Wolfman, are you being deliberately obtuse or do you genuinely not understand the concepts involved here?
Here's how it is:
There are a consortium of IT industry leaders, including Apple, Intel, AMD, ATI, NVidia, Dell, H-P and Lenovo who have thrahed out a very good, open standard for the next generation of computer video graphics.
This standard includes the use of a small connector plug, about the same size as a USB plug.
Apple have decided to use their own proprietary plug connector instead of the one in the DisplayPort spec.
The "single port able to support all current device standards" is DisplayPort. Apple are part of the DisplayPort consortium and they're ignoring their own standards in order to implement their own proprietary connector. It's ADC all over again.
I am very aware of the state of evolving standards, such as DisplayPorts or HDMI, including the applicability of them. They are just that evolving though...
Somehow you read them as absolutes. HDMI is now at 1.3 with significantly added capabilities over 1.1 and an added mini HDMI connector.
While Apple jumped ahead to implement a mini DisplayPort connector into a current product, neither you nor I know if this particular physical connector format will make it into the 1.2 spec.
If more companies adopt the mini port more third party co's will make straight mini to full cables.
Do we? Have we seen a Mini-VGA, Mini-DVI, or Micro-DVI product that didn't come from Apple? Why would anyone else use Mini-DP, the DisplayPort is normally a pretty small connector as is.
There are no converter boxes for turning DVI signals from a Mac mini or Mac Pro into DisplayPort, which uses not just different physical wiring but an entirely different signaling protocol.
You misread what they said: the compatibility is not both ways. DisplayPort can drive a DVI/VGA monitor, but a DVI/VGA port cannot without a very expensive converter (i.e. a lot more than the $29 adapters Apple sells) drive a DisplayPort only monitor like Apple's new Cinema display. This is why it is only compatible with the new laptops.
My point is that there is no compatibility... never mind in which direction. It is a false claim. DisplayPort is not "backwardly compatible" with DVI or VGA... it is a completely different signaling protocol. If DisplayPort were "backwardly compatible" with DVI or VGA, then no adapters would be needed at all (except maybe to go from different connector types or sizes but act electrically as a passthrough).
It's like claiming that DVI is "backwardly compatible" with VGA just because you can buy an adapter for it; never mind that one is a digital signal and the other is analog. That is completely different than being "backwardly compatible".
Wolfman, are you being deliberately obtuse or do you genuinely not understand the concepts involved here?
Here's how it is:
There are a consortium of IT industry leaders, including Apple, Intel, AMD, ATI, NVidia, Dell, H-P and Lenovo who have thrahed out a very good, open standard for the next generation of computer video graphics.
This standard includes the use of a small connector plug, about the same size as a USB plug.
Apple have decided to use their own proprietary plug connector instead of the one in the DisplayPort spec.
The "single port able to support all current device standards" is DisplayPort. Apple are part of the DisplayPort consortium and they're ignoring their own standards in order to implement their own proprietary connector. It's ADC all over again.
EXACTLY!
You can now buy a DisplayPort graphics card for a PC which will happily connect to a DisplayPort monitor. Then you can also get a DisplayPort laptop and connect it to the DisplayPort monitor. Then you can take your DisplayPort laptop and, with a DisplayPort-to-HDMI adapter already on sale, connect it to your HDMI TV. But Apple have arrived ( 2 years after the standard was approved ) with a connector that cannot connect to any of the above.
Funny, and why do almost all projectors are still VGA-only (or at least the cable running from the ceiling-mounted projector to the presenter's table is VGA-only)? Because almost all Windows laptops still have only VGA (at least the compact business-type laptops). And why do almost all Windows laptops still have only VGA? Because almost all projectors only have VGA...
What a way to advance technology. I rather carry a DVI-to-VGA adaptor with me than be part of that mediocrity (and enjoy digital display quality whenever my laptop is connected to a real display not a projector). Maybe in five years all LCDs will have a DisplayPort connector but projectors will only have cought up with DVI (or they will still be at VGA).
Because projector is analog. It uses old physics where the color wheel spins, and a light get projected onto the color wheel one pixel by one pixel...you can think of it as the old TV, line by line scanning.
You won't see projects with digital input for a while.
You can now buy a DisplayPort graphics card for a PC which will happily connect to a DisplayPort monitor. Then you can also get a DisplayPort laptop and connect it to the DisplayPort monitor. Then you can take your DisplayPort laptop and, with a DisplayPort-to-HDMI adapter already on sale, connect it to your HDMI TV. But Apple have arrived ( 2 years after the standard was approved ) with a connector that cannot connect to any of the above.
This is not true. Their is no technical reason why they cannot produce a mini to full cable.
It is possible to make a straight mini to full cable. Apple is the only vendor who supports the mini DP ports so most third parties don't make a mini to full cable. Apple provides the adaptor so you can then use any DP cable you want. But their is no technical reason why they cannot produce a cable without an adaptor.
If other computers manufacturers use mini DP. Then more third parties will provide cables for it. The mini port would be very useful for companies such as Sony. As currently their thin notebooks have to have a thicker portion for the DVI port.
This is not true. Their is no technical reason why they cannot produce a mini to full cable.
It is possible to make a straight mini to full cable. Apple is the only vendor who supports the mini DP ports so most third parties don't make a mini to full cable. Apple provides the adaptor so you can then use any DP cable you want. But their is no technical reason why they cannot produce a cable without an adaptor.
If other computers manufacturers use mini DP. Then more third parties will provide cables for it. The mini port would be very useful for companies such as Sony. As currently their thin notebooks have to have a thicker portion for the DVI port.
You are imagining cables that do not exist and making prophesies about the future.
The DisplayPort ecosystem is here now and Apple is not a part of it.
Because projector is analog. It uses old physics where the color wheel spins, and a light get projected onto the color wheel one pixel by one pixel...you can think of it as the old TV, line by line scanning.
You won't see projects with digital input for a while.
I suppose you are talking about business projectors.
I don't see any technical reason for this. Consumer home theater projectors aren't analog only. They offer HDMI and component video.
You are imagining cables that do not exist and making prophesies about the future.
The DisplayPort ecosystem is here now and Apple is not a part of it.
Cables for USB 3 do not yet exist. Does that mean they never will? I don't know what is going to happen, I'm looking at what could happen. Right now so early in adoption of Display Port anything could happen.
Display port ecosystem is not yet here. What are you talking about? Only a couple of computer companies begun to have minor support for it. There is no real 3rd party market for it yet.
You don't seem to be interested in looking at this logically. You only seem to be interested in pointing the dirty end of the stick at Apple.
As is the making up excuses to cover up Apple's mistakes.
You're just going to go down to the ground with this, aren't you? If a cable (or adapter) that's mini-DP to DP comes along in 2 months, will you still say it's such a terrible mistake? How many monitors have only DP input? (Apple already makes adapters that go from mini-DP to DVI, mini-DP to dual-link DVI, and mini-DP to VGA).
You seem to want to win an argument rather than look at the real possibilities (and probabilities).
You're just going to go down to the ground with this, aren't you? If a cable (or adapter) that's mini-DP to DP comes along in 2 months, will you still say it's such a terrible mistake? How many monitors have only DP input? (Apple already makes adapters that go from mini-DP to DVI, mini-DP to dual-link DVI, and mini-DP to VGA).
You seem to want to win an argument rather than look at the real possibilities (and probabilities).
and then whine about having to carry an adapter. i carry mine religiously in my laptop bag, even if i know i don't need one on any particular day.
though i would agree that the adapters are a tad on the expensive side.
There is a bit of precedence. As it is, there aren't any cables with mini-DVI on one end, you have to buy one of Apple's dongle adapters and connect it to a cable with full DVI connectors. Mini-DVI is a connector that only Apple uses as far as I can tell.
Because projector is analog. It uses old physics where the color wheel spins, and a light get projected onto the color wheel one pixel by one pixel...you can think of it as the old TV, line by line scanning.
You won't see projects with digital input for a while.
This is completely wrong. Color wheel based projectors use a digital DLP chip. Prism based projectors use a digital LCD chip.
Almost all current projectors are digital. Heck...it's part of the damn name: Digital Projector. There are damned few CRT projectors left.
Now that everyone is fired-up, here's a controversial question
How many times did Apple drop the ball within the past year?
- Leopard Server: AppleTalk dropouts.
- Leopard corrupting CS3 files saved over network.
- Lost emails during MobileMe transition.
- Slooow and buggy MobileMe interface.
- iPhone Push technology blunder.
- iPhone activation issues.
- Canceling Carbon on Adobe forcing them to delay 64-bit CS4.
- No FW in new MacBooks.
- No MacBook Pro matte displays.
- No sign of ever fulfilling mid-tower request.
Seems like Apple is back to ignoring their customers again.
What do you expect? An OS 100% reliable? That does not exist.
If you're not satisfied with Mac OX, just run Windows? on your MacBook. Good luck. Or if you are, like me, more adventurous, go for Linux or BSD. At least, if there is a bug, you'll be able to get some help and fix it by yourself?
My point is that there is no compatibility... never mind in which direction. It is a false claim. DisplayPort is not "backwardly compatible" with DVI or VGA... it is a completely different signaling protocol. If DisplayPort were "backwardly compatible" with DVI or VGA, then no adapters would be needed at all (except maybe to go from different connector types or sizes but act electrically as a passthrough).
But isn't that exactly what the $29 adapters from Apple do? Its hard to imagine they do any other kinds of trickery without costing a lot more. At the very least I find it hard to believe that a $29 adapter from Apple is converting the digital DP output into analogue VGA, it makes a lot more sense that Apple would do this inside the MacBook and just have VGA on one of the pin-outs like DVI does.
Mini DisplayPort. Today, for all *practical* purposes this is an Apple proprietary connector, because the only things you can connect to it without an adaptor are Apple products.
Maybe in the future it will become the defacto standard you say? Well the thing about the future is, there's no guarantees. I can say with equal weight, "No one but Apple will use it." And I have the evidence on my side because so far that is the case.
Comments
Wolfman, are you being deliberately obtuse or do you genuinely not understand the concepts involved here?
Here's how it is:
- There are a consortium of IT industry leaders, including Apple, Intel, AMD, ATI, NVidia, Dell, H-P and Lenovo who have thrahed out a very good, open standard for the next generation of computer video graphics.
- This standard includes the use of a small connector plug, about the same size as a USB plug.
- Apple have decided to use their own proprietary plug connector instead of the one in the DisplayPort spec.
The "single port able to support all current device standards" is DisplayPort. Apple are part of the DisplayPort consortium and they're ignoring their own standards in order to implement their own proprietary connector. It's ADC all over again.I am very aware of the state of evolving standards, such as DisplayPorts or HDMI, including the applicability of them. They are just that evolving though...
Somehow you read them as absolutes. HDMI is now at 1.3 with significantly added capabilities over 1.1 and an added mini HDMI connector.
While Apple jumped ahead to implement a mini DisplayPort connector into a current product, neither you nor I know if this particular physical connector format will make it into the 1.2 spec.
Of course we know these adaptors are coming.
If more companies adopt the mini port more third party co's will make straight mini to full cables.
Do we? Have we seen a Mini-VGA, Mini-DVI, or Micro-DVI product that didn't come from Apple? Why would anyone else use Mini-DP, the DisplayPort is normally a pretty small connector as is.
There are no converter boxes for turning DVI signals from a Mac mini or Mac Pro into DisplayPort, which uses not just different physical wiring but an entirely different signaling protocol.
And here I thought AppleInsider was claiming that Mini DisplayPort was "backwardly compatible with VGA, DVI, and dual-link DVI..."
You misread what they said: the compatibility is not both ways. DisplayPort can drive a DVI/VGA monitor, but a DVI/VGA port cannot without a very expensive converter (i.e. a lot more than the $29 adapters Apple sells) drive a DisplayPort only monitor like Apple's new Cinema display. This is why it is only compatible with the new laptops.
My point is that there is no compatibility... never mind in which direction. It is a false claim. DisplayPort is not "backwardly compatible" with DVI or VGA... it is a completely different signaling protocol. If DisplayPort were "backwardly compatible" with DVI or VGA, then no adapters would be needed at all (except maybe to go from different connector types or sizes but act electrically as a passthrough).
It's like claiming that DVI is "backwardly compatible" with VGA just because you can buy an adapter for it; never mind that one is a digital signal and the other is analog. That is completely different than being "backwardly compatible".
Wolfman, are you being deliberately obtuse or do you genuinely not understand the concepts involved here?
Here's how it is:
- There are a consortium of IT industry leaders, including Apple, Intel, AMD, ATI, NVidia, Dell, H-P and Lenovo who have thrahed out a very good, open standard for the next generation of computer video graphics.
- This standard includes the use of a small connector plug, about the same size as a USB plug.
- Apple have decided to use their own proprietary plug connector instead of the one in the DisplayPort spec.
The "single port able to support all current device standards" is DisplayPort. Apple are part of the DisplayPort consortium and they're ignoring their own standards in order to implement their own proprietary connector. It's ADC all over again.EXACTLY!
You can now buy a DisplayPort graphics card for a PC which will happily connect to a DisplayPort monitor. Then you can also get a DisplayPort laptop and connect it to the DisplayPort monitor. Then you can take your DisplayPort laptop and, with a DisplayPort-to-HDMI adapter already on sale, connect it to your HDMI TV. But Apple have arrived ( 2 years after the standard was approved ) with a connector that cannot connect to any of the above.
Funny, and why do almost all projectors are still VGA-only (or at least the cable running from the ceiling-mounted projector to the presenter's table is VGA-only)? Because almost all Windows laptops still have only VGA (at least the compact business-type laptops). And why do almost all Windows laptops still have only VGA? Because almost all projectors only have VGA...
What a way to advance technology. I rather carry a DVI-to-VGA adaptor with me than be part of that mediocrity (and enjoy digital display quality whenever my laptop is connected to a real display not a projector). Maybe in five years all LCDs will have a DisplayPort connector but projectors will only have cought up with DVI (or they will still be at VGA).
Because projector is analog. It uses old physics where the color wheel spins, and a light get projected onto the color wheel one pixel by one pixel...you can think of it as the old TV, line by line scanning.
You won't see projects with digital input for a while.
EXACTLY!
You can now buy a DisplayPort graphics card for a PC which will happily connect to a DisplayPort monitor. Then you can also get a DisplayPort laptop and connect it to the DisplayPort monitor. Then you can take your DisplayPort laptop and, with a DisplayPort-to-HDMI adapter already on sale, connect it to your HDMI TV. But Apple have arrived ( 2 years after the standard was approved ) with a connector that cannot connect to any of the above.
This is not true. Their is no technical reason why they cannot produce a mini to full cable.
It is possible to make a straight mini to full cable. Apple is the only vendor who supports the mini DP ports so most third parties don't make a mini to full cable. Apple provides the adaptor so you can then use any DP cable you want. But their is no technical reason why they cannot produce a cable without an adaptor.
If other computers manufacturers use mini DP. Then more third parties will provide cables for it. The mini port would be very useful for companies such as Sony. As currently their thin notebooks have to have a thicker portion for the DVI port.
This is not true. Their is no technical reason why they cannot produce a mini to full cable.
It is possible to make a straight mini to full cable. Apple is the only vendor who supports the mini DP ports so most third parties don't make a mini to full cable. Apple provides the adaptor so you can then use any DP cable you want. But their is no technical reason why they cannot produce a cable without an adaptor.
If other computers manufacturers use mini DP. Then more third parties will provide cables for it. The mini port would be very useful for companies such as Sony. As currently their thin notebooks have to have a thicker portion for the DVI port.
You are imagining cables that do not exist and making prophesies about the future.
The DisplayPort ecosystem is here now and Apple is not a part of it.
Because projector is analog. It uses old physics where the color wheel spins, and a light get projected onto the color wheel one pixel by one pixel...you can think of it as the old TV, line by line scanning.
You won't see projects with digital input for a while.
I suppose you are talking about business projectors.
I don't see any technical reason for this. Consumer home theater projectors aren't analog only. They offer HDMI and component video.
the whining in this thread is reaching new levels of absurdity.
As is the making up excuses to cover up Apple's mistakes.
You are imagining cables that do not exist and making prophesies about the future.
The DisplayPort ecosystem is here now and Apple is not a part of it.
Cables for USB 3 do not yet exist. Does that mean they never will? I don't know what is going to happen, I'm looking at what could happen. Right now so early in adoption of Display Port anything could happen.
Display port ecosystem is not yet here. What are you talking about? Only a couple of computer companies begun to have minor support for it. There is no real 3rd party market for it yet.
You don't seem to be interested in looking at this logically. You only seem to be interested in pointing the dirty end of the stick at Apple.
As is the making up excuses to cover up Apple's mistakes.
You're just going to go down to the ground with this, aren't you? If a cable (or adapter) that's mini-DP to DP comes along in 2 months, will you still say it's such a terrible mistake? How many monitors have only DP input? (Apple already makes adapters that go from mini-DP to DVI, mini-DP to dual-link DVI, and mini-DP to VGA).
You seem to want to win an argument rather than look at the real possibilities (and probabilities).
You're just going to go down to the ground with this, aren't you? If a cable (or adapter) that's mini-DP to DP comes along in 2 months, will you still say it's such a terrible mistake? How many monitors have only DP input? (Apple already makes adapters that go from mini-DP to DVI, mini-DP to dual-link DVI, and mini-DP to VGA).
You seem to want to win an argument rather than look at the real possibilities (and probabilities).
and then whine about having to carry an adapter. i carry mine religiously in my laptop bag, even if i know i don't need one on any particular day.
though i would agree that the adapters are a tad on the expensive side.
Is mini Display Port part of the standard yet?
There is a bit of precedence. As it is, there aren't any cables with mini-DVI on one end, you have to buy one of Apple's dongle adapters and connect it to a cable with full DVI connectors. Mini-DVI is a connector that only Apple uses as far as I can tell.
http://www.monoprice.com/products/pr...seq=1&format=2
http://www.monoprice.com/products/pr...seq=1&format=2
http://www.monoprice.com/products/pr...seq=1&format=2
Mini-DVI to HDMI, DVI and VGA for $10 a pop. They are even white.
Google is your friend. Or just reading AI as I've posted Monoprice cables before.
Because projector is analog. It uses old physics where the color wheel spins, and a light get projected onto the color wheel one pixel by one pixel...you can think of it as the old TV, line by line scanning.
You won't see projects with digital input for a while.
This is completely wrong. Color wheel based projectors use a digital DLP chip. Prism based projectors use a digital LCD chip.
Almost all current projectors are digital. Heck...it's part of the damn name: Digital Projector. There are damned few CRT projectors left.
How many times did Apple drop the ball within the past year?
- Leopard Server: AppleTalk dropouts.
- Leopard corrupting CS3 files saved over network.
- Lost emails during MobileMe transition.
- Slooow and buggy MobileMe interface.
- iPhone Push technology blunder.
- iPhone activation issues.
- Canceling Carbon on Adobe forcing them to delay 64-bit CS4.
- No FW in new MacBooks.
- No MacBook Pro matte displays.
- No sign of ever fulfilling mid-tower request.
Seems like Apple is back to ignoring their customers again.
Now that everyone is fired-up, here's a controversial question
How many times did Apple drop the ball within the past year?
- Leopard Server: AppleTalk dropouts.
- Leopard corrupting CS3 files saved over network.
- Lost emails during MobileMe transition.
- Slooow and buggy MobileMe interface.
- iPhone Push technology blunder.
- iPhone activation issues.
- Canceling Carbon on Adobe forcing them to delay 64-bit CS4.
- No FW in new MacBooks.
- No MacBook Pro matte displays.
- No sign of ever fulfilling mid-tower request.
Seems like Apple is back to ignoring their customers again.
What do you expect? An OS 100% reliable? That does not exist.
If you're not satisfied with Mac OX, just run Windows? on your MacBook. Good luck. Or if you are, like me, more adventurous, go for Linux or BSD. At least, if there is a bug, you'll be able to get some help and fix it by yourself?
Now that everyone is fired-up, here's a controversial question
How many times did Apple drop the ball within the past year?
- Leopard Server: AppleTalk dropouts.
- Leopard corrupting CS3 files saved over network.
- Lost emails during MobileMe transition.
- Slooow and buggy MobileMe interface.
- iPhone Push technology blunder.
- iPhone activation issues.
- Canceling Carbon on Adobe forcing them to delay 64-bit CS4.
- No FW in new MacBooks.
- No MacBook Pro matte displays.
- No sign of ever fulfilling mid-tower request.
Seems like Apple is back to ignoring their customers again.
When I see things like this, I always step back and pose the following:I bet her answer is longer, most are still unresolved, and you are still living and being served at home.
My point is that there is no compatibility... never mind in which direction. It is a false claim. DisplayPort is not "backwardly compatible" with DVI or VGA... it is a completely different signaling protocol. If DisplayPort were "backwardly compatible" with DVI or VGA, then no adapters would be needed at all (except maybe to go from different connector types or sizes but act electrically as a passthrough).
But isn't that exactly what the $29 adapters from Apple do? Its hard to imagine they do any other kinds of trickery without costing a lot more. At the very least I find it hard to believe that a $29 adapter from Apple is converting the digital DP output into analogue VGA, it makes a lot more sense that Apple would do this inside the MacBook and just have VGA on one of the pin-outs like DVI does.
Maybe in the future it will become the defacto standard you say? Well the thing about the future is, there's no guarantees. I can say with equal weight, "No one but Apple will use it." And I have the evidence on my side because so far that is the case.