Any alternatives to Apple's ridiculously overpriced Dual Link DVI cable?

[macbook123]

So I don't want to

1) spend $99 bucks for an accessory Apple should have included with the Macbook Pro (they did with the last version)

and

2) wait for it until the end of the month before I can use my 30 inch monitor.

So does anybody know if anybody else produces cables that do the job?

 

[Be3G]

There aren't any alternatives that I know of. And any alternatives that are produced are likely to be expensive too... what a lot of people don't realise is that the dual-link adaptor isn't just a straightforward passive pass-through adaptor like the cheaper single-link adaptor; it actually carries out an active conversion process to translate the DisplayPort signal in to a dual-link DVI signal. (This is apparently required for dual-link but not single-link.) Hence, presumably, the need for the adaptor to have a USB cable - it needs the extra power supplied by a USB port to carry out the conversion.

 

[dr. shdw]

So I don't want to

1) spend $99 bucks for an accessory Apple should have included with the Macbook Pro (they did with the last version)

and

2) wait for it until the end of the month before I can use my 30 inch monitor.

So does anybody know if anybody else produces cables that do the job?

Full DVI port is different.

 

[macbook123]

There aren't any alternatives that I know of. And any alternatives that are produced are likely to be expensive too... what a lot of people don't realise is that the dual-link adaptor isn't just a straightforward passive pass-through adaptor like the cheaper single-link adaptor; it actually carries out an active conversion process to translate the DisplayPort signal in to a dual-link DVI signal. (This is apparently required for dual-link but not single-link.) Hence, presumably, the need for the adaptor to have a USB cable - it needs the extra power supplied by a USB port to carry out the conversion.

I thought the USB cable's purpose was only to make it possible to use the USB ports on the monitor?

Note that dual DVI cables a) come for free (usually two of them) with 30 inch monitors, which I why I'm surprised that Apple would charge that much, and b) those ones don't need extra USB power...unless they're drawing power from the monitor?

Important question here: I've been assuming that I can't just use the cable that came with the monitor (a HP one in this case) in conjunction with Apple's regular mini-DVI-to-DVI cable. Please correct me if I'm wrong!

 

[donbenjy]

are you talking about the new unibody MBP? In which case you don't have a mini DVI port. You have a mini DisplayPort, which Apple designed for the macbooks. Unfortunately (but not surprisingly) the only product which uses this port is the new Apple 24-inch display, which isn't even out yet!

You can't plug a mini-DVI adaptor into the port. They're a different shape!

And you can't use the single-link DVI, because it won't drive a 30-inch display.

The reason that the old cables didn't use the USB cable is because the old MBPs had a dual-link DVI port built in.

 

[dr. shdw]

I thought the USB cable's purpose was only to make it possible to use the USB ports on the monitor?

Note that dual DVI cables a) come for free (usually two of them) with 30 inch monitors, which I why I'm surprised that Apple would charge that much, and b) those ones don't need extra USB power...unless they're drawing power from the monitor?

Important question here: I've been assuming that I can't just use the cable that came with the monitor (a HP one in this case) in conjunction with Apple's regular mini-DVI-to-DVI cable. Please correct me if I'm wrong!

You can, but it'll only go up to 1920x1200...