Presumably you could have a combined cable with Audio and MiniDP at one end into HDMI at the other... but for $14 I suspect it doesn't.
I would say such an adapter is inevitable, and would suit my wants (needs is a bit overstrong) nicely. An HDMI adapter without audio sounds like a lot of hassle.
So because Apple didn't invent HDMI and doesn't receive the license fee we should therefor be denied a simplified solution?
HDMI simplified? That's a matter of perception.
"ahh let's see does your Blu-ray have HDMI 1.1 ports or 1.2a or 1.3 or 1.3a" yup
that's as simplified as it gets
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
Is display port a computer standard?
Yup as the poster before said it's a VESA standard
Quote:
Originally Posted by FallofRedmond
1) Displayport is video only. So no, this adapter will not pass audio through HDMI since Displayport(like DVI before it) does not pass audio. You will still have to go Toslink for audio.
2) HDMI royalties likely have marginal effect considering how much we pay for our computers and how much less many HDMI equipped computers run. HDMI would take up room on the the side panel of the new MB/P that doesn't exist. Even if that room did exist, I'd far prefer to see it filled with Firewire on the MB and eSATA on the Pro.
1. The DisplayPort spec includes support for 8 channels of LPCM audio. Whether manufacturers are actually using this is unknown to me but the audio is there in the spec.
2. Agree the royalties are marginal for a company that ships hundreds of thousands of devices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
OK but DisplayPort cannot support the xvYCC color space, Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio bitstream support, Consumer Electronics Control (CEC) signals, and electrical compatibility with DV as HDMI can.
Hence HDMI is well suited for CE devices that need these features and DisplayPort is suited for computing applications. Thanks for taking us right back to the center of the issue.
HDMI- CE devices, HDTV
DisplayPort - Computers.
Sure there's overlap and that's why we need DP to HDMI cable and such.
But when are we going to get an HDMI to Mini-Displayport adapter so that I can plug my PS3 into the new LED Cinema Display? I'd buy one in a heartbeat if this was the case...
Hence HDMI is well suited for CE devices that need these features and DisplayPort is suited for computing applications. Thanks for taking us right back to the center of the issue.
HDMI- CE devices, HDTV
DisplayPort - Computers.
Sure there's overlap and that's why we need DP to HDMI cable and such.
If HDMI carries audio and video (and at audio and videofile quality) why would you prefer a cable that does only one? Then wouldn't you need another cable from your mini audio jack-no?
But when are we going to get an HDMI to Mini-Displayport adapter so that I can plug my PS3 into the new LED Cinema Display? I'd buy one in a heartbeat if this was the case...
If HDMI carries audio and video (and at audio and videofile quality) why would you prefer a cable that does only one? Then wouldn't you need another cable from your mini audio jack-no?
DisplayPort will carry up to 8 channels of audio at up to 96khz.
It also has a 1mbps bi-direction auxiliary link which can be used for a varity of
signals (webcam, control signal etc)
The thing that makes DisplayPort the ideal solution to computing is that integrating it into chipsets is much easier because it never exceeds 2 volts. Plus it's not a raster based technology ..it uses up to 4 lanes so that if you have say a Netbook with that doesn't need 4 full links you can design it with say 2 lanes (links) reducing cost.
Most people don't know but HDMI has stringent demands for how it's routed through the computer. Vendors have to be careful in how they pass the cables through hinges and AIO computer are supposedly prohibited from having HDMI (I'll have to verify this through a web search )
In the end the bandwidth and unificatio of internal and external interfaces is largely going ot eradicate HDMI on the computer and those that need to bridge the two technologies will simply get the appropriate adapter.
Well there goes the "Apple is just using minidisplay port to force them to buy an overpriced white Apple adapter" argument.
Now only if Dell and friends would get on board with minidisplay port faster...
Expect Dell to as they seem to be a proponent of DisplayPort and I think they'd want to save some port space as well on small items like laptops and the Dell Studio mini class computer.
But when are we going to get an HDMI to Mini-Displayport adapter so that I can plug my PS3 into the new LED Cinema Display? I'd buy one in a heartbeat if this was the case...
Can't you just turn the cable around? DVI to HDMI adapters work both ways.
DisplayPort is the 'intelligent' HDMI, much like FireWire is the 'intelligent' USB. Unlike FireWire, however, DisplayPort is becoming the successor to HDMI in the computer world. HDMI is great for multi-source topologies, much like you'll find on home AV systems, while DisplayPort offers a different feature set that is attractive for computer use, such as daisy chaining. In AV systems, there's generally one display, and many sources, while in computers, there are generally multiple displays and one host.
The fact that the display signals are interchangeable makes the distinction more or less moot. Get a $15 adapter and call it a day.
Well, it's not "intelligent" enough to hook up to your TV without an adapter. People want simplicity not an adapter every time Apple changes their mind on what audio/video out their using in this years computers.
That is why the PC market has both on the "average" computer these days. They are giving the users what they want and asked for not what Apple tells them they need.
DisplayPort will carry up to 8 channels of audio at up to 96khz.
It also has a 1mbps bi-direction auxiliary link which can be used for a varity of
signals (webcam, control signal etc)
The thing that makes DisplayPort the ideal solution to computing is that integrating it into chipsets is much easier because it never exceeds 2 volts. Plus it's not a raster based technology ..it uses up to 4 lanes so that if you have say a Netbook with that doesn't need 4 full links you can design it with say 2 lanes (links) reducing cost.
Most people don't know but HDMI has stringent demands for how it's routed through the computer. Vendors have to be careful in how they pass the cables through hinges and AIO computer are supposedly prohibited from having HDMI (I'll have to verify this through a web search )
In the end the bandwidth and unificatio of internal and external interfaces is largely going ot eradicate HDMI on the computer and those that need to bridge the two technologies will simply get the appropriate adapter.
I think the point is the average comsumer doesn't want to know a single word you typed.
They want to see a simple HDMI slot on their computer and one cable going to their TV for Sound and Video.
Well, it's not "intelligent" enough to hook up to your TV without an adapter. People want simplicity not an adapter every time Apple changes their mind on what audio/video out their using in this years computers.
That is why the PC market has both on the "average" computer these days. They are giving the users what they want and asked for not what Apple tells them they need.
Apple isn't the first company to begin to move towards DisplayPort. Dell had one of the first displays with DP.
DisplayPort is intended to replace VGA, DVI and HDMI as the connector of choice for displays. It's design choices point towards computing applications hence the aux channel and daisy-chain capability.
PC tend to throw an abundance of ports into the computers and hope they hit their target with the scatter shotgun blast.
I like that Apple is definitive. Remember the iMac made USB the connectivity standard when PC were still using parallel ports because it was safe.
Ditto. Monoprice is great! Unless you need a cable immediately, there's no point looking at a store: monoprice.com, bluejeanscable.com, parts-express.com. Better quality and much better prices.
I think the point is the average comsumer doesn't want to know a single word you typed.
They want to see a simple HDMI slot on their computer and one cable going to their TV for Sound and Video.
To be fair, I don't think the average consumer really cares about hooking their computer up to their TV. I doubt many consumers want to use their TV as the primary monitor for their PC, so hooking up a computer to a TV via HDMI would often require moving it to the TV whenever such usage was desired. Unless that PC is a notebook, it'll largely be a huge pain in the ass. What consumers do want to do is view the media that is on their computer on their TV, and hardware and software companies are still experimenting to find a solution that works. That's why there are things like the AppleTV.
Comments
Presumably you could have a combined cable with Audio and MiniDP at one end into HDMI at the other... but for $14 I suspect it doesn't.
I would say such an adapter is inevitable, and would suit my wants (needs is a bit overstrong) nicely. An HDMI adapter without audio sounds like a lot of hassle.
So because Apple didn't invent HDMI and doesn't receive the license fee we should therefor be denied a simplified solution?
HDMI simplified? That's a matter of perception.
"ahh let's see does your Blu-ray have HDMI 1.1 ports or 1.2a or 1.3 or 1.3a" yup
that's as simplified as it gets
Is display port a computer standard?
Yup as the poster before said it's a VESA standard
1) Displayport is video only. So no, this adapter will not pass audio through HDMI since Displayport(like DVI before it) does not pass audio. You will still have to go Toslink for audio.
2) HDMI royalties likely have marginal effect considering how much we pay for our computers and how much less many HDMI equipped computers run. HDMI would take up room on the the side panel of the new MB/P that doesn't exist. Even if that room did exist, I'd far prefer to see it filled with Firewire on the MB and eSATA on the Pro.
1. The DisplayPort spec includes support for 8 channels of LPCM audio. Whether manufacturers are actually using this is unknown to me but the audio is there in the spec.
2. Agree the royalties are marginal for a company that ships hundreds of thousands of devices.
OK but DisplayPort cannot support the xvYCC color space, Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio bitstream support, Consumer Electronics Control (CEC) signals, and electrical compatibility with DV as HDMI can.
Hence HDMI is well suited for CE devices that need these features and DisplayPort is suited for computing applications. Thanks for taking us right back to the center of the issue.
HDMI- CE devices, HDTV
DisplayPort - Computers.
Sure there's overlap and that's why we need DP to HDMI cable and such.
Currently, both of the current standards can handle very similar data rates, really close to 10Gbps. Single link DVI goes up to 4Gbps.
Supposedly DP can scale a lot farther than than 10, but I don't think it's available yet.
Beside the fee issue, wouldn't HDMI be more desired because it carries better audio? Wouldn''t you want the best of both worlds?
HDMI simplified? That's a matter of perception.
"ahh let's see does your Blu-ray have HDMI 1.1 ports or 1.2a or 1.3 or 1.3a" yup
that's as simplified as it gets
It seems like a silly stone to throw, DP is already on version 1.1a, which sounds a lot like they are following the same path.
Hence HDMI is well suited for CE devices that need these features and DisplayPort is suited for computing applications. Thanks for taking us right back to the center of the issue.
HDMI- CE devices, HDTV
DisplayPort - Computers.
Sure there's overlap and that's why we need DP to HDMI cable and such.
If HDMI carries audio and video (and at audio and videofile quality) why would you prefer a cable that does only one? Then wouldn't you need another cable from your mini audio jack-no?
But when are we going to get an HDMI to Mini-Displayport adapter so that I can plug my PS3 into the new LED Cinema Display? I'd buy one in a heartbeat if this was the case...
That's sounds great if you're into silent gaming.
It seems like a silly stone to throw, DP is already on version 1.1a, which sounds a lot like they are following the same path.
When taken from the context of version simplification I have no horse in this race. Both will walk the path of 1.x, 2.x upgrades.
If HDMI carries audio and video (and at audio and videofile quality) why would you prefer a cable that does only one? Then wouldn't you need another cable from your mini audio jack-no?
DisplayPort will carry up to 8 channels of audio at up to 96khz.
It also has a 1mbps bi-direction auxiliary link which can be used for a varity of
signals (webcam, control signal etc)
The thing that makes DisplayPort the ideal solution to computing is that integrating it into chipsets is much easier because it never exceeds 2 volts. Plus it's not a raster based technology ..it uses up to 4 lanes so that if you have say a Netbook with that doesn't need 4 full links you can design it with say 2 lanes (links) reducing cost.
Most people don't know but HDMI has stringent demands for how it's routed through the computer. Vendors have to be careful in how they pass the cables through hinges and AIO computer are supposedly prohibited from having HDMI (I'll have to verify this through a web search )
In the end the bandwidth and unificatio of internal and external interfaces is largely going ot eradicate HDMI on the computer and those that need to bridge the two technologies will simply get the appropriate adapter.
Now only if Dell and friends would get on board with minidisplay port faster...
Well there goes the "Apple is just using minidisplay port to force them to buy an overpriced white Apple adapter" argument.
Now only if Dell and friends would get on board with minidisplay port faster...
Expect Dell to as they seem to be a proponent of DisplayPort and I think they'd want to save some port space as well on small items like laptops and the Dell Studio mini class computer.
But when are we going to get an HDMI to Mini-Displayport adapter so that I can plug my PS3 into the new LED Cinema Display? I'd buy one in a heartbeat if this was the case...
Can't you just turn the cable around? DVI to HDMI adapters work both ways.
DisplayPort is the 'intelligent' HDMI, much like FireWire is the 'intelligent' USB. Unlike FireWire, however, DisplayPort is becoming the successor to HDMI in the computer world. HDMI is great for multi-source topologies, much like you'll find on home AV systems, while DisplayPort offers a different feature set that is attractive for computer use, such as daisy chaining. In AV systems, there's generally one display, and many sources, while in computers, there are generally multiple displays and one host.
The fact that the display signals are interchangeable makes the distinction more or less moot. Get a $15 adapter and call it a day.
Well, it's not "intelligent" enough to hook up to your TV without an adapter. People want simplicity not an adapter every time Apple changes their mind on what audio/video out their using in this years computers.
That is why the PC market has both on the "average" computer these days. They are giving the users what they want and asked for not what Apple tells them they need.
DisplayPort will carry up to 8 channels of audio at up to 96khz.
It also has a 1mbps bi-direction auxiliary link which can be used for a varity of
signals (webcam, control signal etc)
The thing that makes DisplayPort the ideal solution to computing is that integrating it into chipsets is much easier because it never exceeds 2 volts. Plus it's not a raster based technology ..it uses up to 4 lanes so that if you have say a Netbook with that doesn't need 4 full links you can design it with say 2 lanes (links) reducing cost.
Most people don't know but HDMI has stringent demands for how it's routed through the computer. Vendors have to be careful in how they pass the cables through hinges and AIO computer are supposedly prohibited from having HDMI (I'll have to verify this through a web search )
In the end the bandwidth and unificatio of internal and external interfaces is largely going ot eradicate HDMI on the computer and those that need to bridge the two technologies will simply get the appropriate adapter.
I think the point is the average comsumer doesn't want to know a single word you typed.
They want to see a simple HDMI slot on their computer and one cable going to their TV for Sound and Video.
Well, it's not "intelligent" enough to hook up to your TV without an adapter. People want simplicity not an adapter every time Apple changes their mind on what audio/video out their using in this years computers.
That is why the PC market has both on the "average" computer these days. They are giving the users what they want and asked for not what Apple tells them they need.
Apple isn't the first company to begin to move towards DisplayPort. Dell had one of the first displays with DP.
DisplayPort is intended to replace VGA, DVI and HDMI as the connector of choice for displays. It's design choices point towards computing applications hence the aux channel and daisy-chain capability.
PC tend to throw an abundance of ports into the computers and hope they hit their target with the scatter shotgun blast.
I like that Apple is definitive. Remember the iMac made USB the connectivity standard when PC were still using parallel ports because it was safe.
I think the point is the average comsumer doesn't want to know a single word you typed.
They want to see a simple HDMI slot on their computer and one cable going to their TV for Sound and Video.
The avg consumer is not hooking their computer up to HDMI display
Monoprice is great.
Ditto. Monoprice is great! Unless you need a cable immediately, there's no point looking at a store: monoprice.com, bluejeanscable.com, parts-express.com. Better quality and much better prices.
The avg consumer is not hooking their computer up to HDMI display
My brother and his wife are and they are about as computer illiterate as they come.
They use it everyday to watch Hulu.
I think the point is the average comsumer doesn't want to know a single word you typed.
They want to see a simple HDMI slot on their computer and one cable going to their TV for Sound and Video.
To be fair, I don't think the average consumer really cares about hooking their computer up to their TV. I doubt many consumers want to use their TV as the primary monitor for their PC, so hooking up a computer to a TV via HDMI would often require moving it to the TV whenever such usage was desired. Unless that PC is a notebook, it'll largely be a huge pain in the ass. What consumers do want to do is view the media that is on their computer on their TV, and hardware and software companies are still experimenting to find a solution that works. That's why there are things like the AppleTV.