All devices, all manufacturers, get together to develop one single standard. Imagine both sides of your laptop being lined with a row of small round holes for plugging in anything you like. The power cord, a mouse, a monitor, an iPhone, a camera, a printer, a blender.....Well maybe not a blender.
The "full-size" Display Port is roughly as big/small as a USB port. I don't see any practical reason why this had to be repaced by a mini version.
My MBP early 08 has a full-size DVI port and 2 firewire ports, yet it's smaller in dimensions than the late 08 MBP. What a miracle of product design!
Isn't it blatantaly obvious to you that iPhone sized devices will eventually get video out ports? If not iPhone certainly Netbook sized devices will benefit from smaller connectors. How small has USB gotten...freakin' lillipution for digicams and cell phones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gastroboy
So this will be the display connector to end all display connectors?
Pardon but I think I have heard that before.
For a start it doesn't even necessarily do the obvious of including audio in it.
8- channels of LCPM audio have been in the specification since day 1. May I suggest www.displayport.org so that you can become more informed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar
Daisy chaining displays is another feature that seems to be unsupported by Apple. It goes to show that no matter what features DisplayPort can support, some manufacturers will simply provide token support-- supporting the absolute minimum level of functionality just so they have an excuse to claim that they follow the standard.
I actually think there are a lot of features not currently support. Par for the course...when HDMI hit the computing arena it came across missing features. What I want to know is how many features can be backported/added to currrent Mini-DisplayPort Macs. I really want the 8-channels of audio and the aux channel to be enabled soon enough.
CES 2009: HDMI Introduces Next Generation Specification
...
Smaller connector
New, smaller 19-pin connector
------------------------
OMGWTF!?! Those bastards behind HDMI are introducing Yet Another Small Connector that won't work with existing devices! What's wrong with the current one?!?!?!
CES 2009: HDMI Introduces Next Generation Specification
...
Smaller connector
New, smaller 19-pin connector
------------------------
OMGWTF!?! Those bastards behind HDMI are introducing Yet Another Small Connector that won't work with existing devices! What's wrong with the current one?!?!?!
See how this game works?
The current connector doesn't have a locking mechanism in it and
a lot of HD cameras are adding HDMI ports which eats up a lot of space.
It's going to be interesting to see if HDMI can survive the onslaught of DisplayPort.
Frankly if I'm a device manf I'm wanting to save thata $1000 license fee and per device royalty payments.
DisplayPort is going to look damn good with its free licensing and backwards compatibility.
It's going to be interesting to see if HDMI can survive the onslaught of DisplayPort.
I'm not sure if I would use the word 'onslaught'.
But I hope it ultimately wins the video port battle. HDMI's latest improvements sound good (if a bit dubious, such as Ethernet - I can't imagine supporting GigE in that cable bundle) but DP won't remain static. For anyone who's read its capabilities it's hard not to be impressed with its forward-looking packet-based architecture.
I've never been a fan of VESA's past offerings, but in this case I think they've got a winner, at least for the next 15 years or so (given the state of product development and interface adoption.)
The current connector doesn't have a locking mechanism in it and
a lot of HD cameras are adding HDMI ports which eats up a lot of space.
Camcorders with HDMI have the mini connector more often than not. It's tiny, but maybe not mini-DP tiny, I have no frame of reference for mini-DP. I still haven't gotten around to ordering a mini-to-full HDMI cable for my camcorder. I can just stuff the SD card into my PS3 and it just works.
Quote:
It's going to be interesting to see if HDMI can survive the onslaught of DisplayPort.
Frankly if I'm a device manf I'm wanting to save thata $1000 license fee and per device royalty payments.
DisplayPort is going to look damn good with its free licensing and backwards compatibility.
I don't see that fee being an obstacle for billion dollar companies, though as long as the transition really is as smooth and and intercompatible as they say, then that's fine with me. I want my display devices to be able to accept HDMI for as long as my HDMI devices are viable, I'm not going to buy incompatible displays until I decide it's not worth using the source device.
You are just finding stuff to complain about. Many of us said that Apple was likely pushing to make it apart of the official standard. Others wished to jump to conclusions and say Apple made it proprietary. Since very few are yet using Display Port at all there is no confusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig
It wasn't free and part of the standard when released. If apple had actually communicated rather than taking the "we like it, so you're going to use it approach", much of this would have been avoided. What users saw was a new port, with fewer connection options and no word from Apple when or if those options would ever arrive form Apple or a third party. Users had no idea if once DVI and VGA were full phased out in favor of DP and HDMI would they be able to buy a non-Apple display or if they would ever be able to hook their Mac up to a TV or projector.
But I hope it ultimately wins the video port battle. HDMI's latest improvements sound good (if a bit dubious, such as Ethernet - I can't imagine supporting GigE in that cable bundle) but DP won't remain static. For anyone who's read its capabilities it's hard not to be impressed with its forward-looking packet-based architecture.
I've never been a fan of VESA's past offerings, but in this case I think they've got a winner, at least for the next 15 years or so (given the state of product development and interface adoption.)
The cable has nothing to do with GigE, if manufacturers provide support for Gig in their hardware then the cable will support it.
I find nothing dubious about the new HDMI specs, the only thing I find odd is why on Earth Apple are trying to go it alone with the MiniDisplayPort when what would be best for the consumer would be a standardization on HDMI.
CES 2009: HDMI Introduces Next Generation Specification
...
Smaller connector
New, smaller 19-pin connector
------------------------
OMGWTF!?! Those bastards behind HDMI are introducing Yet Another Small Connector that won't work with existing devices! What's wrong with the current one?!?!?!
See how this game works?
And you are making this point on a thread discussing Apple's new smaller port?
Who told you it would not work with existing devices?
Did it not cross your mind that you would get a cable with different connectors at each end?
The cable has nothing to do with GigE, if manufacturers provide support for Gig in their hardware then the cable will support it.
I find nothing dubious about the new HDMI specs, the only thing I find odd is why on Earth Apple are trying to go it alone with the MiniDisplayPort when what would be best for the consumer would be a standardization on HDMI.
No this is incorrect. It is bot best to standardize on a platform that doesn't have the roadmap for future technology. DisplayPort already has more bandwidth than HDMI in its first incarnation. Apple is not trying to go it alone. Like USB ..Apple is moving forward with technolog that makes sense from a pricing, architectural and technological roadmap standpoint.
The cable has nothing to do with GigE, if manufacturers provide support for Gig in their hardware then the cable will support it.
Sure, if you don't mind a fat, expensive cable connecting your components. Bundling GigE along with video signals (and everything else) will require shielding and tight conductor twists, which add bulk and cost to the whole assembly.
I'm not against consolidating cables, but in this case it seems like HDMI is using a kitchen-sink approach to solve a problem that is pretty far from the original intention. I predict that the number of devices that support networking within their A/V cable connection with be pretty damn close to zero.
I just want to have a MiniDP to HDMI adapter so I can use my MacBook with my Samsung TV that will carry video AND AUDIO.
I know it's all new stuff and I am being impatient, but I have a beautiful MB and TV and I want them to work together without having to McGuyver 3 adapters together. I don't care if Mono Price or Apple make one first. I will buy it as soon as it's availbale.
You are just finding stuff to complain about. Many of us said that Apple was likely pushing to make it apart of the official standard. Others wished to jump to conclusions and say Apple made it proprietary. Since very few are yet using Display Port at all there is no confusion.
So in other words, its alright to jump to conclusions with no evidence one way or the other as long its the conclusion that you jump to which usually relies on blind faith. We had no evidence one of way or the other of what Apple's intentions were. All we had is what we could see and that was Apple has not offering adapters for video out, HDMI, or standard display port. Plus, VESA could have told Apple no. But, please feel free to spin in on any way that makes you happy,
I haven't found anything that says the standard will support GigE. The info I've seen just says Ethernet.
It should not make any difference at all. There is no such thing as a GigE cable, nor that matter a GigE RJ45 plug. The ethernet ports on the hardware or switch determine how fast the connection is not the cable. So if if HDMI includes an option for including Ethernet in the spec it is up to equipment manufacturers to determine what speed they will support.
Sure, if you don't mind a fat, expensive cable connecting your components. Bundling GigE along with video signals (and everything else) will require shielding and tight conductor twists, which add bulk and cost to the whole assembly.
I'm not against consolidating cables, but in this case it seems like HDMI is using a kitchen-sink approach to solve a problem that is pretty far from the original intention. I predict that the number of devices that support networking within their A/V cable connection with be pretty damn close to zero.
I am not sure. We have no idea how they are going to implement Ethernet support in the HDMI specification. I would guess you only buy the cable that includes Ethernet if you want Ethernet.
I think cable manufacturers may well come up with something ingenious to shield the Ethernet signal, remember Cat5 cables are heavily shielded a twisted because they are designed for long runs up to 100M. If we are talking about equipment to equipment with much shorter cables it is not hard to believe there is a more ingenious way.
It should not make any difference at all. There is no such thing as a GigE cable, nor that matter a GigE RJ45 plug. The ethernet ports on the hardware or switch determine how fast the connection is not the cable. So if if HDMI includes an option for including Ethernet in the spec it is up to equipment manufacturers to determine what speed they will support.
It's not so simple, it does make a difference. Without access to the spec, it's hard to know for certain. The wiring does have an effect, because the standard has ways of defining what passes in terms of signal rate and signal quality.
For example, with Cat 5, it may be the same cable, but 100Mb Ethernet only uses two pair of the wires, GigE uses all four pairs.
Comments
All devices, all manufacturers, get together to develop one single standard. Imagine both sides of your laptop being lined with a row of small round holes for plugging in anything you like. The power cord, a mouse, a monitor, an iPhone, a camera, a printer, a blender.....Well maybe not a blender.
Amen
The "full-size" Display Port is roughly as big/small as a USB port. I don't see any practical reason why this had to be repaced by a mini version.
My MBP early 08 has a full-size DVI port and 2 firewire ports, yet it's smaller in dimensions than the late 08 MBP. What a miracle of product design!
Isn't it blatantaly obvious to you that iPhone sized devices will eventually get video out ports? If not iPhone certainly Netbook sized devices will benefit from smaller connectors. How small has USB gotten...freakin' lillipution for digicams and cell phones.
So this will be the display connector to end all display connectors?
Pardon but I think I have heard that before.
For a start it doesn't even necessarily do the obvious of including audio in it.
8- channels of LCPM audio have been in the specification since day 1. May I suggest www.displayport.org so that you can become more informed?
Daisy chaining displays is another feature that seems to be unsupported by Apple. It goes to show that no matter what features DisplayPort can support, some manufacturers will simply provide token support-- supporting the absolute minimum level of functionality just so they have an excuse to claim that they follow the standard.
I actually think there are a lot of features not currently support. Par for the course...when HDMI hit the computing arena it came across missing features. What I want to know is how many features can be backported/added to currrent Mini-DisplayPort Macs. I really want the 8-channels of audio and the aux channel to be enabled soon enough.
...
Smaller connector
New, smaller 19-pin connector
------------------------
OMGWTF!?! Those bastards behind HDMI are introducing Yet Another Small Connector that won't work with existing devices! What's wrong with the current one?!?!?!
See how this game works?
It's fully HDMI Compatible if that's what you mean about DRM free.
Actually, it's fully HDCP compatible if that's what you mean.
(Not that I'm endorsing it.)
CES 2009: HDMI Introduces Next Generation Specification
...
Smaller connector
New, smaller 19-pin connector
------------------------
OMGWTF!?! Those bastards behind HDMI are introducing Yet Another Small Connector that won't work with existing devices! What's wrong with the current one?!?!?!
See how this game works?
The current connector doesn't have a locking mechanism in it and
a lot of HD cameras are adding HDMI ports which eats up a lot of space.
It's going to be interesting to see if HDMI can survive the onslaught of DisplayPort.
Frankly if I'm a device manf I'm wanting to save thata $1000 license fee and per device royalty payments.
DisplayPort is going to look damn good with its free licensing and backwards compatibility.
It's going to be interesting to see if HDMI can survive the onslaught of DisplayPort.
I'm not sure if I would use the word 'onslaught'.
But I hope it ultimately wins the video port battle. HDMI's latest improvements sound good (if a bit dubious, such as Ethernet - I can't imagine supporting GigE in that cable bundle) but DP won't remain static. For anyone who's read its capabilities it's hard not to be impressed with its forward-looking packet-based architecture.
I've never been a fan of VESA's past offerings, but in this case I think they've got a winner, at least for the next 15 years or so (given the state of product development and interface adoption.)
The current connector doesn't have a locking mechanism in it and
a lot of HD cameras are adding HDMI ports which eats up a lot of space.
Camcorders with HDMI have the mini connector more often than not. It's tiny, but maybe not mini-DP tiny, I have no frame of reference for mini-DP. I still haven't gotten around to ordering a mini-to-full HDMI cable for my camcorder. I can just stuff the SD card into my PS3 and it just works.
It's going to be interesting to see if HDMI can survive the onslaught of DisplayPort.
Frankly if I'm a device manf I'm wanting to save thata $1000 license fee and per device royalty payments.
DisplayPort is going to look damn good with its free licensing and backwards compatibility.
I don't see that fee being an obstacle for billion dollar companies, though as long as the transition really is as smooth and and intercompatible as they say, then that's fine with me. I want my display devices to be able to accept HDMI for as long as my HDMI devices are viable, I'm not going to buy incompatible displays until I decide it's not worth using the source device.
It wasn't free and part of the standard when released. If apple had actually communicated rather than taking the "we like it, so you're going to use it approach", much of this would have been avoided. What users saw was a new port, with fewer connection options and no word from Apple when or if those options would ever arrive form Apple or a third party. Users had no idea if once DVI and VGA were full phased out in favor of DP and HDMI would they be able to buy a non-Apple display or if they would ever be able to hook their Mac up to a TV or projector.
I'm not sure if I would use the word 'onslaught'.
But I hope it ultimately wins the video port battle. HDMI's latest improvements sound good (if a bit dubious, such as Ethernet - I can't imagine supporting GigE in that cable bundle) but DP won't remain static. For anyone who's read its capabilities it's hard not to be impressed with its forward-looking packet-based architecture.
I've never been a fan of VESA's past offerings, but in this case I think they've got a winner, at least for the next 15 years or so (given the state of product development and interface adoption.)
The cable has nothing to do with GigE, if manufacturers provide support for Gig in their hardware then the cable will support it.
I find nothing dubious about the new HDMI specs, the only thing I find odd is why on Earth Apple are trying to go it alone with the MiniDisplayPort when what would be best for the consumer would be a standardization on HDMI.
CES 2009: HDMI Introduces Next Generation Specification
...
Smaller connector
New, smaller 19-pin connector
------------------------
OMGWTF!?! Those bastards behind HDMI are introducing Yet Another Small Connector that won't work with existing devices! What's wrong with the current one?!?!?!
See how this game works?
And you are making this point on a thread discussing Apple's new smaller port?
Who told you it would not work with existing devices?
Did it not cross your mind that you would get a cable with different connectors at each end?
8- channels of LCPM audio have been in the specification since day 1. May I suggest www.displayport.org so that you can become more informed?
I did. In the spec but not necessarily in the hardware.
The cable has nothing to do with GigE, if manufacturers provide support for Gig in their hardware then the cable will support it.
I find nothing dubious about the new HDMI specs, the only thing I find odd is why on Earth Apple are trying to go it alone with the MiniDisplayPort when what would be best for the consumer would be a standardization on HDMI.
No this is incorrect. It is bot best to standardize on a platform that doesn't have the roadmap for future technology. DisplayPort already has more bandwidth than HDMI in its first incarnation. Apple is not trying to go it alone. Like USB ..Apple is moving forward with technolog that makes sense from a pricing, architectural and technological roadmap standpoint.
Standardizing on HDMI is pure folly.
And you are making this point on a thread discussing Apple's new smaller port?
My apologies - I left off the flashing SARCASM tag. I'll try to accommodate your needs next time I point out the inconsistencies in arguments here.
The cable has nothing to do with GigE, if manufacturers provide support for Gig in their hardware then the cable will support it.
Sure, if you don't mind a fat, expensive cable connecting your components. Bundling GigE along with video signals (and everything else) will require shielding and tight conductor twists, which add bulk and cost to the whole assembly.
I'm not against consolidating cables, but in this case it seems like HDMI is using a kitchen-sink approach to solve a problem that is pretty far from the original intention. I predict that the number of devices that support networking within their A/V cable connection with be pretty damn close to zero.
I know it's all new stuff and I am being impatient, but I have a beautiful MB and TV and I want them to work together without having to McGuyver 3 adapters together. I don't care if Mono Price or Apple make one first. I will buy it as soon as it's availbale.
You are just finding stuff to complain about. Many of us said that Apple was likely pushing to make it apart of the official standard. Others wished to jump to conclusions and say Apple made it proprietary. Since very few are yet using Display Port at all there is no confusion.
So in other words, its alright to jump to conclusions with no evidence one way or the other as long its the conclusion that you jump to which usually relies on blind faith. We had no evidence one of way or the other of what Apple's intentions were. All we had is what we could see and that was Apple has not offering adapters for video out, HDMI, or standard display port. Plus, VESA could have told Apple no. But, please feel free to spin in on any way that makes you happy,
The cable has nothing to do with GigE, if manufacturers provide support for Gig in their hardware then the cable will support it.
I haven't found anything that says the standard will support GigE. The info I've seen just says Ethernet.
I haven't found anything that says the standard will support GigE. The info I've seen just says Ethernet.
It should not make any difference at all. There is no such thing as a GigE cable, nor that matter a GigE RJ45 plug. The ethernet ports on the hardware or switch determine how fast the connection is not the cable. So if if HDMI includes an option for including Ethernet in the spec it is up to equipment manufacturers to determine what speed they will support.
Sure, if you don't mind a fat, expensive cable connecting your components. Bundling GigE along with video signals (and everything else) will require shielding and tight conductor twists, which add bulk and cost to the whole assembly.
I'm not against consolidating cables, but in this case it seems like HDMI is using a kitchen-sink approach to solve a problem that is pretty far from the original intention. I predict that the number of devices that support networking within their A/V cable connection with be pretty damn close to zero.
I am not sure. We have no idea how they are going to implement Ethernet support in the HDMI specification. I would guess you only buy the cable that includes Ethernet if you want Ethernet.
I think cable manufacturers may well come up with something ingenious to shield the Ethernet signal, remember Cat5 cables are heavily shielded a twisted because they are designed for long runs up to 100M. If we are talking about equipment to equipment with much shorter cables it is not hard to believe there is a more ingenious way.
It should not make any difference at all. There is no such thing as a GigE cable, nor that matter a GigE RJ45 plug. The ethernet ports on the hardware or switch determine how fast the connection is not the cable. So if if HDMI includes an option for including Ethernet in the spec it is up to equipment manufacturers to determine what speed they will support.
It's not so simple, it does make a difference. Without access to the spec, it's hard to know for certain. The wiring does have an effect, because the standard has ways of defining what passes in terms of signal rate and signal quality.
For example, with Cat 5, it may be the same cable, but 100Mb Ethernet only uses two pair of the wires, GigE uses all four pairs.