PDA

View Full Version : A smart decision for Apple w/ their new displays...


spaceballl
Mar 18, 2004, 01:55 AM
would be to drop ADC. Moving to DVI would make their displays more readily available to PC users. Also, Apple is trying to be all open source and standards based these days and this would be a good step in the right direction. Plus, putting the power and video signals on the same cable is kinda silly..
-Kevin

Bigheadache
Mar 18, 2004, 02:08 AM
would be to drop ADC. Moving to DVI would make their displays more readily available to PC users. Also, Apple is trying to be all open source and standards based these days and this would be a good step in the right direction. Plus, putting the power and video signals on the same cable is kinda silly..
-Kevin

Actually one cable makes things neat. I agree they should drop ADC and pick up DVI but I can't see a commercial reason why they would want to. I can't imagine displays being a core product for them so making them work with PCs to sell more is not really a big "must-do" item for Apple, especially when PC users can shop around and get better screens than the Apple ones, and at a lower price.

spaceballl
Mar 18, 2004, 03:42 AM
People CAN get bette displays for lower prices, but apple has a weird phenomenon surrounding their products right now. They are so "cool." That being said, most people won't dessert the PCs that they know... but a nice aluminum apple LCD might fit the bill just right...
-Kevin

johnnyjibbs
Mar 18, 2004, 04:49 AM
Why can't they stick the ADC connector, plus a separate DVI one on the back so you can choose?

EDIT: Oh yeah, because then I wouldn't have to shell out 99 ($200) on the ADC to DVI adaptor for my PowerBook :rolleyes: (unfortunately this is what deters me from getting an Apple display)

stoid
Mar 18, 2004, 05:07 AM
<snip>(unfortunately this is what deters me from getting an Apple display)

BINGO!! That's my problem too. Kinda defeats the whole education pricing thing.


Interesting that the built-in spell checker doesn't object to the word 'kinda' yet it is obviously NOT a word

titaniumducky
Mar 18, 2004, 09:31 AM
would be to drop ADC. Moving to DVI would make their displays more readily available to PC users. Also, Apple is trying to be all open source and standards based these days and this would be a good step in the right direction. Plus, putting the power and video signals on the same cable is kinda silly..
-Kevin

You do know that ADC is just DVI+USB+Power, right?

Rincewind42
Mar 18, 2004, 09:55 AM
Apple doesn't want to sell displays - they want to sell computers. Apple doesn't care that PC user X wants to buy an Apple display, because they want PC user X to buy a new Power Mac G5 with that display. Thus there is no reason for them to want to sell their displays to PC users other than a possible (and likely negligible for reasons stated earlier) increase in volume - and then it makes the displays less elegant when used with Apple hardware.

One cable connection is extremely elegant, especially when you have a lab full of the damn things to setup and maintain. When everything goes through the computer's power supply you suddenly don't need a power strip per machine, you don't need to play "which black power cable is this one for" and you don't get the massively tangled mess of cables that seems to be the norm.

I love the ADC connector and really really hope that it doesn't go away (and that the standard it is based off of finally starts getting some mass market acceptance).

Naimfan
Mar 18, 2004, 10:23 AM
Let me get this straight--if I have a PB with a DVI connector, I can use it with a non-Apple (eg, Sony) LCD but NOT with an Apple display without buying a ~$200 adapter?!?!? That is stupid.

And Apple should, IMO, care about PC users wanting to use an Apple display, if only on the theory that once the camel's nose is under the tent...

Best,

Bob

Rincewind42
Mar 18, 2004, 10:43 AM
Let me get this straight--if I have a PB with a DVI connector, I can use it with a non-Apple (eg, Sony) LCD but NOT with an Apple display without buying a ~$200 adapter?!?!? That is stupid.

And Apple should, IMO, care about PC users wanting to use an Apple display, if only on the theory that once the camel's nose is under the tent...

$99 adapter, but lets analyze this a little.

Everyone wants to go back to DVI so that they don't have to buy an adapter to use with their non-ADC computer. However, if Apple does go back to DVI, they will have to ship a power adapter with every monitor again. How much do you think that is going to cost (certainly ain't free). Basically the majority of buyers don't need this because of ADC, thus Apple can save money on this (and presumably pass the savings on to you). The few that do need it buy the adapter for $99. Presumably if each display had an adapter with it, they would cost less but then everyone if they needed it or not would have to pay for it. And then the displays would likely be less elegant (because why have ADC if you ship DVI & Power supply - what ADC takes over for - in the box).

So yea, PC users may come by and want to buy one of the displays. But if they do (and likely they are few of them) they can buy the $99 adapter too. Same for non-Power Mac owners, cuz lets get real here, if you don't own a Power Mac, you most likely don't need to buy a display (and most likely won't). Those who do own a Power Mac can get a more elegant experience and likely pay less for the same displays (ignoring comparisons to other manufacturers here).

I'd say with all that, I don't see Apple dropping ADC anytime soon.

jxyama
Mar 18, 2004, 11:00 AM
because DVI is becoming very common, i think it's about time apple forgo their "design elegance" (but at the expense of being proprietary) and make displays that have at least both DVI and ADC ports, and yes, a power brick.

then, include the DVI/ADC adapter in all PMs.

this way, everyone - PC users, PM users, non-PM Mac users - wins.

power brick can't possibly cost that much - at least, not enough that it's worth pissing off/irritating many users. ADC, as of now, is too PM specific. i imagine many PB users would want to get an apple display...

Naimfan
Mar 18, 2004, 11:07 AM
Rince--

Fair response! Thanks for correcting the price--it actually does make a big difference, at least to me.

I do still think that Apple should try to standardize their display connectors, because it would, financially, make more sense for me, as an Apple owner, to go buy a Sony/whatever display that takes a DVI input. For example, I can go purchase a 17" Sony display at CompUSA (hardly the least expensive place to buy one!) for $479, and not need the bloody ADC adaptor. The comparable Apple display is $599 from the education store, plus the adaptor.

I understand the argument in favor of the ADC connector, but would it be that difficult to include a DVI connector as well?

Best,

Bob

jxyama
Mar 18, 2004, 11:29 AM
currently, this is the situation:

PM - has ADC output for primary display. DVI output for secondary display.
(can the DVI port be used to drive a primary display? my impression is that it cannot.)

PB - DVI output only

displays - ADC input only.

as mentioned before, DVI to ADC adapter is $100.

basically, the situation now is that apple display is useful only for PM users without buying an adapter. with the adapter, it becomes useful for PB and PC users. in fact, i believe it's worse than that. unless the DVI port on the PM can be used to drive the primary display, PM will not be able to drive an external display digitally unless it's an apple display!

it's not a matter of "oh, if you can afford a $1500 display, you can drop another $100." if adapters are needed for most people, then it's just annoying - if something is "needed" for most, it should be included to cater to most people.

apple should simplify their display lineup to cater to most people. what should be done is to equip PM with two DVI ports and include DVI to ADC adapter with each unit. equip the display with ADC and DVI ports and a power supply.

this way, PC and PB users can use the display with no adapters. PM users can also use the display with no additional adapters and they get the benefit of not having to use the power brick with the display - and should they choose to, they can use non-apple digital displays too.

johnnyjibbs
Mar 18, 2004, 12:12 PM
Power Macs don't require Apple displays. Although I have never owned a PM, I know that people can use them and not have an Apple display. I think there is an adaptor in the box for this.

We all know that ADC is just DVI with USB and power in one but this elegant solution is also what makes it niche. However, I expect that Apple prefers to make its displays hard to use with a PC so that people associate them with Macs (and so PCs cannot look so cool). As I said before, put a DVI connector on it also and then that'll solve everything.

jxyama
Mar 18, 2004, 12:23 PM
Power Macs don't require Apple displays. Although I have never owned a PM, I know that people can use them and not have an Apple display. I think there is an adaptor in the box for this.

PM comes with ADC to VGA adapter... which is cheap, like $20. but that's a waste to have a videocard capable of putting out digital, but using it with an analog display...

anyone with a PM care to confirm whether or not it can be used with regular, non-apple DVI displays as the primary digital display?

also, as much as apple not letting PC users use apple displays without a $100 adapter to protect the "coolness" factor of apple, i think it's worse to see PB users hooked up to a dell or a sony displays.

Chaszmyr
Mar 18, 2004, 12:46 PM
PC monitors tend to have monitor controls on the unit, Apple monitors don't. That makes Apple monitors less ideal for PC use to begin with.

Rincewind42
Mar 18, 2004, 01:13 PM
anyone with a PM care to confirm whether or not it can be used with regular, non-apple DVI displays as the primary digital display?

All PowerMacs come with dual-head capable video cards, with ADC & DVI connectors therefore you can hook up a single DVI monitor to a PowerMac and be done with it (I haven't experienced this first hand, but I have heard others do it, and have done it with PowerMacs that came with ADC & VGA connectors).

As I said before, put a DVI connector on it also and then that'll solve everything.

Except how do you power the monitor? Might as well get the $99 converter at that point.

Laslo Panaflex
Mar 18, 2004, 01:40 PM
PM comes with ADC to VGA adapter... which is cheap, like $20.

Actually my G5 came with a DVI to VGA adapter, I had to go and buy a ADC to VGA adaptor from Dr. Bot in order to hook up my two VGA monitors. It is my understanding that apple does not even make a ADC to VGA adapter, this is becuase they want you to buy an Apple display. And to clarify, yes you can run your primary monitor from DVI connector. At first I only hooked up one monitor to my G5 with the DVI to VGA adapter.

I am waiting for the new 23" aluminum display to replace my dual 21 VGA's. If there is a 30" and it is affordable I may get that, but most likely 23" will do for me.

jxyama
Mar 18, 2004, 03:09 PM
Actually my G5 came with a DVI to VGA adapter

you are right! i stand corrected...

and it's definitely good to hear that you can drive just a DVI monitor from a PM. the description on the apple.com website certainly doesn't make it sound like it. kinda sneaky...

All cards ship with an Apple Display Connector (ADC) port for connecting an Apple display, and a DVI port for a second digital display with support for both extended desktop and video mirroring modes.

makes it sound like the DVI port is for a second display only... :rolleyes:

spaceballl
Mar 18, 2004, 03:55 PM
Actually one cable makes things neat.
Once monitors get bigger (and higher powered), it becomes a problem to power two large monitors through a video card's PCI slot... that's a lot of power. Why do you think Apple doesn't put two ADC ports on cards? because they can't. It's a good concept, but until displays start eating up half the power they do now or less, it's not viable. Even the apple 17" CRTs aren't really reccommended to use ADC... they pull too much power from the video card. DVI is a far better way to go.

spaceballl
Mar 18, 2004, 04:00 PM
Apple doesn't want to sell displays - they want to sell computers.
Are you sure? I once heard of this thing called the iPod...
One cable connection is extremely elegant, especially when you have a lab full of the damn things to setup and maintain.
See my previous argument about power requirements and dual displays.
you don't need to play "which black power cable is this one for" and you don't get the massively tangled mess of cables that seems to be the norm.
1. If you are the administrator of a computer lab, you should be able to trace a cable to its computer.
2. The tangled mess of cables is usually from peripherals, keyboards, mice, cameras, external drives, hubs, etc etc. not from a single power cable.

Rincewind42
Mar 18, 2004, 04:56 PM
Once monitors get bigger (and higher powered), it becomes a problem to power two large monitors through a video card's PCI slot... that's a lot of power. Why do you think Apple doesn't put two ADC ports on cards? because they can't. It's a good concept, but until displays start eating up half the power they do now or less, it's not viable. Even the apple 17" CRTs aren't really reccommended to use ADC... they pull too much power from the video card. DVI is a far better way to go.

The Power for ADC doesn't come from the video card, it goes through a connector in the same slot as the AGP card. The power lines run through the video card, but that is not the same thing. As for larger displays, who knows what the future holds. It may end up that we use OLED displays 2 years from now that consume a tenth of the power that an equivalent LCD does and ADC becomes more viable than ever in this respect.

Are you sure? I once heard of this thing called the iPod...

Want me to amend my statement to say Apple wants to sell computers and iPods? I fail to see how it changes anything...

1. If you are the administrator of a computer lab, you should be able to trace a cable to its computer.
2. The tangled mess of cables is usually from peripherals, keyboards, mice, cameras, external drives, hubs, etc etc. not from a single power cable.

1) Sure I can. Doesn't mean I want to. I can upgrade the RAM in a Power Mac 8500, but if you gave me the choice I'd make someone else do it.

2) And most of those devices can be plugged into the monitor via it's built in USB connection, and removed from the computer (along with the monitor) in one plug. Even without cable tangle, I'll take the convenience of that any day.

ADC is the connector "for the rest of us". Unless you can convince my mom that 1 cable is better than 3 cables when connecting a device, you can pretty much assume that Apple will continue to opt for 1 cable.

stoid
Mar 18, 2004, 07:35 PM
I understand the difference between DVI and ADC, but what has DVI got that VGS doesn't? I use the DVI-VGA adaptor to power the campus projectors for presentations at 1024x768, so there is obviously no size limit on the VGA connection.

Makosuke
Mar 18, 2004, 09:11 PM
In reply to the previous poster, VGA is analog, DVI is digital; DVI, assuming the cabling is good, removes the potential for blurriness in the image that can happen when converting an analog image signal to the digital pixels of an LCD display, as well as a host of similar analog to digital conversions. Think of it this way; the computer creates a digital signal, but until DVI had to convert it to be displayed on an analog monitor; now that monitors can be digital as well, might as well send that signal directly to them.

As for the original question, it's a toss up the way I look at it. The contrast pretty much comes in when I look at the back of my G4 w/Apple LCD at work, and G5 with VGA CRT at home.

At work, one cable goes under my desk. Unplugging my computer to drag it out involves unplugging one connection. And, I only need a very short cable on my keyboard. Plus, I can put my computer to sleep or turn it on by just tapping the monitor power button--very convienent. On the other hand, I can't put my moitor to sleep by itself (need to wait for the computer to turn it off) and I need to buy an Apple monitor.

At home, I have a HUGE mess of cables snaking from my monitor down to the computer and power strip. If I had an ADC monitor, I would have two less cables going under my desk, about 5 feet less coiled cable, one more free USB port on my G5 (in fact, I could have two free ports and three less cables if I plugged my USB hub directly into the monitor), another free plug on my power strip, I'd be able to sleep my computer without reaching down to the tower's button, and it'd be a whole lot easier to move or disconnect stuff.

However, the advantages of my current system are my monitor is compatible with anything that has a VGA port, and I can power it down manually if I'm doing a long download but I'll be out of the room.

I love the cleanliness of ADC, but I can also see the advantages of Apple selling monitors without it--assuming Apple's next gen LCDs are a decent buy, I'll be torn between them and a generic DVI monitor. It'd also free us all up to use stock ATI/NVIDIA graphics cards, without having to worry about adapters or special connectors.

If only Apple had some way of pushing ADC as a standard...

briankonar
Mar 18, 2004, 11:19 PM
if Apple displays didn't use ADC, I would have never bought one. The whole point of ADC is to reduce uneccesary clutter. One cable to the back of my computer is far nicer than a DVI cord, AC cord with a big lump (aka power brick) attached to the end as well as the need to buy another PCI card for USB ports...

i'm just having trouble imagining the reason nobody is adopting the ADC port (oh yeah, it'd be admitting DVI is garbage).

cr2sh
Mar 19, 2004, 01:16 AM
i'm just having trouble imagining the reason nobody is adopting the ADC port (oh yeah, it'd be admitting DVI is garbage).

Yeh.. the logic of this thread seems to be "Apple should dumb down their design so I can use it." This same logic has been used in the "Ipods need WMA support" threads... bend to the will of the masses. :rolleyes:

Also, Apple is trying to be all open source and standards based these days and this would be a good step in the right direction.
You see spaceball, the thing about open source and the whole darwin logic is that the better design survives. Now what was your point?

Why should Apple change.. PC users are the ones who suck.

JFreak
Mar 19, 2004, 01:18 AM
one more thing about dvi connector that has been neglected so far... hasn't anyone thought that it's a hybrid connector that carries both digital and analog signals in it (that's the reason there are passive dvi-vga adapters available), and in the pc world most of the dvi-monitors are in fact analog devices in digital disguise? if there are both dvi and vga connectors in the back it is almost surely an analog monitor and not a full-digital one.

but apple makes only full digital monitors. i just hope in the next monitor revision apple gets rid of 4:3 ratio and makes only widescreen models offering us a cheap (?) 17"-wide instead of 17"-square in the low end of the line.

adc rocks. it would be fun to see for example sony adopting it...

Bigheadache
Mar 19, 2004, 04:17 AM
in the pc world most of the dvi-monitors are in fact analog devices in digital disguise? if there are both dvi and vga connectors in the back it is almost surely an analog monitor and not a full-digital one.



No offence, but thats a ridiculous notion. All DVI LCDs are digital. Flat panels by nature are digital devices since each transistor in each pixel is a simple on/off device. There is no such thing as an "analog" flat panel. If it has a VGA it just means it has some sort of converter built in.

Rincewind42
Mar 19, 2004, 05:50 AM
No offence, but thats a ridiculous notion. All DVI LCDs are digital. Flat panels by nature are digital devices since each transistor in each pixel is a simple on/off device. There is no such thing as an "analog" flat panel. If it has a VGA it just means it has some sort of converter built in.

That's the thing though, often to make the design uncomplicated if it supports both DVI & VGA it will take the analog DVI signal and pipe it through the A/D converter. This practice is probably lessened as DVI has gotten more popular, but if the LCD panel requires a DVI-I connector (the variant that carries an analog signal) then you can probably bet that it does this.

spaceballl
Mar 19, 2004, 06:08 AM
only the OLD (multiple years old) LCDs w/ DVI ports converted to analog. Anything within the past two years handles the digital/analog signals separately.

switchedanhappy
Mar 19, 2004, 08:10 AM
I'm a switcher, and I love my ADC. I think that it's shameful to have an apple display hooked up to a dell or compaq. the people at apple would probably want to keep the displays inside the mac circle, but anything for profit, right? maybe they should make pc versions and mac versions like they did with the ipod for a short time. maybe the problem is that pc's haven't picked up ADC yet! :rolleyes:

jsw
Mar 19, 2004, 09:57 AM
if Apple displays didn't use ADC, I would have never bought one. The whole point of ADC is to reduce uneccesary clutter. One cable to the back of my computer is far nicer than a DVI cord, AC cord with a big lump (aka power brick) attached to the end as well as the need to buy another PCI card for USB ports...

i'm just having trouble imagining the reason nobody is adopting the ADC port (oh yeah, it'd be admitting DVI is garbage).

Well, DVI isn't garbage, it's just not the complete package ADC is...

Anyway, yes, as far as clutter is concerned, the one thing which helped me to convince the wife to let me buy the G5 (yes, singles, in a marriage there's usually a negotiation when that much $$ is involved), is the fact that it is so neat:


one power cord to plug in the G5
one cable from the monitor to the G5


That's it. The mouse and keyboard are wireless. I use AirPort Extreme. I have the G5 out in the open, and no aesthetic complaints.

Personally, I'm a BIG fan of ADC.

jxyama
Mar 19, 2004, 10:25 AM
ADC is a very good and elegant idea in principle. but considering not even all Mac products carry that connector, i think their displays should be made to appeal to more people, more specifically, to PB users, perhaps.

right now, apple displays are pretty "exclusive" to PM users. it's almost as if display would be part of an AIO PM solution... if someone decides to get rid of a PM and purchase a PB instead, the apple display he owns can't be used without an adapter even though they are all apple products!

this has happened already - apple used to have an older version of ADC connector before. it was proprietary and went bust.

if apple is going to continue to sell displays as a separate and independent (i.e. not as "PM accessory") product, i think customers will be best served if they made it functional (i.e. not requiring adapters) to as many as possible.

i think it's not unreasonable for apple to put a DVI port (along with an ADC port) and bundle a power supply with its displays at all.

rueyeet
Mar 19, 2004, 10:49 AM
The whole question would be moot for Powerbook owners if Apple would either put an ADC port on the Powerbooks, or include the adapter in the box. I don't understand why they make laptops with DVI connectors if they don't sell even a single DVI monitor.

Basically, the current setup amounts to charging Powerbook owners an extra $100 for an Apple display. With the percentage of Mac sales that are laptops, perhaps it's time to rethink this.

Oh, and ADC does nothing to reduce clutter if I have to use an adapter brick with multiple wires spewing from it. At that point, I might as well be using DVI.

Rincewind42
Mar 19, 2004, 01:31 PM
ADC is a very good and elegant idea in principle. but considering not even all Mac products carry that connector, i think their displays should be made to appeal to more people, more specifically, to PB users, perhaps.

right now, apple displays are pretty "exclusive" to PM users. it's almost as if display would be part of an AIO PM solution... if someone decides to get rid of a PM and purchase a PB instead, the apple display he owns can't be used without an adapter even though they are all apple products!

Well of course, mostly PowerMac users buy them :). But I've already given my reasoning behind this anyway so I'll leave this be...

this has happened already - apple used to have an older version of ADC connector before. it was proprietary and went bust.

Which connector are you talking about called ADC? The current one is the only one I know of. Apple used to use a different VGA-style port in the old days, but that wasn't proprietary either - Apple thought the industry would zig and instead zagged and thus Apple got stuck with a non-compatible connector.

if apple is going to continue to sell displays as a separate and independent (i.e. not as "PM accessory") product, i think customers will be best served if they made it functional (i.e. not requiring adapters) to as many as possible.

i think it's not unreasonable for apple to put a DVI port (along with an ADC port) and bundle a power supply with its displays at all.

Again, we come back to increasing prices across the board to satisfy people who aren't the primary target of the product. Since most purchasers won't care about the power supply (or worse get confused about why they have it in the first place) you might as well bundle it as an optional accessory. Oh wait, that's what we have now...

jaw04005
Mar 19, 2004, 07:13 PM
$99 adapter, but lets analyze this a little.

Everyone wants to go back to DVI so that they don't have to buy an adapter to use with their non-ADC computer. However, if Apple does go back to DVI, they will have to ship a power adapter with every monitor again. How much do you think that is going to cost (certainly ain't free). Basically the majority of buyers don't need this because of ADC, thus Apple can save money on this (and presumably pass the savings on to you). The few that do need it buy the adapter for $99. Presumably if each display had an adapter with it, they would cost less but then everyone if they needed it or not would have to pay for it. And then the displays would likely be less elegant (because why have ADC if you ship DVI & Power supply - what ADC takes over for - in the box).

So yea, PC users may come by and want to buy one of the displays. But if they do (and likely they are few of them) they can buy the $99 adapter too. Same for non-Power Mac owners, cuz lets get real here, if you don't own a Power Mac, you most likely don't need to buy a display (and most likely won't). Those who do own a Power Mac can get a more elegant experience and likely pay less for the same displays (ignoring comparisons to other manufacturers here).

I'd say with all that, I don't see Apple dropping ADC anytime soon.

We all know that the Apple displays are not a bargain. They are extremely nice (I have a 20") however, they should include both an ADC and DVI connector for the price you pay. Also, if Apple eliminated ADC it *in theory* it would be easier (and cheaper) to get ATI and Nvidia to release newer graphics cards for Macs (thus not having to place power+usb on the chip). That is not so much of a problem now (G5)... however in recent years the Mac's video card was sometimes versions behind the PC. And the "neatness" argument, I agree--but only if you have a Powermac. Apple might not sell as many displays w/ powerbooks but they do sell a significant number enough to justify creating a device (ADC to DVI adaptor) to allow that to happen.

jaw04005
Mar 19, 2004, 07:18 PM
The whole question would be moot for Powerbook owners if Apple would either put an ADC port on the Powerbooks, or include the adapter in the box. I don't understand why they make laptops with DVI connectors if they don't sell even a single DVI monitor.

Basically, the current setup amounts to charging Powerbook owners an extra $100 for an Apple display. With the percentage of Mac sales that are laptops, perhaps it's time to rethink this.

Oh, and ADC does nothing to reduce clutter if I have to use an adapter brick with multiple wires spewing from it. At that point, I might as well be using DVI.

Lol, I feel yah fell powerbook owner. However, Apple doesn't put ADC on their notebooks because of power. I don't get great battery performance now.. I can only imagine what would happen if my powerbook was trying to power a 20" display.. you talking what? 20 minutes ;)

Dont Hurt Me
Mar 19, 2004, 07:18 PM
We all know that the Apple displays are not a bargain. They are extremely nice (I have a 20") however, they should include both an ADC and DVI connector for the price you pay. Also, if Apple eliminated ADC it *in theory* it would be easier (and cheaper) to get ATI and Nvidia to release newer graphics cards for Macs (thus not having to place power+usb on the chip). That is not so much of a problem now (G5)... however in recent years the Mac's video card was sometimes versions behind the PC. And the "neatness" argument, I agree--but only if you have a Powermac. Apple might not sell as many displays w/ powerbooks but they do sell a significant number enough to justify creating a device (ADC to DVI adaptor) to allow that to happen.adc has killed the videocard market for mac and yes we are behind once more. Pcs are selling fx5200 with 128 ram, also 5700 and 5950 with 128 and ati has 9600xt and 9800xt while we dont. whats new? our hardware is allways behind but after using macs for years i guess im use to being behind and paying more.

jaw04005
Mar 19, 2004, 07:22 PM
Again, we come back to increasing prices across the board to satisfy people who aren't the primary target of the product. Since most purchasers won't care about the power supply (or worse get confused about why they have it in the first place) you might as well bundle it as an optional accessory. Oh wait, that's what we have now...

Get confused? These are people who need professional systems (Powerbook, Powermac) not your normal consumer (iMac, iBook, eMac). I don't think Apple including a DVI connector on the displays would "confuse" the Powermac users.. if it does they might be in over their heads anyways ;)

jaw04005
Mar 19, 2004, 07:26 PM
adc has killed the videocard market for mac and yes we are behind once more. Pcs are selling fx5200 with 128 ram, also 5700 and 5950 with 128 and ati has 9600xt and 9800xt while we dont. whats new? our hardware is allways behind but after using macs for years i guess im use to being behind and paying more.

I would like to know what someone who works at ATI or Nvidia thinks about the ADC. It has to involve alot more work than the PC version--and im sure that is the reason it costs so much, anyone priced a graphics upgrade lately? They are ridiculous.

Rincewind42
Mar 19, 2004, 08:12 PM
Get confused? These are people who need professional systems (Powerbook, Powermac) not your normal consumer (iMac, iBook, eMac). I don't think Apple including a DVI connector on the displays would "confuse" the Powermac users.. if it does they might be in over their heads anyways ;)

Professionals can be just as lame with things that are outside of their scope as the next person. I've seem some very intelligent people do some very stupid things that you wouldn't expect them to do.

Also, if Apple eliminated ADC it *in theory* it would be easier (and cheaper) to get ATI and Nvidia to release newer graphics cards for Macs (thus not having to place power+usb on the chip). That is not so much of a problem now (G5)... however in recent years the Mac's video card was sometimes versions behind the PC.

nVidia doesn't make any graphics cards, they only make the chip sets for them. So you would have to recruit someone who would not only build the cards, but also build them with the Mac firmware.

ATi does make display cards with ADC for Macs, but since I haven't needed one, I haven't looked at them.

And as I said before, ADC is in no way involved with the chips on the card at all, it's just a few extra lines on the card from the motherboard.

And the "neatness" argument, I agree--but only if you have a Powermac. Apple might not sell as many displays w/ powerbooks but they do sell a significant number enough to justify creating a device (ADC to DVI adaptor) to allow that to happen.

Well, there is an ADC to DVI adapter - it costs you $99 from the Apple Store :)

briankonar
Mar 19, 2004, 09:22 PM
The whole question would be moot for Powerbook owners if Apple would either put an ADC port on the Powerbooks, or include the adapter in the box. I don't understand why they make laptops with DVI connectors if they don't sell even a single DVI monitor.

a powerbook could never supply the power to run a monitor even when plugged into AC (i doubt the power supply could handle that kind of load). Plus many people travel with their Power books (to work, vacation, etc) and they opted for DVI to maintain compatibility with as large a range of setups as available. I think the real debate here is not whether or not Apple should switch to DVI, but whether or not they should include a DVI port on the Apple Displays. I definitely think it could only be a good thing.

to the person who commented about Apple's previous propietary connection being a flop, you are correct (although keyboards with power buttons were cool). It was called ADB and was for Mice and Keyboards, long since replaced with USB. I hate the fact that so many Windows machines still carry serial connectors and parallel ports. That **** died out in the early 90's.

realityisterror
Mar 19, 2004, 09:24 PM
i don't think so. apple's target for their displays is people with apple computers. they don't care about pc users. however it does somewhat defeat the purpose with all computers but powermacs. if the powerbooks had room, i would say that they should have an adc port. what does adc even look like?? i'll go look

reality

spaceballl
Mar 19, 2004, 09:42 PM
i don't think so. apple's target for their displays is people with apple computers. they don't care about pc users.
Let's try to broaden our perspective here. While mac users are Apple's highest priority, Apple is, above a computer maker, a business. The iPod, PC software, they do care about PC computers when it can help them achieve the bottom line, profit.

briankonar
Mar 19, 2004, 09:59 PM
Well, DVI isn't garbage, it's just not the complete package ADC is...
Personally, I'm a BIG fan of ADC.

my point is DVI hardly lives up to the potential it could have (as ADC so clearly shows). Apple needs to push ADC like they pushed Firewire, make the development kit's free so people have no reason not to use them. DVI has it's place (portability due to power issues) but aside from that all desktops should use ADC. Is DVI an Intel technology? that would explain alot :eek: .

i don't think so. apple's target for their displays is people with apple computers. they don't care about pc users. however it does somewhat defeat the purpose with all computers but powermacs. if the powerbooks had room, i would say that they should have an adc port. what does adc even look like?? i'll go look

reality

Apple loves cash, not Mac users. Powerbooks don't have room because they could never supply the juice to run a monitor, even off AC power you'd probably fry your power supply and MB. ADC is similar to DVI with 4 extra pin holes.

reality. :D

Rincewind42
Mar 19, 2004, 11:24 PM
Let's try to broaden our perspective here. While mac users are Apple's highest priority, Apple is, above a computer maker, a business. The iPod, PC software, they do care about PC computers when it can help them achieve the bottom line, profit.

Apple would rather sell a PC user a PowerMac G5 and a Display than sell 3 displays to PC users. It is higher margin, less compatibility work (currently an Apple monitor only has to work with ADC which is an extremely known quantity at Apple - granted this isn't a big point) and it keeps the "cool" points with Apple's machines.

There are many many businesses that refuse to do things that would seem to be very good ideas from the outside - for example selling $0 margin computers on the idea that users will pay for inflated upgrades. There is business that some companies simply don't want.

And as has been pointed out in other mediums, Mac users in general tend to not understand marketing very well (re: iPod mini's huge Mac community flop expectations) and with all due respect, I suspect that is what is happening here. The vocal minority that doesn't want to have to buy an ADC->DVI adapter is ignoring the fact that there is a silent majority that is either indifferent or loves the ADC connector. So for that minority, get over it. The adapter is really not that big a cost (in fact, at $99 it's a steal - buying the pieces if available would probably cost $30 for the connector and $90 for the power supply) and there are competing displays on the market that you can get without the adapter. I assure you, Apple won't miss your money if you decide not to go with their displays.