Yes but not passing the cost to the customer.
Whether you like it or not, not including extraneous cables and optional parts is simply par for the course for the industry. It means that companies can offer better products by redistributing the BOM allowance, and only those customers needing the extra features have to pay--it's really win-win.
First of all I want a direct support from Apple in their OS to use BD not a third party support.
Fine. But one has nothing to do with the other. Apple doesn't like the current hazards of BD and has not yet been forced thanks to incredibly low demand.
[It takes a BIG BIG troll to make that claim. I am no fan of DisplayPort, as I have repeatedly demonstrated, despite your outright refusal to make any sense at all./QUOTE]
I know you're not a fan of DP. You're a fanboy of Apple who drinks the kool aid and support them no matter what!
That's plainly not true, and repeating it will not make it more so. This discussion isn't about Apple; it's about ignorant whining from people incapable of structuring a logical complaint. Pointing out the obvious flaws in your knowledge and reasoning does not equate to defending the other side.
As I have said many times, implementing DisplayPort at all was stupid. How that is supporting Apple makes as much sense as any of your other arguments.
All you been doing is keep on saying "Mini-DP is a standard; there are standards and such". You might as well copy and paste a PR release every time you post because your thoughtless posts to defend Apple is getting ridiculous!
Except that the press releases that already exist, from VESA, say the same thing. You know, VESA,
the standards body for whom you seem to be taking offense where they themselves have no problem.
DP is a great idea, but the time hasn't arrived yet unless you want to be "thin"
And again, the ignorance is staggering. DisplayPort
does not enable thinner electronics at all. Period.
Stop playing with words cause it just magnifies your degree of fanboyism.
It's not playing with words. You're complaining that this is proprietary lock-in, then admitting that it's a standard and saying that standards aren't the solution to lock-in. You can't make up your mind about what's acceptable.
Apple could go ahead and introduce anything; but they have to provide the backward compatibility path at no cost
Nobody else does.
Who are you to claim something is valid or not?
When you can create a logical and coherent complaint, based in reality and surviving the simple facts of the situation, it's valid. Anything else is baseless bitching, as you and others have roundly demonstrated.
Yes. Unless you can come up with a convincing reason why comparing similar products, targeted at similar markets, with similar design constraints, is invalid.
Because it has no bearing on any other. This is a circular comment, and it doesn't help your case. Even within a company with a larger product lineup, like Dell, there are specific constraints in specific models--you get varying numbers and arrangements of ports because different hardware and chipset selections, along with different exterior designs, impose
different constraints.
Again, only if you believe no aspect of the MacBook's design is changeable (an argument you take both sides on, depending on what you're trying to prove).
No. There is one side. Whether the design is changeable is not the question. The question is whether there is a justification
to require a change, without making other compromises that are determined to be unacceptable. This is something you cannot establish.
I have presented numerous authorities than an alternately designed laptop, similarly sized (or smaller), but utilising DP, was possible.
That is (a) not an authority and (b) not relevant. Fitting a port into a device at least the size of the port is not evidence of anything except that that particular device was designed to do so.
You are conflating DisplayPort (the standard) with DisplayPort (and Mini-DP) the connector.
Conflation requires distinction. The connectors are part of the standard; no conflation needed.
You also apparently have zero understanding of what "NIH syndrome" refers to.
Please. You've continued for a dozen posts pushing the laughable and idiotic notion that Apple, a VESA member actively involved in the development of DisplayPort (including its connectors), has taken offense to
their own work to create a reactionary "not invented here" design. You want to talk about zero understanding, look in a mirror.
No, I claim they used a non-standard connector when a standard one would have done because that's what Apple do.
Except that this is a standard connector, and it's available to others, unlike mini-DVI, and that ADC could easily have gone on to be a working standard had it been more successful in the marketplace. VESA, for its part, developed a similar,
standardized connector that had
less success and
fewer manufacturers involved.
You have not offered a single example of one of these 'tradeoffs' that DP over Mini-DP would have required, nor how they would have meaningfully reduced the functionality or overall design of the MacBook.
First, you're lying, and second
you are arguing the affirmative and have the burden of proof--it's
your examples we await, and I have intentionally not mentioned it to highlight your complete inability to address the question. The tradeoffs in the current design are clear: (1) the PCB will not tolerate an additional or larger port. The PCB is the maximum size allowed in the horizontal dimensions, and the only alternative is to reduce battery volume and thus battery life. (2) Ignoring the PCB, addition of another or larger port requires a choice between (a) lack of structural integrity (b) moving ports to two sides, or (c) sacrifice of another connector somewhere.
However, that criticism would not mean that Mini-USB ports didn't need to exist at all since it is quite clear that several existing devices could not be retain equivalent functionality and overall design without Mini-USB.
But your DP argument forecloses exactly that--you claim that any device that might elect to use DisplayPort can use the full-size connector variant. If that is the case, then any such device could
also use HDMI with the full-size HDMI connector. Your argument, however, claims that the HDMI C connector is justified to exist, while the mini-DP is not. These are mutually exclusive.
Once again, the bottom line is that you are complaining with a lack of knowledge about the basis of your complaint, and attempting to refine your comments without confronting the reality. You can swap out the word Apple at any point in this discussion with any other industry corporation, so these weak and asinine fanboy and Kool Aid comments are a complete waste of time and fully illustrate the nonviable nature of your arguments and your utter lack of professionalism. The bottom line is that VESA created the standard, Apple was involved, and VESA continues to praise Apple for its DisplayPort deployment. If VESA had a problem or if they considered Apple to be going off on an NIH tangent,
the standards body would be the authority.
Nothing about this situation is unusual or evil or hasn't been done (without complaint by the ignorant) by companies with names that aren't Apple.
