Apple's Mini DisplayPort Officially Adopted By VESA 160
DJRumpy writes "The Video Electronics Standard Association officially issued its Mini DisplayPort standard Tuesday, based on the technology licensed from Apple. VESA said that all devices using the Mini DisplayPort connector must meet the specifications required by the DisplayPort 1.1a standard, and cables that support the standard must also meet specific electrical specifications. It's a formal confirmation of the news from earlier this year, when VESA announced the Mini DisplayPort connector would be included in the forthcoming DisplayPort 1.2 specification."
Cue the linux trolls. (Score:2, Funny)
We know this has nothing at all to do with Linux or OS X, but this has never stopped this jolly crowd from doing "granny attacks", lunging from under their stones, when the topic is related to Apple. Set forth, gentleboys!
they need light too (Score:2)
Most of the time, it's the Apple fanboys hogging the spotlight. Doesn't matter what the article is about, according to them, Apple did it first and did it best, and anybody who disagreed is modded into oblivion as a troll.
So, give the Linux trolls a break; occasionally, they need light to. And it's better if they come out over something as insignificant as a smaller DVI connector than if they start dismantling Apple's claims to novelty, innovation, and quality. We wouldn't want that, would we.
Re:Cue the linux trolls. (Score:4, Funny)
Hurr durr, I am linux troll. I was written by Linus Trollwards.
I'm sorry, but before you go any further - are you a GPLv2 troll, or a GPLv3 troll?
HDMI? (Score:5, Interesting)
What happened to HDMI? Lots of monitors and computers already have it, it supports audio over the connection (Mini-DP doesn't), and it can support the resolutions the article mentions. There's even already a mini version of it in use. It's a standard in home video and had plenty of adoption with computers. Is there something that Mini-DP does that HDMI doesn't?
Re:HDMI? (Score:5, Insightful)
IIRC, HDMI's signaling is basically a single DVI link, and isn't rated to push anything past 1920x1200. Pretty much anything higher requires a dual-link DVI connection, which involves more complex cabling and signal routing on the board.
DisplayPort is a much smaller connector and has an overall smaller PCB footprint, as well as using a thinner cable. I suspect that if Intel doesn't manage to run it by the wayside in a year's time with Lights Peak, you -might- see video cards with combination Mini DisplayPort + HDMI outputs.
Re:HDMI? (Score:4, Informative)
Don't the newer specs of HDMI exceed 1920x1200?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hdmi#Version_Comparison [wikipedia.org]
And according to the same article (maybe I should read more before posting) DP is actually royalty free whereas HDMI isn't...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hdmi#Relationship_with_DisplayPort [wikipedia.org]
Also (Score:2)
It seems to be cheaper to implement. DVI or HDMI ports need extra hardware over DP to output a signal it seems. For example ATi's upcoming 6 monitor Radeon is all DP, and their current 5870 has 2 DVI, 1 HDMI and 1 DP, but to do 3 monitors you have to use the DP, there are only 2 DVI/HDMI outputs.
All in all it seems DP is a little cheaper. Also while you are right, new HDMI exceeds 1920x1200, it didn't when DP was first rolled out. For that matter HDMI 1.3 gear is still a bit scarce these days.
Who knows how
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
There is also a dual-link version of HDMI with a different connector. With the double bandwith it is basically equivalent to quad-DVI. Again, nothing really uses it.
Re:HDMI? (Score:5, Informative)
HDMI's signaling is basically a single DVI link, and isn't rated to push anything past 1920x1200
And just to complete the thought: the Mini DiplayPort goes to 2560x1600 and goes up to 8.64 Gbits/second. That's about twice as fast as the HDMI 1.2.
HDMI 1.3 is actually comparable to Mini DisplayPort, with very similar specifications in terms of bandwidth.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect that if Intel doesn't manage to run it by the wayside in a year's time with Lights Peak, you -might- see video cards with combination Mini DisplayPort + HDMI outputs.
We're already seeing video cards with full-sized DisplayPort, plus HDMI, plus DVI, like the Radeon 5850 and 5870.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem with any modern connector is licensing. Every time you buy a cable, or a device with {XYZ connector}, some smug bastard gets paid for "inventing" that connector. It's rarely about "what is technically superior", usually it's "what's the cheapest standard we can shove down people's throats".
Licensing is why today's computers have umpteen slow inefficient USB ports, and zero or one Firewire ports. Apple fucked that one up by charging $20 or so per Firewire device for the longest time, they only
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Apple fucked that one up by charging $20 or so per Firewire device for the longest time
Actually, it was $1 per controller. With USB being pushed for replacing keyboards and mice, you couldn't build a computer without USB and expect it to sell, but you could build one without FireWire. If you'd wanted to build FireWire keyboards and mice, you'd have needed a controller (including the $1 license fee, plus the cost of the controller silicon) in each one, which would have made them much more expensive ($1 is a lot on a device that costs $1-2 to make).
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget Intel. Intel (who pushed USB) put it in their chipsets. So you couldn't build a PC motherboard with a genuine Intel chipset without getting USB. You'd have to go with someone else, who put USB in their chipsets to compete with Intel (and I think Intel may have given away the design for a reference controllers).
USB was free (except for connector and a few discrete parts). FireWire had the same costs, plus a little licensing, plus the controller.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd have to go with someone else, who put USB in their chipsets to compete with Intel
usually it was a companion chip "back in the day"
USB was free (except for connector and a few discrete parts). FireWire had the same costs, plus a little licensing,
It also did things that USB didn't, like provide guaranteed rate I/O, peer to peer connections, and for that matter the potential to not suck CPU. Today that's less relevant; when you have two or more cores a little USB abuse is no big deal, and today Firewire probably would die immediately.
plus the controller.
I used to have boards with USB chips, then it happened again when USB2 came out and the chipsets only had USB 1.1. That was definitely not the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
If by "many" you mean "the Macbook and Macbook Air", then yes. Everything else has Firewire 800, even the Mini.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I know Apple's laptops don't currently send audio over Mini-DP, but I thought the protocol/cable supported audio, even if Apple isn't using it.
Am I just wrong?
Re:HDMI? (Score:4, Informative)
Audio is an optional component in mini-DisplayPort.
I presume that supporting audio would be done in the display output controller, so within the graphical portion of the computer (integrated within the 9400M, or discrete GPU). Maybe NVIDIA products don't support audio over DP themselves, or more likely Apple hasn't done the drivers to copy audio to the GPU from the audio controller for output via DP?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:HDMI? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:HDMI? (Score:4, Informative)
...it supports audio over the connection (Mini-DP doesn't)...
Actually the DisplayPort (and now Mini DisplayPort) standard DOES support audio, it's simply that Apple's DisplayPort offerings are not taking advantage of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? I have an iMac connected to a 24" Cinema over Mini-DP and it does sound, is it some black magic from Apple that makes it work?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it's not magic, but it is USB - the Apple 24" display is actually a USB audio device as well with a 2.1 sound system in it (yes, 2 stereo speakers and a separate "sub")
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:HDMI? (Score:4, Informative)
What happened to HDMI?
It was made long before DisplayPort as a DVI replacement. HDMI requires royalties and licensing (DP does not). It is also using a CRT-like raster scan and needs a heartbeat, with sound being transmitted during "blanking" (DP transmits data packets and has an embedded clock). Finally, the hardware is more expensive to produce and more complex.
I'm sure someone knows more - this is what I remember reading some time ago...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Finally, the hardware is more expensive to produce and more complex.
Except that if you want backwards compatibility with DVI then you already have all of that hardware. If you want to be able to plug in a DP to DVI adaptor then you need all of that hardware plus all of the DisplayPort electronics.
It's a more modern standard, but historically more modern standards that aren't designed with legacy compatibility in mind have not done well. Maybe DisplayPort will get enough backing to buck that trend, but in the meantime expect a horrible mess of analogue VGA, HDMI/DVI, a
Re: (Score:2)
Is it even possible to buy a graphics card with VGA output these days? From what I can tell, it's pretty much double DVI, with the occasional HDMI/DP added. HDMI isn't very widespread on computers, so DP should have no problems replacing DVI, but when it comes to video equipment it's a different thing...
I'd say it's comparable to SATA. We still get motherboards with a PATA controller, but pretty much all HDDs and optical drives are SATA these days, including the power connectors. In 4-5 years, we shouldn't
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Do you mean a VGA port, or electrical VGA signalling support? If you mean the former, possibly not. If you mean the latter, then the answer is 'definitely yes'. I've only ever seen a couple of graphics cards that only support DVI-D and not DVI-I, which contains a VGA signal embedded in the DVI signal (and can be converted to a VGA signal with a trivial adaptor that just connects some of the DVI pins to VGA pins).
SATA was designed to be identical in software to IDE, so an OS with IDE support could run
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're seeing problems below 15', I'd consider the quality of your cables/output source rather than the HDMI standard.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
One other problem with HDMI is that although they have a nominal max cable length of 15 feet, you're lucky to get it to work if the cable is over five feet.
-jcr
No it doesn't. It has rules on signal performance and if you can manage that, it can be a mile long.
Re:HDMI? (Score:4, Informative)
it supports audio over the connection (Mini-DP doesn't),
Display port does support audio. I don't know if its actually implemented anywhere though. Are you sure mini-DP doesn't?
Is there something that Mini-DP does that HDMI doesn't?
At the electrical level they work quite differently and displayport is much more better suited for certain tasks like embedded applications, laptop screens, etc. Its like SATA vs PATA in some respects with displayport being SATA. It can use fewer wires.
Displayport is also license free, while HDMI requires a license. That, of course, makes displayport a bit cheaper.
Overall displayport is the superior technology in nearly every respect. But HDMI was out first and is the more established one. If displayport had been out of the gate first, hdmi wouldn't exist.
Re:HDMI? (Score:5, Informative)
HDMI is basically a single link DVI signal along with a digital audio stream. Both the audio and video gets their own pins and wires. But display port is a packet based system so audo, video and other signals can be multiplexed across the same set of wires. Display port 1.1 allows for eight 24 bit 192kHz digital audio channels. There can be 1, 2 or 4 digital lanes, similar to how PCI express works, more lanes = more bandwidth. The maximum bandwidth is over 8Gbps (3 meter cable limit)and there is also a 1mbps aux channel. A single display port cable can deliver a 2560x1600 60 Hz 30 bpp video signal. Dual link DVI port can do the same but it cant scale as well as display port will.
The HDMI connector is mechanically flimsy and can be easily damaged by the heavy shielded cables that hang from them of if yanked on. Display port is designed for those heavy cables and resists tugging and pulling that would otherwise damage an HDMI connector. Its also screw-less connector so no more fiddling with thumb screws.
Re:HDMI? (Score:4, Informative)
HDMI is basically a single link DVI signal along with a digital audio stream. Both the audio and video gets their own pins and wires. But display port is a packet based system so audo, video and other signals can be multiplexed across the same set of wires.
DVI, HDMI, and DP are all packet based systems. DVI and HDMI have three lanes (DVI-DL has six) and DP has four lanes. All of them send all data over all lanes. There is no specialization of the data channels.
Re: (Score:2)
Mini-DP is royalty free. HDMI is not.
Mini-DP is packetized and can be switched and, in principle, carry multiple streams over a single connection.
Re: (Score:2)
My problem with HDMI is the port design itself. I had a Tivo HD using an HDMI cable and I unplugged it maybe a dozen or so times in under a year.
One of the times I guess I wound up killing the Tivo's socket and couldn't fix it.
There are a lot of horror stories out there about that. Too tight of a cable or cable gets moved to the side a little while moving some equipment around and pretty soon your thing can become toast.
Personally I like the old DVI/VGA way of doing things. Usually the worst you can do i
HDMI doesn't work (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would they compare it with HDMI? They'd rather be misleading and say "The Mini DisplayPort is 10 percent the size of a full DVI connector" (emphasis mine), which, if the images on that page are actual size, is also wrong.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So the if you want to use this connector in your devices then you give Apple the right to infringe any patent that you might have? So by contributing this Apple is basically buying the right to any implementor's patents, correct?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, it 'can' be voided, but it is not necessarily voided.
Realistically, this won't stop any company with a serious case against Apple. Yes, Apple could use it as an excuse to pull the Display Port licence, but I can guarantee that the company would keep using it and that it would just get added to the lawsuit. And then if Apple loses they have to pay for the original infraction as well as a bunch of extra damages for trying to be dicks about the Display Port licence plus potentially losing control of the
Re: (Score:2)
True patent trolls don't manufature anything anyway so why would they care if they lose the license to potentially make Mini DisplayPort-compliant stuff?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
it's like open source, if you want a lot of code that has been tested to work then you have to give something back as well
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nope. DisplayPort supports both HDCP and the stronger AES based DPCP.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Meh (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Um... DVI came out first. Thus, nothing was forfeited as HDMI is the newer, fixed design.
Re:I hope it catches on (Score:5, Funny)
DVI connectors are clunky and have that 18th century finger destroying screw-on mechanism. Anything with screws on computers should be abolished for good.
Typical response from you so-called "computer user" kids these days. Back in my day, everything had screws! From the case to the cards to the plugs and sometimes the boxes everything came in! And our fingers were perfectly good enough for the job! Even the ones that weren't thumbscrews! Any one of the old-timers could grind your mabmly-pambly little soft, precious, pampered thumbs to dust, bones and all, with nothing but our bare fingers, and we wouldn't even flinch!
Now get off my lawn! Durn whippersnappers...
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to see you try to get a Microchannel card out of a system without a screwdriver. :)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I know of a support call where the customer tried to install a Microchannel card without a screwdriver or even removing the PS/2 cover. They tried to shove it in through the back where the bracket blank was. I guess they somehow thought it was like a Cardbus device. That took a while to resolve because initially the customer simply said "your card does not fit".
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
So then don't use the screws. Some of us like having a more secure connection.
All of this nonsense whining "just get a converter" ignores the simple fact that DVI was already a "modern" connector that can support an "archaic" VGA monitor with some sort of simple adaptor. Besides pandering to the fad-fixated, this new connector doesn't really deliver any real benefit to the vast majority of people that will be inconvenienced by the transition.
A well made monitor can last for several generations of PC. Excess
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I hope it catches on (Score:4, Insightful)
Agree fully. I still drop my jaw everytime I see a laptop from the past 3-4 years still sporting a friggin' VGA connector, or even worse, from some "PC" manufacturers, a parallel port.
Sadly, there will always be that crowd of conservative oddballs and anal retentives, barking like old dogs refusing to learn how to sit, for keeping old standards, trying to justify it by reasons of pointless, smelly compatibility that is long past its expiry date.....and everyone knows they are the ones who contribute to nothing but stagnation, not the ones who help driving the world forward.
Yeah, just like people using serial ports to program Cisco gear or people in EE using serial ports to program microcontrollers by plugging the RX and TX pins directly to a serial port. And what about those people presenting their research at conferences around the world wanting to use a display connector that's supported on every single projector around the world in all convention centres instead of carrying a suitcase of adapters. We all know those aren't the people who help drive the world forwards, right?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, just like people using serial ports to program Cisco gear or people in EE using serial ports to program microcontrollers by plugging the RX and TX pins directly to a serial port.
Specialists will always need specialist equipment. The vast majority of us don't.
And what about those people presenting their research at conferences around the world wanting to use a display connector that's supported on every single projector around the world in all convention centres instead of carrying a suitcase of adapters.
As one of those people, I can confirm that we normally carry our presentations (ppt or pdf) on a USB stick instead. Much easire than fiddling around with display connections between each talk. Most conferences don't allow you to use your own computer.
Re: (Score:2)
The parallel port, though, is easier to program for if you just need relatively low-frequency IO. As in some data logging applications and of course, prototyping. There are C headers that will let you interface *directly* with the parallel port, and all you need on the hardware end are a couple opto-isolators for safety. No need for any kind of special UART or host controller.
Re: (Score:2)
The parallel port, though, is easier to program for if you just need relatively low-frequency IO. As in some data logging applications and of course, prototyping. There are C headers that will let you interface *directly* with the parallel port, and all you need on the hardware end are a couple opto-isolators for safety. No need for any kind of special UART or host controller.
Is it too hard to program for USB, instead? I am sure there must be a lot of ready-made libraries in most major languages...
Just wondering... I don't code myself, but it seems that in this day and age, it would be wiser to use a port that is available in almost every single computer in the world
Re: (Score:2)
There are C headers that will let you interface *directly* with the parallel port, and all you need on the hardware end are a couple opto-isolators for safety.
For $6ish, you can get a USB to TTL Serial [parallax.com] chip, or a USB to LPT [parallax.com] chip, and use those exact same C headers to program for, as the devices use the USB standard for serial and parallel interfaces and drivers.
Makes it really nice so your parallel port device only has a single 4 wire cable between it and the PC, with the 8-16 IO pins wired up in the same enclosure/protoboard the rest of your project is on!
Serial latency (Score:2, Interesting)
IIRC, serial ports offer lower latency than USB, and certain real-time guarantees. So, for example, you use a GPS unit with a serial port connection to deliver a pulse-per-second output to your computer, which ntpd can then use to calibrate your clock pretty accurately. It works much worse with USB.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I hope it catches on (Score:5, Insightful)
The idea is that the new standard goes on the laptop, and from that nicely small connector, you can adapt to any standard, including new ones with much higher capacity.
Want a VGA adapter? Done. Want ah DVI adapter? Done. Each $30 at the Apple Store, and soon probably cheaper elsewhere. Other adapters possible. More capacity in the standard, for other folks who want to hook up to something else. Small connection to help keep your laptop small.
The only reason you actually need an ungainly VGA connector on your laptop is if you either refuse to pay $30 for an adapter, or you expect that you might lose the adapter yet still have your laptop for that super-important presentation.
Re: (Score:2)
The only reason you actually need an ungainly VGA connector on your laptop is if you either refuse to pay $30 for an adapter, or you expect that you might lose the adapter yet still have your laptop for that super-important presentation.
(bold added)
Don't you ever do anything for convenience?
Re:I hope it catches on (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure. The 95% of the time that I carry my laptop for my own use only, I have a slimmer machine that I throw in my backpack. That's convenient.
When I might make a presentation, I can throw in a small cable and I have full-sized VGA. Another small cable gives me full-sized DVI. Other cables will come that provide other standards/sizes.
When I'm going to a conference where I will make a presentation, I'll have my big laptop bag with all of those connectors, and I'll have a USB stick with my presentations on it, and a DVD, too, burned in PDF as a lowest-common-denominator.
Lugging around a laptop with a VGA (which size) port and also a DVI (which size) port on it all the time is inconvenient.
Re: (Score:2)
Notebooks that have other legacy ports are only annoying because I know they wasted real estate where I'd rather have more USB ports or just a smaller/cheaper computer. VGA on the other hand is actually a deficit. You generally only get one monitor output, and if your only output is VGA your stuck in the analog world. Many high quality displays show a marked degradation in text rendering and color, many cheap LCDs suck at syncing with VGA sources and many newer televisions don't have VGA (or compatible R
Re:I hope it catches on (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess you have never used jtag.
It's very easy to create a simple device to reflash firmware via a parallel port.
For example adding the codes to your hardware to a one for all universal remote.
Or recovering from a failed flash of some firmware.
It can be quite difficult to recreate a fully working parallel port via usb.
Another fun thing is to use the data lines for I/o controlling what ever you want.
I don't expect many people to appreciate the uses of the parallel and serial ports but on slashdot ? ...
Re: (Score:2)
What's wrong with having a VGA output? Many older projectors and monitors, which are still perfectly functional and don't need to be replaced, use VGA. Why force people to buy a new monitor and a new projector just because they got a new laptop/PC?
Old technology takes a long time to become obsolete because most people don't want to replace their computer, monitor, projector, cd player, dvd player, vcr, or what have you, every two years. And most people don't have that kind of money, either.
Re:I hope it catches on (Score:5, Informative)
What's wrong with having a VGA output? Many older projectors and monitors, which are still perfectly functional and don't need to be replaced, use VGA. Why force people to buy a new monitor and a new projector just because they got a new laptop/PC?
Let me introduce you to a new concept - an adapter cable [amazon.com]. They cost 20 or 30 bucks at most, and are available for older display technologies and with either male or female style vga/dvi/whatever connectors.
Re: (Score:2)
Says the "93 Escort Wagon." ;)
Joking aside, I know you can get adapter cables. but they are a little annoying to use and annoying to carry around. My monitor takes VGA and DVI. I'm glad it takes both, because my two year old Dell laptop doesn't have DVI out, it only has VGA. My desktop video card, which is newer, only has DVI.
It's not really that big of a deal... but VGA has been working for a while and there are a lot of older VGA monitors still in use that are perfectly fine. Phasing out VGA already
Re: (Score:2)
Says the "93 Escort Wagon." ;)
You're confusing "outdated" with "classic".
(Okay, even I don't buy that one...)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Adapter (Score:3, Informative)
If only it were as simple as getting one adapter cable. John Graham-Cumming explains the situation -- with the recent proliferation of standards, you need a bundle [jgc.org] of adapters to handle all the combinations.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Let me give you a history lesson. For a while there, Apple used to provide industry-standard display ports on their computers. They even included DVI to VGA adapters for people with "older" technologies. Then they started slapping this new port on their laptops. So now I can no longer plug a monitor directly into the computer. I have to attach an adapter to it. An adapter I have to carry around and keep track of. And I have to buy separate VGA and DVI adapters because apple's DVI adapter is digital-o
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You know, one of the best mice I own was hooked up to a parallel port. When that went away I had to get a parallel to serial port adapter. Then that became uncommon, and I had to get a serial port to DIN adapter. Then a DIN to PS/2 connector. Then a PS/2 to USB connector.
Granted, I have hook it up to four adapters, but gosh darn it, I'm too stubborn to buy one of those newfangled mice.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. Enough with this new fangled laser-guided female mice... I want mice with BALLS.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not a big fan of them dropping the DVI-I port, but it's not a $60 change:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428 [monoprice.com]
Re: (Score:2)
That's only for the single-link port. The GPU in newer Macs can send VGA or DVI-D signals over the DisplayPort socket's pins if you have an adaptor plugged in. If you bought a 30" Apple Cinema Display then you need dual-link DVI to drive it. Unfortunately there are not enough pins in the DisplayPort for this so you need an external device with a frame buffer that takes the DP signal, renders it to the frame buffer, and then generates a dual-link DVI output from it. This is expensive and unreliable, and
Re:I hope it catches on (Score:5, Insightful)
Why force people to buy a new monitor and a new projector just because they got a new laptop/PC?
What? There's no need to buy a new monitor or projector. DVI/DisplayPort will drive a VGA device without any problems at all. But the reverse is not true. It really is bizarre that they still make laptops with just VGA output, when the digital alternatives offer VGA and more, with smaller connectors.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What? There's no need to buy a new monitor or projector. DVI/DisplayPort will drive a VGA device without any problems at all. But the reverse is not true. It really is bizarre that they still make laptops with just VGA output, when the digital alternatives offer VGA and more, with smaller connectors.
This is only true for DVI-I (Integrated) ports. DVI-D (Digital) doesn't have the VGA (analog) output. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface [wikipedia.org] for details
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
HDMI is adaptable only to DVI-D, and more and more laptops are coming with HDMI out...
Re: (Score:2)
The most annoying thing about DVI-I is that the majority of the DVI cables that you'll find in your IT room (those which ship with LCD panels) do not have pins or wires for the analog portion -- they are DVI-D cables. Drove me bat shit insane once tracking down why a daisy-chain of DVI-VGA adapters, VGA-only KVMs, VGA-DVI adpaters and LCD monitors did not work, even though everything was physically hooked up.
IMHO, it's criminal to have cables that physically fit a connector, but do not support all of the co
Re: (Score:2)
What's wrong with having a VGA output?
Simple. It's crap.
Try comparing a VGA signal to a DVI/DisplayPort one some time. The VGA version will be fuzzy and the colours will look a bit wonky compared to the DVI version.
As has been pointed out, if you've got an old monitor that doesn't do digital inputs then just use an adapter.
Re: (Score:2)
VGA is nowhere near "dead technology" for business projectors.
Checking Amazon, only some units have HDMI, and that only might accessible in a random conference room (and would require a mini-DP dongle anyway).
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
USB to serial is just too painful in the long run. I had to deal with it for 3 years, but this laptop has a built-in serial port. Never again a laptop without it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The adapters are fine, software-wise, if you use Linux or another OS with a generic USB-to-serial driver. They're a bit hit-and-miss in Windows, but you probably don't care about that anyway.
It's just not reasonable to carry around a USB-to-serial plus serial-to-RJ45 for the various vendors. Why can't they agree on a serial-over-RJ45 standard anyway? But that's a different rant. Anyway, always having to juggle two cables is too inconvenient and time-wasting. I'm definitely not getting rid of a real serial p
Re: (Score:2)
I still drop my jaw everytime I see a laptop from the past 3-4 years still sporting a friggin' VGA connector, or even worse, from some "PC" manufacturers, a parallel port.
Sure, VGA is supplanted by DVI-I. Just use an adaptor if you need VGA. What has replaced the parallel port? If you want to easily connect a console controller to your computer, or build an eeprom programmer, or do any number of other electronics projects you're going to want a parallel port.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I am running one of those rare examples you list, I'm sure I can install a PCI parallel port card.
Can you recommend a manufacturer of parallel port and serial port cards in PCIe and ExpressCard formats?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Since I have not needed one, I have not shopped.
However, 30 seconds of Google and I found 2 serial and 1 parallel in a single PCIe card: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001TH78QC [amazon.com]
Amazon also has them in ExpressCard formats. Need me to do any other shopping for you? :)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually I'd use a USB attached one, personally. I have a few and they're quite handy.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I'd use a USB attached one, personally. I have a few and they're quite handy.
They also tend to be flaky at best (if they work at all) when treated as a bit-banging interface. The parallel port and floppy bus continue to be with us (yea, even unto my brand spanking new Socket AM3 GA-MA770T-UD3P) because they have purposes long abused by geeks everywhere to do all kinds of things for which they are necessary to continue to make fancy PCs a drop-in replacement for industrial control applications. If, back in the day, you interfaced to the PC via the parallel port or the floppy bus (yes
Re: (Score:2)
I lost my parallel ports on my new board [flickr.com], a cousin of yours, but I don't use it for anything but printing at home.
For industrial control applications I used and sold quite a few of the Lava PCI parallel cards of the last ten years. You're right that many of the USB parallel interfaces are flaky at times. Its too bad nobody's made a nice solid one, perhaps for the IEEE1394 interface if USB doesn't have solid enough timings.
Re: (Score:2)
Volume, perhaps? Mini-DVI is shorter than full-size DVI.