Apple Offering Free Licensing of Mini DisplayPort Spec

[matticus008]

That "advantage" being bugger all, given that basically no laptops are stretched for space in that direction, since it's essentially dictated by the size of the screen.

Your several post rant stream notwithstanding, this is simply not true. Most notebooks are indeed tight on space because the mainboard is less than half the depth of the notebook. The eee avoids this by removing the hard drive and optical drive, and switching the battery to a piggyback unit. Its mainboard is a typical size for a notebook.

Except, as noted, there's no real incentive to use Mini-DP over regular DP. The only real advantage Mini-DP has - size - is basically irrelevant.

It is not. By the same token, mini USB is "irrelevant" because it too is only about half the size of an already small connector. Yet, as we all know, it has allowed for USB implementation on a wide variety of compact consumer devices. If there is ever going to be an iPhone or iPod that features HD output, it will be over a connector like mDP. The size differential you cast aside is equally shortsighted. It is not as simple as squeezing ports closer together to free up space on the PCB.

Certainly for most applications the regular connector would suffice, but there are definitely applications where it would not, and it includes many things Apple does. Having a single connector throughout the model line therefore makes the choice obvious. The displays themselves would benefit from a standard connector as well for non-Mac users, but that is obviously not a major concern for Apple displays.

There is easily enough room on that board to move the audio adapters (or combine them into a single PCB-mounted unit), move the screwhole elsewhere, and replace the Mini-DP with DP.

Like what ?
SCSI. USB. Abandoning legacy ports. Firewire. Wireless networking. DVD writers. To name a few.

 

[lgoodlove]

it's a baby step but its still a step

 

[haunebu]

If this plan works out, Apple will make a killing in adapters.

You, sir, are absolutely correct.

Apple has decided that Mac customers need to buy Apple displays. If Mac customers choose to buy displays from other manufacturers, Apple still wants a cut of the action by selling Mini DisplayPort -> Everything Else adapters.

By licensing the spec out, other companies might start making adapters, but Apple will always sell a ton (most?) of them.

If rumors of Apple handing the spec over to VESA are true, awesome. But from the consumer's perspective, they still shouldn't have made it. Fragmentation, adapters and other sloppiness will be the only result (besides more revenue for Apple). DisplayPort is just fine.

 

[840quadra]

Glad to see this finally put forward by Apple. This backs up what I had been debating on these forums with countless people, there was absolutely no proof that Mini Display Port was proprietary (by definition).

 

[Michael CM1]

I know HDMI has royalties associated with it, but why do "new" standards need to be created when there are currents standards available? I am a HUGE Apple fan...but I opine that Apple's decision to use DisplayPort over HDMI was a step sideways...now I must buy a DisplayPort-to-HDMI cable...wtf? C'mon Apple play nicely with everyone else...

Because they had to make something new for all 100 people on the planet that use the massive monitors that need higher bandwidth than present HDMI can offer. HDMI would've worked fine for 1920x1200 monitors, but we MUST have something that appeals to that 100-person segment. Heaven knows Apple couldn't put some port on a computer that nearly every HDTV owner could make use of.

All that hope of ports for computers and home entertainment finally converging into HDMI all went poop with Apple's poo party. Couldn't have worked with the HDMI creators to make some sort of HDMI 2.0 cable, could we? Noooooo.

By the way, I still don't get moving all the ports to the left and the optical drive to the right. The entire front of the new MacBook is mostly empty. Keep the optical drive there and you could at least have more USB ports and keep the firewire (or add ExpressCard to the low-end MacBooks). Sometimes Apple just seems to take "Think Different" to a new extreme.

 

[ATimson]

And I bought a standard kensington lock.. fitted it to my friend's new MBP, and lo' and behold : it doesn't fit! (do we have to acquit)

I can't speak for what the Apple site says. But as the owner of an aluMacBook using a Kensington lock, I suspect you're doing it wrong.

 

[AidenShaw]

Like what ?

SCSI. USB. Abandoning legacy ports. Firewire. Wireless networking. DVD writers. To name a few.

Sony sold 1394 before Apple, 802.11b was around before Apple used it, Compaq announced the Pioneer DVD burners before Apple, millions of PCs had USB before Apple, not clear that SCSI was a big deal - it never really left Apple for consumer use ...

But, I guess a lawyer can define a term like "consumer breakthrough" to mean whatever she wants.

Glad to see this finally put forward by Apple. This backs up what I had been debating on these forums with countless people, there was absolutely no proof that Mini Display Port was proprietary (by definition).

Are you kidding? The very basis of this story is that the Mini Display Port is proprietary, and Apple owns the design rights.

The news that Apple will license its proprietary connector absolutely proves that it is proprietary. If it weren't proprietary, how could Apple license it?

 

[BenRoethig]

Still strikes me as backwards. Why not work with other manufacturers first to develop a standard, instead of coming up with one and hoping it gets picked up? Maybe someone smarter than me can explain this way of thinking.

One of two reasons.

First, Apple is using mini-DP as a form of control. Standard displayport is not much larger than the Mini-VGA/DVI ports.

Second, its creation was a solution to a problem caused by Ive's design. Mini-DP is the size of Micro-DVI. From the internal configuration, using a full sized display port or a Mini-DVI port may have required the removal of not just the FW400 port, but one of the two USB2 ports as well.

 

[cyberakuma]

All that hope of ports for computers and home entertainment finally converging into HDMI all went poop with Apple's poo party. Couldn't have worked with the HDMI creators to make some sort of HDMI 2.0 cable, could we? Noooooo.

There was never a chance in hell of convergence on HDMI. HDMI's only single benefit over DisplayPort is that it came first and thus has adoption.

DisplayPort not only is a better designed protocol, it has higher bandwidth, is cheaper to implement, results in less components (aka smaller devices), has a higher quality connector, and does not require royalties for use of the port/protocol (although HDCP still requires licensing for both ports).

There still is a small sliver of chance of convergence on DisplayPort, but thats years and years away. Eventually displays themselves will internally be built around DisplayPort, and HDMI will just be extra components and cost.

 

[Ibjr]

With ADC, miniVGA, and miniDVI Apple didn't pretend that they were giving the world a new standard... This is worse.

 

[matticus008]

Sony sold 1394 before Apple, 802.11b was around before Apple used it, Compaq announced the Pioneer DVD burners before Apple, millions of PCs had USB before Apple, not clear that SCSI was a big deal - it never really left Apple for consumer use

I quite clearly said major consumer breakthroughs, not first to market. Apple funded and initiated 1394 development. 802.11b was finalized in June 1999; Apple's Airport base station was launched in July at quite a high profile. The first push to prolific USB peripherals came from the Mac market--for a specific example, one need look no further than flatbed scanners introducing USB models for Macs, which then slowly replaced LPT PC models. Apple also was first to market with a complete consumer solution involving both the software and hardware necessary to create DVDs.

You can quibble on the details if you like, but none of it distracts from the essential point that Apple's adoption of standards and third-party technologies handily outweighs the alleged "NIH syndrome".

But, I guess a lawyer can define a term like "consumer breakthrough" to mean whatever she wants.

And I guess AidenShaw can read whatever she wants into words that are quite plain.

If it weren't proprietary, how could Apple license it?

You mean like DVI is licensed? How about USB licenses? If being licensed is your metric, then all of the standards this could be competing against are "proprietary", too.

 

[dernhelm]

A friend recent bought a MacBook, and loves it except for the fact that the MDP => DVI connector is a DVI-D not DVI-I. (Something that Apple did it's best not to tell him when he bought it - but he also didn't think to ask). It's bad enough that the MacBook didn't ship with an adapter, but now he has to buy two, one MDP=>DVI-D and one MDP=>VGA for any presentations he would have to give, because it is impossible to adapt DVI-D to VGA (he already had several DVI-I to VGA adapters lying around).

I don't care how you cut it, it is hard to cast this as anything other than Apple trying to squeeze as much money as possible out of an unsuspecting user base. These MDP=>DVI-D and MDP=>VGA adapters are not cheap, especially on top of an already premium priced computer.

Anyway, I hope someone else uses this opportunity to produce a quality MDP=>DVI-I connector. Only a fool would choose apple's cables over a that.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

Sony sold 1394 before Apple, 802.11b was around before Apple used it, Compaq announced the Pioneer DVD burners before Apple, millions of PCs had USB before Apple, not clear that SCSI was a big deal - it never really left Apple for consumer use ...

But, I guess a lawyer can define a term like "consumer breakthrough" to mean whatever she wants.




Are you kidding? The very basis of this story is that the Mini Display Port is proprietary, and Apple owns the design rights.

The news that Apple will license its proprietary connector absolutely proves that it is proprietary. If it weren't proprietary, how could Apple license it?

Millions of computers had a broken implementation of USB 1.1 and then Apple released the iMac with USB1.1 that wasn't broken, along-side Firewire thus demonstrating [Intel observing] that they know Serial Bus transports like no body's business.

 

[ff_will]

If only they'd license out the freaking MagSafe port, we could have an affordable secondary power adapter.

My words! I don't care buying the power supply from Apple, but I really would like to have a car adaptor.... and I don't mean converting 12V DC to 110/220V AC only to be able to convert it back to 7.5V (?) DC again! MagSafe is great, but the lack of free licensing sucks

 

[Eidorian]

Millions of computers had a broken implementation of USB 1.1 and then Apple released the iMac with USB1.1 that wasn't broken, along-side Firewire thus demonstrating [Intel observing] that they know Serial Bus transports like no body's business.

Can you prove that?

 

[tuc]

Connector design isn't easy -- especially at that size. A whole lot of time and money had to have been spent to thoroughly test the design to ensure that it was fully compatible with the DP specs – ensuring it could pass the same signals within the same tolerances and parameters as the DP standard. That's a lot of hard work.

It is indeed hard work. Standard DisplayPort is pretty clever in how
it isolates the signals. The p/n/ground signals for each lane form a
triangle, with the p/n pairs surrounded by three ground pins--nice.

Apple's miniDP isn't quite as elegant. Lane 3's p/n/ground pins lie
directly under Lane 1's p/n/ground pins, for example. Also the way
the conductors cross with standard DisplayPort is easy to describe
(pins 15-19 straight through, 1-to-12, 2-to-11, 3-to-10, etc.) while
it's less obvious with mini-DisplayPort (pins 2/14/16/18/19 straight
through, 1-to-8, 3-to-10, 5-to-12, 7-to-13, 9-to-15, 11-to-17).

It's not a big deal, of course. At least Apple could use the same trick
of having some pins longer than others to control the contact order.

 

[tuc]

Additionally, a mini-DisplayPort to DVI adapter and mini-DisplayPort to DisplayPort adapter should come with the new 24" Cinema Display. Especially considering the premium price that comes with an Apple Display.

I'm with you on the miniDP-to-DP adapter, but a miniDP-to-DVI adapter
would be pointless. Or rather, the new 24" LED-backlit Cinema Display
doesn't understand DVI signals, so either circuitry would have to be added
to the display or else it would have to be a very expensive "active" adapter.

DVI needs to be replaced, whether it be DP or HDMI...there is better technology out there that is not as limiting (in several areas) as DVI...

Huh? HDMI is DVI, except it is limited to single-link. Yeah, there's
audio in there too, but HDMI is too limiting to standardize on unless
it's ok to max out at 1920x1200. (Granted, I'm talking HDMI 1.2.)

 

[tuc]

A friend recent bought a MacBook, and loves it except for the fact that the MDP => DVI connector is a DVI-D not DVI-I. (Something that Apple did it's best not to tell him when he bought it - but he also didn't think to ask). It's bad enough that the MacBook didn't ship with an adapter, but now he has to buy two, one MDP=>DVI-D and one MDP=>VGA for any presentations he would have to give, because it is impossible to adapt DVI-D to VGA (he already had several DVI-I to VGA adapters lying around).

I don't care how you cut it, it is hard to cast this as anything other than Apple trying to squeeze as much money as possible out of an unsuspecting user base.

This is nonintuitive, I agree, but it's been the same way with mini-DVI
and micro-DVI.

You make it sound like Apple could make DVI-I adapters if they wanted
to, but they can't. (Well, I guess they could make one that had a little
switch on it or something--might be something for a third-party to try.)
When the DVI adapter is attached, there are no analog VGA-style signals
to convey. Similarly, when the VGA adapter is attached, there are no
digital DVI/HMDI-style signals to convey. At least it seems like this is
the case. Details are scarce.

 

[Phil A.]

I can fully understand the move to DisplayPort on the new Macs, and can even understand the move to try and create a mini DisplayPort standard (I see it as similar to the Mini USB options).

However, what I don't understand is why they were so keen to drop the 23" ACD when they have no viable alternative for the vast majority of their customers (although it is reminiscent of their move from ADC to DVI!).


I don't think there will ever be a simple cable adapter for DVI to the 24" LCD monitor because it seems to be a DirectDrive monitor, which simply cannot understand DVI signaling, so it'll be an expensive active adapter or nothing.

 

[Yuppi]

The very obvious reason for Apple to not include a full display port is that they (or therewith the stores selling macbooks) can make money by selling the adapter. Those accessories make good money for stores that earn close to nothing by selling Notebooks.
It is the same reason why some printers are no longer sold with USB cable even though it would be insanely cheap to include this cable. For the same reason the apple remote is no longer shipped, yet another accessory to be sold.

For anyone having troubles to believe that it would be difficult on the MacBook to include a full size DisplayPort, just look at the x-Ray pictures of the MacBook. http://www.flickr.com/photos/jasondv/3025109312/
Anyone else, just look at the picture too, it is really nice

 

[matticus008]

However, what I don't understand is why they were so keen to drop the 23" ACD

Supply. 23" panels have been hard to come by for a while now, as manufacturers moved to 22" (TN, MVA) and 24" (TN, MVA, IPS) sizes.

For anyone having troubles to believe that it would be difficult on the MacBook to include a full size DisplayPort, just look at the x-Ray pictures of the MacBook.

Picture shows a crowded bank. Full-size DisplayPort is about 25% wider than a USB port. The USB ports as it is are squeezed a hair closer together than they probably should be.

It's not inconceivable that they could have tweaked some things to make it work, but there is a cost to everything, and again, Apple wants to use one connector for their whole line, and if they want to put one on anything smaller than a MacBook, the half-size connector is the way to go, especially since they've managed to get full bandwidth and compatibility, unlike some older mini connectors.

 

[Yuppi]

Picture shows a crowded bank. Full-size DisplayPort is about 25% wider than a USB port. The USB ports as it is are squeezed a hair closer together than they probably should be.

It's not inconceivable that they could have tweaked some things to make it work, but there is a cost to everything, and again, Apple wants to use one connector for their whole line, and if they want to put one on anything smaller than a MacBook, the half-size connector is the way to go, especially since they've managed to get full bandwidth and compatibility, unlike some older mini connectors.

I agree to the line-up thing. And I don't totally hate the new connector. But in this case I think they really did not have many choices. The white dot between the MDP and the audio things is probably a screw and it is totally necessary to have it on this position. Also the USB and MDP are so close to each other that there is less than 1 mm between my USB-Stick (which is the most average you can imagine) and the MDP Adapter cable, which itself has a 1 mm plastic around the connector.

 

[drsmithy]

i think this has a bit more to do with the business model that apple adopts. the mac os x software is just a bit short of £60 compared to price tag such as £200+ for a "usable" version of windows vista.

OS X Upgrade RRP: £83
Vista Home Premium Upgrade RRP: £79.99

 

[Nuvi]

If you compare the old ports and new full size DP you see how small it is. Anyway, Apple has habit of making great computers but only mediocre displays that tend stay in production far longer then they should. I guess some one thought they had a perfect solution aka MINI DisplayPort. Anyway, if you take look at VESA statements regarding the compatibility I don't think Apple has that much hope of getting their port accepted as VESA standard. This is just a prediction but IMHO mini DP will be just Apple Display Port. Do you remember ADC?

EDIT: Regarding the possibility of engineering standard DP on new MB's; Apple managed to fit full size 6-pin FireWire on original iPod's but now they really need to shrink the standard DP into their own "Apple" Display Port in order to fit it. You honestly believe that? You guys don't think its not a method of trying to control consumer behavior. History keeps repeating itself.

 

[ErikCLDR]

I agree - does no-one remember ADC?

Those were the days.

I don't care what they say, the display port is still proprietary BS until every monitor company picks it up. How many companies are really going to adapt this when I guess only the macpro and mac mini would be the two computers that need a monitor- all the others have a built in LCD. Given that apple has a pretty low market share relatively speaking, no other companies have the mini display port, and for the sake of saving money I don't see why they'd invest in it. They'd probably just rather have you go out and buy the overpriced $30 video adapter. Hopefully someone will come out with a reasonable $5.00 one.