Get ready for hot, hot convergence kids 'cause the
DisplayPort 1.1 specification was just approved. The new VESA-approved digital interface standard is meant to replace DVI and VGA ports while co-existing with HDMI for HDTV connectivity. As you can see in the picture above, it's about the size of a USB connector yet offers 2x the performance of DVI in a much smaller package. They also bake in a nasty dollop of HDCP 1.3 content protection to keep the Blu-ray and HD DVD kiddies happy. The wee size allows the interface to be included in smaller handheld electronics while enabling direct-drive LCD panels thereby eliminating the need for non-panel LVDS electronics in the monitor designs. Of course it also supports pass-through of DVI and HDMI signals via simple adapters similar to DVI-to-HDMI variety on the market today. So which of our esteemed manufactures will bite first? We're not sure, but VESA isn't shy about using
Dell's high-end XPS systems in their marketing collateral. Of course, the question they don't answer is, why not just move everything to HDMI? For that, you just have to look at who backs royalty-free DisplayPort (the PC industry) and who backs HDMI (the consumer electronics industry). Yeah, we know.
posted April 4th 2007 3:21AM
For the 1st several years monitors will still have to offer DVI to ensure backwards compatiblity just many today still have VGA.
DVI doesn't carry audio signals...
Yes, the DisplayPort plug does have a lock to prevent it from falling out. Look closely. See the clip on the top with the two little rivets? You press down on that in order to pull the cable out. If you look at the front of the plug, you can see two little slits on either side where the lock probably is.
I'm glad the days of screwing in the cable are over.
-Haxxy
Screwing in the old cables was annoying... but a push button lock won't make it much less annoying.
As things get smaller and smaller form factors I have noticed I am having issues getting my fingers to the connectors....
now on home builts with a DisplayPort compatable add on card it won't be much of an issue...
But on a pre-built from say Dell, HP, or whomever... if you have a DisplayPort it might be sandwiched in behind a USB port... so the only way to disconnect the cable would be to remove the USB cables etc to press the button. I have seen this type of issue before with network cables... they have a latch mechanism too... maybe it's not a high-tech fancy push button thing... but really just a flap of plastic on the end... but it's the same concept and will suffer from similar flaws (except for the plastic flap breaking off or getting caught on other cables ;-p )
I think I do know what resolution independence is, Lloyd. It's a technology that Apple doesn't have, that they are planning to have, that would enable them to shift away from shipping displays that provide 100dpi only. It doesn't matter how it's implemented, it only matters that it works and works well.
Unlike Apple, other OSes have, for some time, provided mechanisms that allow users to increase or decrease the size of fonts and graphical elements. None of these systems are perfect, far from it, but they are all better than what Apple provides today. Apple is in last place.
BTW, resolution independence doesn't have to be used to keep display elements the same size regardless of screen resolution. Apple may implement it that way but if they do they are idiots. Element size is just as much a function of viewing distance as it is screen resolution and we don't all view from the same distance. I don't want the same size icons on my notebook, handheld, desktop, and television. I want to control the size in which things are displayed. Sadly, Apple has shown no inclination to allow that.
ADC was nothing of the sort. ADC was an Apple proprietary connector that combined multiple functions into one cable. No one bought it because it was not for sale...except to Apple customers. Apple abandoned it because it was a pain in the ass for interoperability and wasn't worth the cost.
Well of course you (mostly) get it now - I just explained it to you dip$hit. To further illeviate your previous ignorance, 72dpi was the long adopted industry standard - not 100dpi. You still don't appreciate that resolution independence is more than the ability to change font sizes. If you think that you can't change font sizes in OS X then there's something else you don't know. Certainly Windows does not support a resizeable interface, I can't comment for "other OSes" but since you didn't mention any particular ones I'm guessing that neither can you...
On the other hand Apple have been actively working towards res-independence harder than anyone else. Tiger DOES support some resolution independant GUI elements and Apple has stated many times that Leopard will be fully resolution independant - how exactly then is " Apple is in last place" - did you mean pole position, because that's closer to the case?
I never said that resolution independence's only application was to keep things the same size, that's why it's called an 'example'. Apple has shown no inclination to allow a resizable UI? How about the slider in Tiger: http://www.interact-sw.co.uk/images/NormalWindow.png ?
oh, meaningless and unnecessary name-calling on the internet. Where would we be without you?
On topic (not directed at Lloyd, but the conversation in general), I honestly don't understand why everyone is shitting bricks cuz of a new standard. So what, it's a new standard that's more technically capable. Oh no, the bogeyman's trying to shove DisplayPort down our throats!!
The piracy rants by Andrew and the other guy were right on point, but unfortunately, major SW and HW and consumer electronics companies are most likely never going to think that way. Hell, if you or I made millions of dollars a year on this stuff, we'd probably not think that way either.
Also, someone complained about tech being changed and incompatible and having to buy new stuff and blah blah blah. Well, I don't know what rock that person has been living under, but it's ALWAYS been like that in the world of technology. Seriously. Always. Companies (and governments, when involved) usually take reasonable steps to ease transition such as backwards compatibility, selling both old and new standards at the same time, etc etc, (mostly because they have to, actually).
So again, what's the big deal?
Keep talking, Lloyd. It further cements your image as a fool.
"72dpi was the long adopted industry standard"
sure, in the 70s. I realize that Apple is behind the times but they made the jump to 100dpi a while ago.
"You still don't appreciate that resolution independence is more than the ability to change font sizes."
I don't? Where did I ever equate the two? I'm not the dumb one here.
"If you think that you can't change font sizes in OS X then there's something else you don't know."
Please show me where I can set system-wide font sizes in OS X then. Not that font size is all that matters, but OS X offers no screen scaling capability whatsoever.
"Certainly Windows does not support a resizeable interface..."
You clearly know nothing about Windows. Windows allows users to set screen dpi and allows control over a large number of graphical element and text sizes. It offers a number of presets that include 3 different size standards. You are way off here.
"I can't comment for "other OSes" but since you didn't mention any particular ones I'm guessing that neither can you..."
For someone who knows nothing you sure think you know a lot about me. Any OS that runs X would be an example. Those would include a number of BSDs, Linux, Solaris, etc. All these systems have screen scaling flexibility. If you are intentionally ignorant maybe you should keep your mouth shut.
"On the other hand Apple have been actively working towards res-independence harder than anyone else."
How do you know this, Lloyd? Are you privy to the development efforts of all OS suppliers including all those you admit you don't know?
"Tiger DOES support some resolution independant GUI elements..."
Show me how I can control them then. I'm typing this message using Tiger. Tell me exactly where to go to access this scaling capability.
"how exactly then is " Apple is in last place""
Leopard isn't shipping and Apple is not providing any of these promised capabilities to anyone yet. If and when they do, they may be in "pole position". Right now they are in last place. Apple provides its users ABSOLUTELY NO screen scaling capability today. Everyone else does better than that.
"I never said that resolution independence's only application..."
Yes you did. You said "Resolution independence involves a vector based GUI that will (as far as the user's concerned) remain the same size accross all monitors regardless of their pixel density...". Sorry, but you are wrong.
..."that's why it's called an 'example'."
Go ahead and quote the word 'example' even though you didn't say it was an example. What you said was perfectly clear.
"Apple has shown no inclination to allow a resizable UI? How about the slider in Tiger..."
That's not a control in Tiger, it's a control in a 3rd party app that I'm not familiar with and there is no evidence from that image that affects Aqua at all. Curiously, it's served from a site that offers Windows consultation. Show me exactly where in Tiger that I can access a control like this or we can all file this ignorant comment as another ranting from a hopeless fanboy.
Who knows what will come of this.
Leopard is bringing full resolution independence.
"How do you know this, Lloyd?"
Well there's: http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2168 - oh and even last year Apple were giving seminars educating developers how to make their apps Res-independent and Leopard ready... Why you incorrectly said this was not the case is the real question...
"Leopard isn't shipping and Apple is not providing any of these promised capabilities to anyone yet. If and when they do, they may be in "pole position". Right now they are in last place. Apple provides its users ABSOLUTELY NO screen scaling capability today. Everyone else does better than that."
Ever heard of zoom? For screen scaling (which Windows DOES NOT offer) read on...
"Show me how I can control them then. I'm typing this message using Tiger. Tell me exactly where to go to access this scaling capability."
Actually the ability ships with Tiger. That you're not aware of it means next to nothing. Open 'Quartz Debug'. Tools -> Show User Interface Resolution. Drag the slider. That's more than Windows offers... still think last place?
"Any OS that runs X would be an example. Those would include a number of BSDs, Linux, Solaris, etc. All these systems have screen scaling flexibility."
Since when did being based on Unix have anything to do with resolution independence? No, we're not talking about zooming (after all, that has no effect on the bandwidth required for the monitor cable).
"Leopard is bringing full resolution independence."
Then when Leopard becomes a product perhaps Apple will be offering that capability. They don't today.
"Why you incorrectly said this was not the case is the real question..."
I don't dispute that Apple claims they will offer this feature. You said that Apple was working harder on it than anyone else. I quote: "On the other hand Apple have been actively working towards res-independence harder than anyone else." Your link in no way supports this claim. You have no idea what others are doing in this area, you're just a bragging fanboy.
"Ever heard of zoom? For screen scaling (which Windows DOES NOT offer) read on..."
Zoom is in no way a form of resolution independence. It is under "Universal Access" and is for people with vision difficulties. Your arguments are becoming pathetic.
"Open 'Quartz Debug'. Tools -> Show User Interface Resolution. Drag the slider. "
"Quartz debug" is not a part of Tiger.
"That's more than Windows offers... still think last place?"
No it's not since it's not part of OS X. So far, yes, still last place.
"Since when did being based on Unix have anything to do with resolution independence?"
Never said it did, but since you challenged me to name another OS that's what I did. It is the X Window System that's involved and that runs on unix-like systems.
"No, we're not talking about zooming (after all, that has no effect on the bandwidth required for the monitor cable)."
What? Are you really this stupid or are you just pretending?
"that has no effect on the bandwidth required for the monitor cable"
It seems like a distant memory but I think we were supposed to be talking about DisplayPort...
"On the other hand Apple have been actively working towards res-independence harder than anyone else."
Still stand by this. As I said, Apple have been trying to make their OS resolution independent for a number of years now, they've been giving seminars to developers on how to get their apps ready and they've declared that their 2007 OS will fuly support it as a key feature. MS has shown their minimal efforts and they are extremely rudimentary in comparisson.
"Ever heard of zoom? For screen scaling (which Windows DOES NOT offer) read on..."
I said that Zoom was not resolution independece - hence 'For screen scaling... read on' is a new sentence. You are right, Zoom is for people with impaired eyesight, just like the enhanced themes in XP.
"Quartz debug" is not a part of Tiger."
It ships with every copy of Tiger as do the underlying technologies to use it. It's a semi-baked version of what Leopard will offer. I said from the start that Tiger had SOME res-independence.
Apple will not be the 1st adopter, it will be Dell for sure. DP (Display Port) supports audio, yes. HDMI over DP will exist, so will the adapters. It has a positive lock, with a simple release. It will support up to 25x16 resolutions easily, even more. It competes heavily with HDMI 1.3 on features, including the expanded color depths and enhanced audio 7.1. With DP you don't have to pay Silicon Image royalties anymore, but you will have a license issue with Molex to worry about. All OEMS including Apple, HP and Dell will adopt the standard. Nvidia and AMD/ATI will be providing solutions, starting later this year and mostly into 08. It being a packet based protocol interface similar to pci-express its way more tollerent of signal loss and cable degradation than HDMI/DVI is. DP uses HDCP 1.3 (not to be confused with HDMI 1.3), and will honor those statues for copy protection. It has the ability to get acceptance in the consumer electronic market, they will be slow adopters. VESA camp knows, the only way to succeed in the standard war is to provide interoperability to HDMI, they know this, it's written into the spec.
This interface standard has all the makings to success, lets see what the market does. Watch as the mobile camp jump over this with verocity unseen before, with the connector size much smaller than DVI, they love it. Not having to pay silicon image any $$ is huge, so long as molex guys to screw it up.
YES, for sure there will me lots of consumer market confusion around this, with HDMI 1.3 making traction it's going to be a display battle. Again, there only winning strategy is the interoperability with there competing standard.
DisplayPort offers more and better features than HDMI and is backward compatible to HDMI. Read Dave123 comments as he is stating the facts. It appears to be a no-brainer... DisplayPort should be adopted. The quicker the better.
So they didn't use HDMI because they would have to pay royalties on it... Well I hope someone is making a DP->HDMI convertor cuz I've had enough of this cable madness. DP1.1 cables better not cost more than $1 since they are saving so much money by skimming off the backside.