This is absurd. I never foreclosed the possibility that it could have been done dozens of other ways. I've been pressing you to identify why this way is a problem, or how you would address all the problems and design changes that come from your "simple" solution.
Well, I'm not sure how else to interpret your implicit insistence that it was the only way Apple could have designed it.
I have already explained my concerns. It's a non-standard port, it will remain a non-standard (or, at best, very uncommon) port, it adds no value while causing difficulties to end users, and there is no reason to believe there would have been any meaningful design changes or problems to implement the standard DP port.
The armchair speculation that they "could" have used a different design without consequences is unconvincing.
Not nearly as unconvincing as the armchair speculation that it's the only solution that could have been engineered, given the plethora of alternative implementations and Apple's penchant for this sort of thing.
I'll trust the professional PCB designers and the multiple design and prototype stages to have produced the best product given available resources, unless you can put your money where your mouth is and produce a working design.
I'm sure they did, I'm just quite confident that one of those constraints was not "use regular DP", when it should have been. Apple are also, after all, a poster child for 'form over function'.
You must be reading a different thread. I haven't seen anyone make that argument. I've seen people suggest that the MacBook mainboard, as it exists, does not have enough room for a full size DP connector. That is true. It was designed that way for a reason, and the mini connector allowed for other advantages elsewhere in the design.
What advantages ? The MB offers no additional hardware features to make up for it, and lacks some that are standard on physically similar machines.
And once again, fitting a full size USB connector on a digital camera, you say, is impossible.
Almost certainly. The space premium is far, far higher.
The bottom edge of just about every phone is pretty close to 3".
What ? Even the iPhone, which is relatively large width-wise, is less than 2.5 inches across. Further, just a casual glance at the pictures - without even bothering to check dimensions - of the average mobile phone make it obvious there's no room for even a full-size USB A port (let alone a USB B port, which is what it would need to be), without even starting to consider the internal space requirements.
Coincidentally, most digital cameras are at least 3" tall.
No, they're not. Even something like a Canon Powershot Gx-series device - which is huge by non-DSLR digicam standards - is less than 3 inches tall.
It's pretty obvious that you have a poor sense of visual scale.
I'm not understanding why you don't question the design choices of what's behind these devices, but suddenly when it comes to a MacBook, it's time to start making sweeping accusations.
Firstly, because the size ratio of a full-size USB port to the average phone or mobile is substantially greater than the ratio of a DP port to the average (or even [much] smaller than average) laptop. Hence, the former is obviously going to be harder to squeeze in. Your assumption that putting a full-size USB port into a phone or camera is the same thing as putting a full-size DP port into a laptop is simply wrong, and will remain so no matter how many times you repeat it.
Secondly, and more significantly, because the vast majority (probably all) of cameras and phones on the market
don't have full-size USB-B ports, whereas the vast majority of laptops on the market
do have full-size DP, DVI and/or VGA ports on them. When things divert from the norm - especially with a negative result - questions should be asked as to why.
Because DisplayPort is HDMI's primary competitor and its intended replacement by a large segment of the industry...that's the whole point. To unify home theater and consumer electronics display interfaces with a single communication standard.
DP isn't going to replace HDMI any time soon (by which I mean at least a decade), and I sincerely doubt even a tiny segment of "the industry" (let alone a "large" one) has any illusions that it will.
Arguably, they're not even "competitors" in any meaningful sense. DP is mainly targeted at replacing DVI (and will find little application outside of that), whereas HDMI is targeted at replacing Component+SPDIF and imposing DRM (and has had little success outside of that). Certainly, there will likely be some crossover (HDMI on media-centre-oriented computers, a DP input on TVs to allow easier connectivity to computers), but ultimately there's not a lot of direct competition.
No, I did not. For the nth time, a product having a consumer breakthrough does not make the product itself a consumer breakthrough.
Where n=1 ? Because you haven't explained to me yet what you meant by "consumer breakthrough", and reasonable interpretations on my part don't seem to be hitting home.
For example, hardware RAID's big consumer breakthrough was when Abit and a few other manufacturers started including it in their consumer mainboards. RAID to this day is not itself a consumer breakthrough.
OK, so apparently "consumer breakthrough" means appearing on consumer-level equipment. In which case, I refer you back to my original reply, which remains essentially unchanged.
You know, the burden of proof lies with the affirmative. It's your job to demonstrate that Apple invents its own connectors for no apparent reason, rather than being motivated by a particular purpose and then having the industry move in a different direction.
No, I just need examples of where Apple has invented its own connectors (or other solutions) where there was no real engineering-driven reason to do so, which I have done.
You can't really do that, because there are only isolated examples of completely arbitrary connectors, which can be matched by isolated (and in some cases, habitual) actions at other manufacturers as well. ADC is a perfect example. A single-cable connector providing power, signal, and USB to a monitor is a great idea. Just look at HDMI.
HDMI provides video and data, and a significant reason for its invention was the lack of any already existing standard for transmitting digital (and, particularly, DRM-encumbered) high-def video and audio data in the home theatre world.
Which is, to be blunt, a completely different situation to ADC - ultimately nothing more than a proprietary, overengineered cable snake primarily meant to "encourage" people buying Apple computers or screens, to also buy one of their screens or computers as well. Much like Mini-DP, in fact.
Any manufacturer of a new connector has no way of knowing in advance whether it will be successful or not, or whether the industry will take it or not. Just look at HD-DVD. Was Toshiba stupid and evil to try?
Talk about an apples to oranges comparison.
Your overall argument is wrong, firstly because it is based on the false assumption that there wasn't already some form of suitable connector and, therefore, that a strong
engineering requirement existed for one to be created. Secondly, because it is based on the assumption that individual manufacturers designing and releasing their own port designs is in any way a common occurrence.
Says you, with nothing resembling evidentiary support, when the technical reason is staring you down: there's no room as designed in some of their products, and they want to use the same connector for all applications.
Actually I have a great deal of 'evidentiary support':
- DP is not significant thicker than Mini-DP.
- It is wider, but width is not a significant constraint in laptop designs.
- Mini-DP is not a standard, has not been implemented by anyone except Apple and is unlikely to be implemented [on hardware devices] by anyone except Apple
- Regular DP has already been implemented in several products on the market - laptops, converters, screens - and is supported by a range of manufacturers.
You, OTOH, haven't come up for a single line of non-circular reasoning for Mini-DP to exist.
Further, you still haven't identified any of these products you keep talking about. As I've already said (and which even a cursory glance at the photos and dimensions will confirm), all the iPods (with the possible exception of the iPod Classic) will not fit a Mini-DP port, and neither will the iPhone. Either due to a simple, brute-force factor of overall dimensions, the aesthetics (tapering on the edges), or the internal space that would be necessary.
In fact, HDMI would be a logical port to have directly on an iPod. Not only because of how it would likely be used, but also because it is noticably thinner.
That is, of course, unless Apple makes them thicker. Which is, to say the least, highly unlikely.
Given that, the choice is obvious: use the small one. There is no lock in to speak of, since anyone can make the connector.
The "lock-in" comes from there not being anyone else making devices that use the connector. "Product tying" is an alternative way of looking at it.
I don't see a marketing advantage or disadvantage to a display connector, [...]
The advantage is you sell more monitors, because the only way your customers can connect their shiny new computer to an external screen is to buy one of yours (and vice versa - someone who wants your screen is more likely to buy a new computer from you as well to connect to it).
(The disadvantage to a standard port should be fairly obvious.)
[...] and I don't think anyone is investing any egoistic capital on a port, except for those of you convinced that the fairly normal workings of the industry are some sort of satanic uprising.
The ego part is the 'we are Apple, we sell you what we think you need, why would you want to buy anyone else's equivalent, you ungrateful sod' attitude.
I'm not sure what "fairly normal workings of the industry" you're thinking of, either. New, non-standard ports are not "common" in the computer industry and neither are immediate cutovers of physical interfaces without transition periods (at least, outside of Apple),
[0] Which reminds me, using a Mini-DVI port on the iMac is a perfect example of the attitude I'm talking about. There is certainly no way a 'lack of space' argument applies. Heck, it would have been more justifiable to have
ADC on the iMac rather than Mini-DVI.
)
