more than HDMI????????
It's not obvious. You can't make a statement, and then say that it's obvious you didn't mean exactly what you said.
And I NEVER said, nor hinted, that DP was used MORE than HDMI. Its a newer standard, and will take some time. I said that several times, but you won't respond to that.
Sometimes I wish people here would display the same logic about new phones. Declaring the iphone the "winner" when a competitor has just emerged uses the same logic as declaring HDMI a winner when DP is getting started..
Its been around a couple years now. If apple wasn't using it, none of you would be giving displayport a second thought. However, since Apple's using it can't be a failure.
It is and it isn't- that's the problem you see. Currently it's not used at all on some devices. And secondly nowhere does it ssupport 7.1.
Like many people really care about 7.1. How about 10.1. that exists as well.
... I still think Apple should have also included a HDMI port on their computers, it not all then at least a few.
They did include it on the one computer where it actually makes sense. The AppleTV has it.
It's always nice to have all the ports you can on everything, but IMO they have done it exactly right so far.
We can all agree with part of that statement.
Its a couple business models and you're trying to twist it to to seem like every product they make have displayport.
It's quite a few. And it's not only Dell. Almost any graphics card has it, or will be having it. So any computer that comes with a graphics card will have it by default.
Lot's of stuff has this:
http://www.google.com/search?client=...UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
Who needs better than 480i? My mom told me if I'm sitting so close I can see the scan lines I'll go blind. I can read the text in Zork just fine! The color rendering is pretty good. It even backwards-compatible with black-and-white displays! If its good enough for NTSC (Now that's a standard with staying power!), it's good enough for me.
Commodore totally has it right - when people catch on they are going to DOMINATE the market. There is nothing like playing Dig Dug on the big 27" living room TV!
Oh, wait. What decade is it again?
Come on people, it's just a connector!
and DRM infested.
Unfortunately, you won't escape that with DisplayPort. They wouldn't release a standard these days that didn't offer it as an option, although it is at least licensed separately.
"DRM protection
DisplayPort includes optional DPCP (DisplayPort Content Protection) copy-protection from Philips, which uses 128-bit AES encryption, with modern cryptography ciphers. It also features full authentication and session key establishment (each encryption session is independent). There is an independent revocation system. This portion of the standard is licensed separately. It also adds support for verifying the proximity of the receiver and transmitter, a technique intended to ensure users are not bypassing content protection system to send data out to distant, unauthorized users.
Version 1.1 added support for HDCP."
Its been around a couple years now. If apple wasn't using it, none of you would be giving displayport a second thought. However, since Apple's using it can't be a failure.
Look, be realistic. All standards take time. What about FW 3200 that some people are talking about? What about USB 3, what about SATA 6 Gbs? What about Light Peak?
A year from now, you will be saying that they've been around for almost two years, because we've known about them for a year now. But they will have really been out for just a few months at best.
Two years from now, they still will be new.
That's the way it works.
Why is it that even now, some new devices are still using HDMI 1.2?
When will 1.4 be on almost all new devices? About the end of 2011.