Apple hints at first-party Mini DisplayPort to HDMI adapter

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 43
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by allblue View Post


    That's because everyone goes home from the first party to have a wash and change their clothes. By the time they get back, the second party has already finished and the third party is underway. It's obvious when you think about it.



    Obvious perhaps... but it doesn't make it any less sorrowful...
  • Reply 22 of 43
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post


    What devices do YOU provide personally? (I'm loosely following literary forms in terms of 1st person, 2nd person, 3rd person voices)



    Oh, I'm sorry! No, I'm afraid that's incorrect.



    I was actually looking for a more inspired response... but nobody goes away empty handed... Johnny, tell our departing contestant what he's won!
  • Reply 23 of 43
    josh.b.josh.b. Posts: 353member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by John.B View Post


    Pertinent questions:

    [LIST][*]Will the new MBPs output audio through the mini-DisplayPort connector?



    AFAIK, there's an HDMI adaptor. If this is correct, HDMI has audio, so the DP connector either outputs audio or it doesn't really do HDMI. I'd bet on the former.
  • Reply 24 of 43
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    According to MR, the 2010 MBPs support audio over MDP.
  • Reply 25 of 43
    According to the Apple Website DisplayPort and HDMI are supported:



    Quote:

    Mini DisplayPort.



    The Mini DisplayPort delivers a pure digital connection to external displays ? even large 30-inch displays ? quickly and easily. It gives you plug-and-play performance with the Apple LED Cinema Display and supports VGA and DVI, as well as the latest multimedia standards such as DisplayPort and HDMI. (note 6)



    Note6: Requires adapters, sold separately.



    When can I buy a mini-displayport to displayport adapter then Apple? Its a standard you are supposedly supporting!



    No mention of 3rd party adapters either.
  • Reply 26 of 43
    Don't know how long this has been the case but I just noticed that the only Apple display currently in the lineup is the 24" LED Cinema Display.



    Does this mean Apple is about to release new display products?
  • Reply 27 of 43
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kerryn View Post


    I bet it is video only and that audio will still be via an optical cable. Apple is kind of retarded that way...



    well, bad bet, you're wrong.
  • Reply 28 of 43
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by grandpawes View Post


    Monoprice. There is nowhere else.



    Is there any way in the world Apple's "first-party solution" will be as cheap as these?



    8.55 for an adapter and you can use any HDMI cable (also dirt cheap on monoprice).

    http://www.monoprice.com/products/pr...seq=1&format=2



    or



    10.37 for a 6 ft miniDP to HDMI male cable.

    http://www.monoprice.com/products/pr...seq=1&format=2



    Nobody's cables are as cheap as those, so why bothering asking? Buy your wires from them, and don't worry about it. The worst thing you can do is buy cables from Apple and think you did yourself a favor.
  • Reply 29 of 43
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TallPaul View Post


    When can I buy a mini-displayport to displayport adapter then Apple? Its a standard you are supposedly supporting!



    No mention of 3rd party adapters either.



    Huh? You have been able to buy mDP-to-DP cables and adapters for at least a year, maybe two. This is wiring and pins, Apple doesn't need to bless a brand on their site. Just buy something cheap and be done with it.
  • Reply 30 of 43
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,716member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by grandpawes View Post


    10.37 for a 6 ft miniDP to HDMI male cable.

    http://www.monoprice.com/products/pr...seq=1&format=2



    BTW, mad props to monoprice.com for realizing that some people want actual cables and not just a bunch of ugly 2" connectors.



    </threadjack>
  • Reply 31 of 43
    I always wondered what the reasoning behind Apple going with mini-display port was in the first place, apart from making huge profits selling adapters which is a direct contradiction to making the Macbook family as slim as possible. What's the point of going slim if you have to constantly tote adapters? HDMI is a far more prevelent standard, carries both picture and sound, and the port is slim enough to cram into the thinnest enclosures.



    The same goes for the iMac and cinema displays. You could utilize bluray players (Apple doesn't offer one), and gaming consoles on one screen to consolidate resources. Limiting such gorgeous screens to just computing is just so wasteful... so much for Apple being green.



  • Reply 32 of 43
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by smeagol View Post


    I always wondered what the reasoning behind Apple going with mini-display port was in the first place, apart from making huge profits selling adapters which is a direct contradiction to making the Macbook family as slim as possible. What's the point of going slim if you have to constantly tote adapters? HDMI is a far more prevelent standard, carries both picture and sound, and the port is slim enough to cram into the thinnest enclosures.



    The same goes for the iMac and cinema displays. You could utilize bluray players (Apple doesn't offer one), and gaming consoles on one screen to consolidate resources. Limiting such gorgeous screens to just computing is just so wasteful... so much for Apple being green.







    Read up on DisplayPort. It's clearly the way to go for a computer. And no, their is no requirement to buy adapter from Apple.
  • Reply 33 of 43
    debusohdebusoh Posts: 82member
    Since Apple could just make the same modification to have hdmi connectivity with sound for the Mac Mini, do people think the rumored hdmi interface on the mini is bogus?



    It wouldn't seem to make sense to switch it to hdmi when this type of displayport could give you the same connectivity and more other options...
  • Reply 34 of 43
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by debusoh View Post


    Since Apple could just make the same modification to have hdmi connectivity with sound for the Mac Mini, do people think the rumored hdmi interface on the mini is bogus?



    It wouldn't seem to make sense to switch it to hdmi when this type of displayport could give you the same connectivity and more other options...



    The Mac mini is the only Mac I can see getting a dedicated HDMI port. It already has mDVI and mDP. I can see fading out mDVI. As many of suspected, the rumours of Apple adding HDMI to Macs was them adding audio to DP, which can support all the other signal types.
  • Reply 35 of 43
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by canucklehead View Post


    Don't know how long this has been the case but I just noticed that the only Apple display currently in the lineup is the 24" LED Cinema Display.



    Does this mean Apple is about to release new display products?



    Logic would say so, but when it comes to displays logic and Apple are rarely, if ever on the same page. They like to keep you guessing.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by smeagol View Post


    I always wondered what the reasoning behind Apple going with mini-display port was in the first place, apart from making huge profits selling adapters which is a direct contradiction to making the Macbook family as slim as possible. What's the point of going slim if you have to constantly tote adapters? HDMI is a far more prevelent standard, carries both picture and sound, and the port is slim enough to cram into the thinnest enclosures.



    Control. They greatly prefer you spend $900 (or whatever it is in other currencies) on the cadillac of 24" displays.
  • Reply 36 of 43
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,164member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by smeagol View Post


    I always wondered what the reasoning behind Apple going with mini-display port was in the first place, apart from making huge profits selling adapters which is a direct contradiction to making the Macbook family as slim as possible. What's the point of going slim if you have to constantly tote adapters? HDMI is a far more prevelent standard, carries both picture and sound, and the port is slim enough to cram into the thinnest enclosures.



    The same goes for the iMac and cinema displays. You could utilize bluray players (Apple doesn't offer one), and gaming consoles on one screen to consolidate resources. Limiting such gorgeous screens to just computing is just so wasteful... so much for Apple being green.







    Parellel ports were prevalent prior to the launch of USB and slower serial ports were prevalent to the launch of faster Parallel technologies. I think you've asked a question that's been answered a hundred times over. New technologies come and supplant older technologies because they are superior (if they wish to survive).



    You don't have to tote an adapter if you have a DisplayPort capable display.



    DisplayPort also carries picture and sound and the mDP ports are even smaller than HDMI.



    I suggest you go to DisplayPort.org, hdmi.org and/or search Wikipedia for information regarding HDMI and DisplayPort and become informed. It's really inexcusable that you have internet access and a wealth of infomation at your fingertips yet stumble over basic questions.
  • Reply 37 of 43
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post


    Logic would say so, but when it comes to displays logic and Apple are rarely, if ever on the same page. They like to keep you guessing.



    Logic would also say that it's unlikely for a company to act illogical on such things and Occam's Razor would say that we simply don't have enough information to understand their reasoning.



    Quote:

    Control. They greatly prefer you spend $900 (or whatever it is in other currencies) on the cadillac of 24" displays.



    Let me get this straight... They moved from a interface standard known as DVI that shares the same signaling as HDMI to a newer, better, more future-forward, license freeopen-standard created by VESA that is backwards compatible with DVI/HDMI video signaling and now HDMI audio for control? How exactly does that work since Any monitor that accepts DP or DVI/HDMI signaling will work with any Mac with a mDP port?



    It's sad that after having the huge DL-DVI ports and then Apple creating the SL-DVI option with mini-DVI for the MacBooks and then micro-DVI for the MBA, we finally have a single port interface standard that will likely be on every Mac and will be the future of quality PC tech until something like LightPeak usurps it with a protocol-nuetral optical standard. Yet people complain that it's not good enough to use the same great technology across the entire product line. People complain despite it being backwards compatible, free and open and adopted by other vendors. If you people had your way we'd still be using VGA or something worse because change is such a bad thing.
  • Reply 38 of 43
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post


    DisplayPort also carries picture and sound and the mDP ports are even smaller than HDMI.



    Don't forget data, at speeds 50% faster than USB2.0.
  • Reply 39 of 43
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,164member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Don't forget data, at speeds 50% faster than USB2.0.



    Here's a good link for people





    http://www.displayport.org/retail/?q=content/facts





    You know I really hate to be snarky about the this stuff. It just grows tiring. The differentiation is quite easy.



    HDMI = consumer electronics.

    DisplayPort = computer display.



    For example.



    4k video over HDMI 1.4 maxes at 24 frame per second because it's tailored for movie playback.

    4k display over DP supports 60fps and higher framerates because it's aimed at display tech



    We now have a Quad 720p display with the Apple 27" iMac and odds are Quad 1080 are coming to replace the 30"



    HDMI simply doesn't have the bandwidth to handle high refresh, high bits per pixel and high resolution. DP is designed to handle these technologies via its roadmap.



    It's clear why Apple doesn't put HDMI on computers. DisplayPort makes putting HDMI on a Mac redundant. The niche amount of people that want to put Mac on their HDTV pale in comparison to the people that need a good connector for computer display.
  • Reply 40 of 43
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,716member
    So has anyone actually tested the new MBPs to validate that audio is being passed from mDP to HDMI without a separate adapter? If so, do they all work or just the 15"/17" models?



    Edit: How do we know which cables or connectors are capable of passing audio through to the HDMI connector? http://support.apple.com/kb/TS3065
Sign In or Register to comment.