As has been reported elsewhere, the display port on the new Macbook's is DRM "enabled", restricting the ability to play DVDs, or instance, on an external display.
If this is the case on the new Mac Mini, one of the prime uses for the mini as a media center will go away.
Can you please provide a link or reference that states that the DRM affected DVDs?
The only info I read was that some iTunes content was affected, but I never saw anything about DVD's getting blocked. And Apple released a patch to end the blocking of the iTunes content.
It's possible that Apple could enable it for DVDs, but considering that it's relatively easy to get around DVDs restrictions, hopefully the studios won't ask for this. However, if you ever want to see HD movies in iTunes on your computer (vs on the AppleTV), I expect that enabling the DRM is the ONLY way that will happen.
So far Apple has done a good job of balancing the need for DRM (either because it was required by the content owners or because it was necessary for their business model) with not interfering with how most people would use the content. Let's hope they continue to be successful at doing that.
We've found that not to be true after the loss of FW on new MacBooks and Jobs reply to an angry Mac user. While this is true for DV cams, they show to be fading away in favour of tapeless recorders.
I still think that was a red herring. It totally ignores the 100s of thousands of camcordes and other devices already in existence that require Firewire. I think the real reason was a need to differentiate the MB from the MBP. If you look at the performance specs, for tasks that don't take advantage of the MBP's extra video card, it's very similar. There wasn't enough difference to justify the historic price point differences between the two machines. It's easy to upsell someone who needs Firewire to the MBP.
However, upselling someone from a mini to a MacPro is quite a different challenge. I guess they could try to upsell to an iMac, but that's different, too. Either you need a monitor or not. So unless Apple comes out with a mid-range, headless Mac that you could upsell a mini user who needs Firewire, removing FW from the mini is a much bigger deal than removing it from the MB. Hopefully Apple realizes that.
That said, I'll be very disappointed, but not entirely surprised, if FW is dropped from the mini. If they keep it, I'll be buying one. If they don't, I won't. Other than DisplayPort, all other specs are nearly irrelevant to me.
From what I read - I don't have a new Macbook / Pro - that people that had an external monitor hooked up to prior generation Macbooks/Pros, when they went to the new one, the exact same setup would not allow the playing of DVDs to the external monitor, which worked with the prior, non-DRM enabled DVI port. The display port-DVI adaptor does not go around this "feature.
I have no first hand knowledge of this, however. Does anyone out there have this info? I think it would be a critical issue in moving to a display port enabled computer.
There were problems initially with downloaded itunes movies, but that has since been adressed. I haven't heard anything about dvds being affected, so I don't believe there ever was a problem there.
As far as I know, there is no difference between what the old macbooks and new macbooks can play, except that there is the possibility of being able to play high def content on the new machines at some future date. The old macbooks will never be able to play HD content encrypted with HDCP, which basically amounts to all the HD content you can buy.
"The company this week released an update to QuickTime that allows HDCP-flagged standard-definition videos to play without the authentication. The protection was originally intended to prevent illegal copying of HD material, downgrading the output to SD quality if the connected device is not HDCP-compatible. "
"While users of older hardware continue to get a free pass, Apple's now activated the protection on the Mini DisplayPort-enabled models. This affects users who use DisplayPort-to-DVI adaptors to connect to external monitors, rather than watch their movies on a tiny laptop screen. Users who wish to continue using external displays are forced to buy new monitors with DisplayPort connectors. "
It is unclear from these discussions whether Blue-ray HD DVDs are encumbered with the same restrictions, but it was alluded to in the Apple discussion forum content.
I think it was a red herring, too, but my feeling is that FW400 was low man on the port totem. Id est, space constraints with the new uni-body design. The video connector is considerably smaller and they removed FW400, while not adding any additional ports, and yet had to push the ports slightly closer together.
Quote:
That said, I'll be very disappointed, but not entirely surprised, if FW is dropped from the mini. If they keep it, I'll be buying one. If they don't, I won't. Other than DisplayPort, all other specs are nearly irrelevant to me.
If my theory is correct, then I see no reason why FW will go away on the Mac Mini. They may up it to FW800 and then require you to buy an adapter to connector FW400 accessories. If my theory is incorrect, then FW400 will go away and they won't replace it with anything other than an additional USB2.0 port.
The Magsafe on the ADC doubles to charge your laptop battery and uses the passthrough power of the Monitor to do so.
It makes no sense for non-portable products.
If you're going to rationalize adding a "modified" magsafe for the desktop you are adding costs to the design and serving to use it w/o benefiting the point of it's core service--to recharge the system.
Only portable devices with magsafe from at least 1 dedicated power system makes sense, ala the Monitor.
With desktops having dedicated sources it makes no sense to offer it. It's much less expensive to add that functionality into the adaptor than to modify the current one resulting in no added use.
However, upselling someone from a mini to a MacPro is quite a different challenge. I guess they could try to upsell to an iMac, but that's different, too. Either you need a monitor or not. So unless Apple comes out with a mid-range, headless Mac that you could upsell a mini user who needs Firewire, removing FW from the mini is a much bigger deal than removing it from the MB. Hopefully Apple realizes that.
FW400 is dead to Apple. If Firewire as a whole were dead to them, they wouldn't have left FW800 on the MacBook Pro. So unless Apple feels like putting FW800 on their budget, consumer mini-tower, it will use USB2 exclusively. They'll gladly up sell people to iMacs (or MacBooks). The Mac mini is targeted towards switchers who want a taste, but once they see the iMac, they often give up their big, old, clunky CRT or puny LCD for an all in one experience.. The Mac mini also just makes Apple's entire line of premium computers seem more affordable because it starts at $600 and goes up from there, rather than Apple's cheapest computer - without the Mac mini, it would be the MacBook - starting at $1000.
MagSafe doesn't make sense, but a power pass-through for a small desktop with an external PS does, so having the new Minis have an adapter for MagSafe to use the power pass-through on the new ADC does make sense.
This is a bit of a non-story as far as I'm concerned.
Apple stated that they are putting Mini DisplayPort into every product from now on, so its inclusion is hardly a surprise.
Unlike the other members of the Macintosh family, the Mac mini is explicitly designed to work with a switcher's existing display - hence the need for Mini-DVI. A new mini which could only drive Apples LED Cinema Display wouldn't be much of a switcher machine.
I expect the Mac Pro to go down exactly the same route.
Right. It's not so much they are wanting it to support 2 displays, they want it to be compatible with existing displays and Apple's new displays. So, it will have both. We're due for a new 30" ACD LED BLU, a Mac Pro refresh, and a 17" MBP 4 core unibody. We're due, but that doesn't mean they'll all be at MacWorldExpo. I think the new iMacs will look like the MacBooks - glass all the way to the edge with a black bezel, but no aluminum there.
"The company this week released an update to QuickTime that allows HDCP-flagged standard-definition videos to play without the authentication. The protection was originally intended to prevent illegal copying of HD material, downgrading the output to SD quality if the connected device is not HDCP-compatible. "
"While users of older hardware continue to get a free pass, Apple's now activated the protection on the Mini DisplayPort-enabled models. This affects users who use DisplayPort-to-DVI adaptors to connect to external monitors, rather than watch their movies on a tiny laptop screen. Users who wish to continue using external displays are forced to buy new monitors with DisplayPort connectors. "
It is unclear from these discussions whether Blue-ray HD DVDs are encumbered with the same restrictions, but it was alluded to in the Apple discussion forum content.
Thanks for the links. These was nothing in them that suggested DVDs were affected. The one user who complained the Terminator 2 was displaying only in SD on a Mac Pro, that is to be expected. If he's playing it in iTunes there is no such thing as HD movies (only HD TV shows), no matter if you have Display Port or not. HD movies are only available on the AppleTV as rentals.
The 3rd link is interesting. That suggests that if you are not using a DRM enabled display, iTunes will play the SD version of a TV show (you get both an SD and HD version when you purchase an HD TV show).
I think it's pretty much a given that IF Blu-ray ever comes to Mac, it most certainly will be encumbered with DRM. Also, when HD movies come to iTunes on your computer it will mostly likely be similarly encumbered.
Bottom line, Apple needs to be clear about the direction it is heading with all of this. An error with the rollout of the new laptops revealed that the hardware is capable of DRM, but that Apple wasn't ready to implement it yet. They need to be open about what the hardware does and what it requires to continue using your purchased content. Otherwise the recent laptop furor will look like small potatoes compared to the backlash that will ensue when they officially roll out the DRM scheme.
The rumoured new mini sounds good. Since my wife dropped her Pismo, we've been considering how to replace it. The lack of firewire on the new Macbook rules it out. If it had firewire I'd consider giving her my G4 PowerBook. (I realize we could go with the white low-end model, but don't find it particularly attractive).
A new Mini sounds good if it has DVI out (I'm not buying a new monitor) and firewire (I have too many firewire devices to want to swallow the cost of changing to USB). It should also have a maximum of 4 GB of RAM that is user accessible. Graphics I'm not very concerned about, although faster is always better!
I have 2 Powermac G4 mirror door machines - one single, one dual processor, with the ATI video card with 2 connectors, the ADC, and a DVI. Both of these machines are hooked up to dual displays - and Apple studio monitor, and a 19 inch LCD. It works perfectly.
Yours does. There were earlier models that had ADC and DVI but the connectors were deliberately too close to each other so only one cable at a time could fit because the card was not dual-channel. The second port was only there for connectivity.
A new Mini sounds good if it has DVI out (I'm not buying a new monitor)
Why would you need to buy a new monitor, even if the Mac mini drops its dedicated DVI out for Mini DisplayPort? Or was that not what you were alluding to?
It makes perfect sense if it can handle the load of the new Mini. Especially if it is compatible with the new displays and is of better quality than the old connector.
Quote:
The Magsafe on the ADC doubles to charge your laptop battery and uses the passthrough power of the Monitor to do so.
BS, the power supply is in the monitor to operate your laptop. Simple as that really, if your battery happens to need a recharge you get that too. That isn't the primary point of the power supply though, it is there so the lappie can make like a desktop.
Quote:
It makes no sense for non-portable products.
That could be said about the current Mini connector too.
Quote:
If you're going to rationalize adding a "modified" magsafe for the desktop you are adding costs to the design and serving to use it w/o benefiting the point of it's core service--to recharge the system.
You are so wrong about the "core service" that I'm not sure if there is a point to further discussions. I will repeat though, the power supply is there so that the new monitor can work with the laptop in desktop duty mode. Any recharge you get out of the system is simply grave on top of everything else.
As to additional mechanical help with retention that may help but I don't really see it as an absolute requirement.
Quote:
Only portable devices with magsafe from at least 1 dedicated power system makes sense, ala the Monitor.
What?
Quote:
With desktops having dedicated sources it makes no sense to offer it. It's much less expensive to add that functionality into the adaptor than to modify the current one resulting in no added use.
You are getting hard to follow here. The connector from the power supply would not be modified, it would be the same one that comes with the current monitor. If anything at all is done it will be a case mounted retainer.
What many people are missing here is that this approach offers Apple a way to unbundle the power supply and lower the machines list price. This how one powers the Mini will be up to the purchaser when he makes the purchase. It also opens up the market to a wide range of power supplies.
The real argument against MagSafe isn't the connector but rather is an issue of electrical power. Many laptop power supplies depend on the laptops battery to support surge loads. In otherwirds many laptop power supplies can't handle transient loads like a disk spinup. This is why many laptops require that a battery be inplace even when line connected. I'm not sure what the case is with Apple products but atleast this would be a counter indication.
In any event the MagSafe connector itself isn't anyworst than the old connector.
If the DisplayPort has HDCP, I guarantee you the DVI port will as well. It's not a big deal. Every decent monitor and every last HDTV you can buy today has HDCP, so it's only a limitation if you've got a crappy or old monitor. And it doesn't affect DVDs, or any other media that lacks HDCP.
I don't like DRM, either, but this is something few normal people will encounter. Blame the MPAA, not Apple, if you've got a problem.
I have 2 Powermac G4 mirror door machines - one single, one dual processor, with the ATI video card with 2 connectors, the ADC, and a DVI. Both of these machines are hooked up to dual displays - and Apple studio monitor, and a 19 inch LCD. It works perfectly.
I had an eMac circa 2003... and with a firmware hack it could do dual displays. I'm sure the same thing could be done for a "crippled" mac mini that only supports one display at a time. But I have a feeling it'll be the 9400m gfx chip, along with a price hike.
BTW: there is already a mini-DVI to TV adapter for those interested in using it with older TVs.
If the DisplayPort has HDCP, I guarantee you the DVI port will as well. It's not a big deal. Every decent monitor and every last HDTV you can buy today has HDCP, so it's only a limitation if you've got a crappy or old monitor. And it doesn't affect DVDs, or any other media that lacks HDCP.
I don't like DRM, either, but this is something few normal people will encounter. Blame the MPAA, not Apple, if you've got a problem.
I think the same people that complain about the lack of 9.5mm Blu-ray drives, which requires HDCP for playback, in Mac notebooks are the same ones that complained about Apple finally adding HDCP support to their HW.
DisplayPort supports multiple monitors by means of daisy-chaining, so this is clearly aimed at comforting switchers rather than enabling dual monitor support.
If DisplayPort monitors are daisy chainable they how come there is no mini-displayport connector on the Apple LED Cinema Display? There is the 3 headed cable exiting the display with Mini DisplayPort for connection to the computer, but no chassis connector on the display that would be required if a second display was to daisy chain off it. If Apple introduces another display with a mini-DisplayPort connector, maybe a 20" to replace the current 20" model, THEN maybe one could say the Mac mini would get dual display support. The only option would be to replace the current DVI-I connector with two mini-DisplayPort connections. Considering the market segment the mini is targeted at, I don't see that happening.
Comments
As has been reported elsewhere, the display port on the new Macbook's is DRM "enabled", restricting the ability to play DVDs, or instance, on an external display.
If this is the case on the new Mac Mini, one of the prime uses for the mini as a media center will go away.
Can you please provide a link or reference that states that the DRM affected DVDs?
The only info I read was that some iTunes content was affected, but I never saw anything about DVD's getting blocked. And Apple released a patch to end the blocking of the iTunes content.
It's possible that Apple could enable it for DVDs, but considering that it's relatively easy to get around DVDs restrictions, hopefully the studios won't ask for this. However, if you ever want to see HD movies in iTunes on your computer (vs on the AppleTV), I expect that enabling the DRM is the ONLY way that will happen.
So far Apple has done a good job of balancing the need for DRM (either because it was required by the content owners or because it was necessary for their business model) with not interfering with how most people would use the content. Let's hope they continue to be successful at doing that.
We've found that not to be true after the loss of FW on new MacBooks and Jobs reply to an angry Mac user. While this is true for DV cams, they show to be fading away in favour of tapeless recorders.
I still think that was a red herring. It totally ignores the 100s of thousands of camcordes and other devices already in existence that require Firewire. I think the real reason was a need to differentiate the MB from the MBP. If you look at the performance specs, for tasks that don't take advantage of the MBP's extra video card, it's very similar. There wasn't enough difference to justify the historic price point differences between the two machines. It's easy to upsell someone who needs Firewire to the MBP.
However, upselling someone from a mini to a MacPro is quite a different challenge. I guess they could try to upsell to an iMac, but that's different, too. Either you need a monitor or not. So unless Apple comes out with a mid-range, headless Mac that you could upsell a mini user who needs Firewire, removing FW from the mini is a much bigger deal than removing it from the MB. Hopefully Apple realizes that.
That said, I'll be very disappointed, but not entirely surprised, if FW is dropped from the mini. If they keep it, I'll be buying one. If they don't, I won't. Other than DisplayPort, all other specs are nearly irrelevant to me.
From what I read - I don't have a new Macbook / Pro - that people that had an external monitor hooked up to prior generation Macbooks/Pros, when they went to the new one, the exact same setup would not allow the playing of DVDs to the external monitor, which worked with the prior, non-DRM enabled DVI port. The display port-DVI adaptor does not go around this "feature.
I have no first hand knowledge of this, however. Does anyone out there have this info? I think it would be a critical issue in moving to a display port enabled computer.
There were problems initially with downloaded itunes movies, but that has since been adressed. I haven't heard anything about dvds being affected, so I don't believe there ever was a problem there.
As far as I know, there is no difference between what the old macbooks and new macbooks can play, except that there is the possibility of being able to play high def content on the new machines at some future date. The old macbooks will never be able to play HD content encrypted with HDCP, which basically amounts to all the HD content you can buy.
Can you please provide a link or reference that states that the DRM affected DVDs?
It appears to be difficult to discern what situations / equipment combinations and content specifics do not work. From the Apple support discussions.
http://discussions.apple.com/thread....sageID=8472731
And MacWorld
http://www.macworld.com/article/1371...8/11/hdcp.html
It also appears that the Apple "patch" reduces the output quality to standard definition, so at least content would play, albeit it reduced quality.
http://www.macnn.com/articles/08/11/....drm.conflict/
"The company this week released an update to QuickTime that allows HDCP-flagged standard-definition videos to play without the authentication. The protection was originally intended to prevent illegal copying of HD material, downgrading the output to SD quality if the connected device is not HDCP-compatible. "
http://www.obsessable.com/news/2008/...macbook-users/
"While users of older hardware continue to get a free pass, Apple's now activated the protection on the Mini DisplayPort-enabled models. This affects users who use DisplayPort-to-DVI adaptors to connect to external monitors, rather than watch their movies on a tiny laptop screen. Users who wish to continue using external displays are forced to buy new monitors with DisplayPort connectors. "
It is unclear from these discussions whether Blue-ray HD DVDs are encumbered with the same restrictions, but it was alluded to in the Apple discussion forum content.
I still think that was a red herring.
I think it was a red herring, too, but my feeling is that FW400 was low man on the port totem. Id est, space constraints with the new uni-body design. The video connector is considerably smaller and they removed FW400, while not adding any additional ports, and yet had to push the ports slightly closer together.
That said, I'll be very disappointed, but not entirely surprised, if FW is dropped from the mini. If they keep it, I'll be buying one. If they don't, I won't. Other than DisplayPort, all other specs are nearly irrelevant to me.
If my theory is correct, then I see no reason why FW will go away on the Mac Mini. They may up it to FW800 and then require you to buy an adapter to connector FW400 accessories. If my theory is incorrect, then FW400 will go away and they won't replace it with anything other than an additional USB2.0 port.
The Magsafe on the ADC doubles to charge your laptop battery and uses the passthrough power of the Monitor to do so.
It makes no sense for non-portable products.
If you're going to rationalize adding a "modified" magsafe for the desktop you are adding costs to the design and serving to use it w/o benefiting the point of it's core service--to recharge the system.
Only portable devices with magsafe from at least 1 dedicated power system makes sense, ala the Monitor.
With desktops having dedicated sources it makes no sense to offer it. It's much less expensive to add that functionality into the adaptor than to modify the current one resulting in no added use.
However, upselling someone from a mini to a MacPro is quite a different challenge. I guess they could try to upsell to an iMac, but that's different, too. Either you need a monitor or not. So unless Apple comes out with a mid-range, headless Mac that you could upsell a mini user who needs Firewire, removing FW from the mini is a much bigger deal than removing it from the MB. Hopefully Apple realizes that.
FW400 is dead to Apple. If Firewire as a whole were dead to them, they wouldn't have left FW800 on the MacBook Pro. So unless Apple feels like putting FW800 on their budget, consumer mini-tower, it will use USB2 exclusively. They'll gladly up sell people to iMacs (or MacBooks). The Mac mini is targeted towards switchers who want a taste, but once they see the iMac, they often give up their big, old, clunky CRT or puny LCD for an all in one experience.. The Mac mini also just makes Apple's entire line of premium computers seem more affordable because it starts at $600 and goes up from there, rather than Apple's cheapest computer - without the Mac mini, it would be the MacBook - starting at $1000.
Magsafe makes zero sense for the desktops.
MagSafe doesn't make sense, but a power pass-through for a small desktop with an external PS does, so having the new Minis have an adapter for MagSafe to use the power pass-through on the new ADC does make sense.
This is a bit of a non-story as far as I'm concerned.
Apple stated that they are putting Mini DisplayPort into every product from now on, so its inclusion is hardly a surprise.
Unlike the other members of the Macintosh family, the Mac mini is explicitly designed to work with a switcher's existing display - hence the need for Mini-DVI. A new mini which could only drive Apples LED Cinema Display wouldn't be much of a switcher machine.
I expect the Mac Pro to go down exactly the same route.
Right. It's not so much they are wanting it to support 2 displays, they want it to be compatible with existing displays and Apple's new displays. So, it will have both.
Yeah but then the adapter that came with the mini goes unused
It appears to be difficult to discern what situations / equipment combinations and content specifics do not work. From the Apple support discussions.
http://discussions.apple.com/thread....sageID=8472731
And MacWorld
http://www.macworld.com/article/1371...8/11/hdcp.html
It also appears that the Apple "patch" reduces the output quality to standard definition, so at least content would play, albeit it reduced quality.
http://www.macnn.com/articles/08/11/....drm.conflict/
"The company this week released an update to QuickTime that allows HDCP-flagged standard-definition videos to play without the authentication. The protection was originally intended to prevent illegal copying of HD material, downgrading the output to SD quality if the connected device is not HDCP-compatible. "
http://www.obsessable.com/news/2008/...macbook-users/
"While users of older hardware continue to get a free pass, Apple's now activated the protection on the Mini DisplayPort-enabled models. This affects users who use DisplayPort-to-DVI adaptors to connect to external monitors, rather than watch their movies on a tiny laptop screen. Users who wish to continue using external displays are forced to buy new monitors with DisplayPort connectors. "
It is unclear from these discussions whether Blue-ray HD DVDs are encumbered with the same restrictions, but it was alluded to in the Apple discussion forum content.
Thanks for the links. These was nothing in them that suggested DVDs were affected. The one user who complained the Terminator 2 was displaying only in SD on a Mac Pro, that is to be expected. If he's playing it in iTunes there is no such thing as HD movies (only HD TV shows), no matter if you have Display Port or not. HD movies are only available on the AppleTV as rentals.
The 3rd link is interesting. That suggests that if you are not using a DRM enabled display, iTunes will play the SD version of a TV show (you get both an SD and HD version when you purchase an HD TV show).
I think it's pretty much a given that IF Blu-ray ever comes to Mac, it most certainly will be encumbered with DRM. Also, when HD movies come to iTunes on your computer it will mostly likely be similarly encumbered.
Bottom line, Apple needs to be clear about the direction it is heading with all of this. An error with the rollout of the new laptops revealed that the hardware is capable of DRM, but that Apple wasn't ready to implement it yet. They need to be open about what the hardware does and what it requires to continue using your purchased content. Otherwise the recent laptop furor will look like small potatoes compared to the backlash that will ensue when they officially roll out the DRM scheme.
A new Mini sounds good if it has DVI out (I'm not buying a new monitor) and firewire (I have too many firewire devices to want to swallow the cost of changing to USB). It should also have a maximum of 4 GB of RAM that is user accessible. Graphics I'm not very concerned about, although faster is always better!
I have 2 Powermac G4 mirror door machines - one single, one dual processor, with the ATI video card with 2 connectors, the ADC, and a DVI. Both of these machines are hooked up to dual displays - and Apple studio monitor, and a 19 inch LCD. It works perfectly.
Yours does. There were earlier models that had ADC and DVI but the connectors were deliberately too close to each other so only one cable at a time could fit because the card was not dual-channel. The second port was only there for connectivity.
A new Mini sounds good if it has DVI out (I'm not buying a new monitor)
Why would you need to buy a new monitor, even if the Mac mini drops its dedicated DVI out for Mini DisplayPort?
Seriously? No way!
Apple is not one for doing such a thing. If they were to do anything like this, it would be 2 mini-display ports for maximum accessory add-on.
Did you choose your screen name after eating 56 asparagus spears?
Magsafe makes zero sense for the desktops.
It makes perfect sense if it can handle the load of the new Mini. Especially if it is compatible with the new displays and is of better quality than the old connector.
The Magsafe on the ADC doubles to charge your laptop battery and uses the passthrough power of the Monitor to do so.
BS, the power supply is in the monitor to operate your laptop. Simple as that really, if your battery happens to need a recharge you get that too. That isn't the primary point of the power supply though, it is there so the lappie can make like a desktop.
It makes no sense for non-portable products.
That could be said about the current Mini connector too.
If you're going to rationalize adding a "modified" magsafe for the desktop you are adding costs to the design and serving to use it w/o benefiting the point of it's core service--to recharge the system.
You are so wrong about the "core service" that I'm not sure if there is a point to further discussions. I will repeat though, the power supply is there so that the new monitor can work with the laptop in desktop duty mode. Any recharge you get out of the system is simply grave on top of everything else.
As to additional mechanical help with retention that may help but I don't really see it as an absolute requirement.
Only portable devices with magsafe from at least 1 dedicated power system makes sense, ala the Monitor.
What?
With desktops having dedicated sources it makes no sense to offer it. It's much less expensive to add that functionality into the adaptor than to modify the current one resulting in no added use.
You are getting hard to follow here. The connector from the power supply would not be modified, it would be the same one that comes with the current monitor. If anything at all is done it will be a case mounted retainer.
What many people are missing here is that this approach offers Apple a way to unbundle the power supply and lower the machines list price. This how one powers the Mini will be up to the purchaser when he makes the purchase. It also opens up the market to a wide range of power supplies.
The real argument against MagSafe isn't the connector but rather is an issue of electrical power. Many laptop power supplies depend on the laptops battery to support surge loads. In otherwirds many laptop power supplies can't handle transient loads like a disk spinup. This is why many laptops require that a battery be inplace even when line connected. I'm not sure what the case is with Apple products but atleast this would be a counter indication.
In any event the MagSafe connector itself isn't anyworst than the old connector.
Dave
I don't like DRM, either, but this is something few normal people will encounter. Blame the MPAA, not Apple, if you've got a problem.
I have 2 Powermac G4 mirror door machines - one single, one dual processor, with the ATI video card with 2 connectors, the ADC, and a DVI. Both of these machines are hooked up to dual displays - and Apple studio monitor, and a 19 inch LCD. It works perfectly.
I had an eMac circa 2003... and with a firmware hack it could do dual displays. I'm sure the same thing could be done for a "crippled" mac mini that only supports one display at a time. But I have a feeling it'll be the 9400m gfx chip, along with a price hike.
BTW: there is already a mini-DVI to TV adapter for those interested in using it with older TVs.
If the DisplayPort has HDCP, I guarantee you the DVI port will as well. It's not a big deal. Every decent monitor and every last HDTV you can buy today has HDCP, so it's only a limitation if you've got a crappy or old monitor. And it doesn't affect DVDs, or any other media that lacks HDCP.
I don't like DRM, either, but this is something few normal people will encounter. Blame the MPAA, not Apple, if you've got a problem.
I think the same people that complain about the lack of 9.5mm Blu-ray drives, which requires HDCP for playback, in Mac notebooks are the same ones that complained about Apple finally adding HDCP support to their HW.
DisplayPort supports multiple monitors by means of daisy-chaining, so this is clearly aimed at comforting switchers rather than enabling dual monitor support.
If DisplayPort monitors are daisy chainable they how come there is no mini-displayport connector on the Apple LED Cinema Display? There is the 3 headed cable exiting the display with Mini DisplayPort for connection to the computer, but no chassis connector on the display that would be required if a second display was to daisy chain off it. If Apple introduces another display with a mini-DisplayPort connector, maybe a 20" to replace the current 20" model, THEN maybe one could say the Mac mini would get dual display support. The only option would be to replace the current DVI-I connector with two mini-DisplayPort connections. Considering the market segment the mini is targeted at, I don't see that happening.