[benroethig]

Stephen123 said:

The phrase "mini displayport" does not occur on the site vesa.org.

Since the pins are the same, I think that when Apple says it is a standard, they mean electrically.

Since the Dual DVI adaptor needs USB plus Mini DisplayPort to drive it, Apple is not driving all the pins on the MiniDisplayPort.

There isn't an adapter out there to connect regular DisplayPort to dual link DVI, so I don't think we say what limitations mini-DP has save the connector.

[benroethig]

hillstones said:

This better not be another failed ADC connector. I had to spend an additional $99 for a gigantic box with a slew of breakout cables in order to use a Cinema Display with a PowerBook G4 with DVI.

So if this new port fails, then I am sure you will have to use another box with breakout cables to revert back to DVI. At least the difference is the DisplayPort is an industry standard, if the industry decides to use it.

The keyword here is if the industry decides to use it. If Apple is the only company using mini-DP, it really doesn't matter if its an open standard or not. I'm also more than slightly concerned that HDMI may become the PC standard instead of DisplayPort.

[NeoX]

I too have read up on the DP and MDP and there is no mention of a MDP in the spec. According to this wiki page, Apple is the manufacturer of the MDP:


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini_DisplayPort

Pretty clear to me that although it is in "spec" the connector itself is Apple Proprietary. Although perhaps Apple has released it to the standards committee for adoption...

[natmusak]

adin said:

Take a quick look at the actual standards documents, there are three -- one that details the displayport protocol, on that states all the requirements for a Displayport connector, and one that states the requirements for a "dual mode" HDMI or DVI connector/pigtail (requires separate controllers in the sink and/or the source).

There (as far as I can find) is no mention of a mini-DisplayPort connector in the connector requirements document. It goes into detail on the size, environmental specs, etc. No mini-DisplayPort. So maybe Apple is talking about a version of the connector that will exist in future revisions, but as the standards are available today, no mini connector.

And if I've missed it somewhere, please shoot me a citation in the standard -- I'd love to be wrong!

-a

I never said I knew whether Apple was telling the truth about Mini DisplayPort being an industry standard. People were asking Peter Cohen for proof and when he said he'd had verbal confirmation from an Apple PR person, they questioned the validity of his source. All I'm providing is written, public proof of Apple's claims. ;)

I must say though, this seems like a USB vs. mini-USB issue. Mini DisplayPort makes a lot more sense on laptops due to its smaller size and laptops are the future replacements of desktops, which I believe and which Apple pretty clearly asserts:

Quote

> {quote:title=Apple said:}{quote}
> The new 24-inch Apple LED Cinema Display transforms your MacBook into a desktop computer in seconds.

http://www.apple.com...k/graphics.html

Stephen123 said:

...raises the question of why there is not a Mini DisplayPort to DisplayPort adaptor in the initial announcement.

Well, there are only a few DisplayPort monitors on the market and Apple only sells one of them. If they provided a mini-DSP to full-DSP adaptor, people could (and would) skip Apple's own display before it even ships in November for one of Dell's or HP's. It could be assumed that Apple wants to own the DisplayPort monitor market.

[benroethig]

At $900 I would assume a lot would skip it anyway. They won't be locked into Apple, they will just buy a DVI display.

[John__B]

I disagree that the mini-DisplayPort connectors are part of the current standard. If it were it would be in the doco, and it isn't as of today (Oct.19, 2008).
For my blackbook I have the mini-DVI to DVI-D dongle which only Apple and the BestBuy store brand (Dynex?) make. The dongle is quite large on the DVI connector side, the weight of it and the angle of the stiff cord will occasionally pull the mini-DVI plug out from the side of my MacBook. (No doubt this is probably part of why Apple is moving away from DVI, the connectors are too large.) What would have been ideal is if someone -- anyone -- would make a mini-DVI plug for a MacBook on one end of an actual cable and a regular DVI-D connector for a monitor on the other end, vs. a dongle that is too short for pretty much any single application. I'd guess owners of the original MBA would have a similar problem with the Micro-DVI socket. I made a few inquries which confirmed that nobody is going to make a highly specialized cable with a mini-DVI (or micro-DVI) connector that requires royalty payments to Apple.

So why is this important to the mini-DisplayPort discussion? Because until anyone can manufacture and sell an inexpensive cable with a mini-DisplayPort connector on one side and a DisplayPort/DVI-D/HDMI (pick one) connector on the other side -- and I'm thinking monoprice.com here -- then it might as well be a proprietary connector.

Aesthetics matter, to some of us at least.

OBTW, I'm getting ahead of myself here, but does anyone else think the new 24" display cries out for some sort of mini-DisplayPort based KVM switch?

John

[natmusak]

benroethig said:

At $900 I would assume a lot would skip it anyway. They won't be locked into Apple, they will just buy a DVI display.

Right, people aren't "locked into Apple" any more than early adopters of Dell's lone DisplayPort monitor were "locked into" either Dell or the first company to produce a DisplayPort-compatible video card.

[Stephen123]

According to this:
http://www.displaypo...operability.htm
Dual Link DVI to DisplayPort is part of the standard. So the need for the USB port to do this from a MiniDP suggests not all the pins are being driven.

[mauticom]

Hi Peter,
nice article, but you missed that display port can/does also transfer the audio signal together with the video stream, which frees up your audio out port.
I guess also the new Cinema display makes use of this, 'cos the pictures doesn't show any audio connection, altough the screen does have speakers now.
Bye,
Mauti

[chewygoat]

But wait - my MacBook has a mini-DVI port and it is small and doesn't have thumb screws. You just push in the cable and it clicks into place and pull to remove it. It works well. So how much smaller is mini-DisplayPort compared to mini-DVI? Seems kind of silly to compare it to a full-size DVI port.

[icerabbit]

I had the same thought. Marketing speak to wow the switcher crowd. When when in fact they have been using smaller than standard connectors (the mini versions, for which tons of people have bought adapters they now can't carry over) for years.
We'll probably see somebody compare the size of various connectors shortly. But, like I read in one article / some of the documentation the circuitry behind DP also allows space & cost savings, so it is not just a matter of the size of the connector.

Personally, I am not over obsessed with thin & light like Apple is. I value function over form.

I'll take the extra fraction of an inch & pound ;)

[olivier972]

No, I really mean, is it possible to hook up a MacBook to an Analog TV to use the analog TV as a display.
There are millions of analog TV out there and I sometimes use one to watch movies.

So again, my question, can you hook up a MacBook to an analog TV using DisplayPort and some adapter ?



Regards

[RichardBronosky]

I'd like to know if DisplayPort includes error correction. One misconception that people have about DVI & HDMI is that it is less susceptible to interference because it is digital. They get this idea from the way packets damaged by interference on an Ethernet cable get retransmitted. There is no such mechanism in DVI or HDMI. Digital transfer has benefits over analog in regards to interference, but they are not due to error correction. (The Wikipedia article lacks the word "correction", but I haven't had time to research further.)

[radellaf]

Well, so far this sounds like more of the same. I had a G4 iBook, and it needed proprietary adapters to connect to VGA. My MacBook needs a different proprietary adapter to go to VGA, but now I can also buy a 2nd adapter and hook up to DVI. The miniDisplayPort just means that once again, if I buy a new mac, I have to buy a fresh round of adapters just like I did for this one. Except, I can now get dual-link DVI for $100, whereas on this machine I can't get that at all.

It is annoying that there's this "hidden fee" of $30 (x2 perhaps) just to be able to use your Apple laptop with an external display, when I see my Wintel friends able to directly plug in either VGA or DVI cables. For mini-DVI it almost seems worth it, since, if I remember the adapters, my computer can hook up to either standard.

Of course, they all also get a card slot and 3-4 extra USB ports whereas Apple thinks a smooth exterior is worth not being able to hook up to $%#$. And, to some degree, I agree. My Macbook does look good.

If I got a MBP today, though, I'd not only have two display adapters hanging around in my laptop bag, but now a FW800->FW400 dongus. My new phone has two new dongles, one to plug in 2.5" headsets, another for 3.5". I'm beginning to think the quest for a little bit tinier size devices is getting a bit ridiculous in its consequences. These things are easy to lose and probably hard to find (maybe).