Mini Display Port..now I'm confused.

[nanofrog]

I don't really understand what all the fuss is about. It's new tech and you can label it however you'd like but, I really don't think Apple is going to change it. I'm sure they did it to make some money, there's no doubt in my mind but, I also think Apple is trying to do what they think is best for the customers. Like many of you have said, people were asking for consistency and now that consistency has been delivered you're making a huge deal about how annoying it is. GET OVER IT!

Apple took a standard (DisplayPort), and shrunk it into a proprietary version (Mini DisplayPort).
How is this best for consumers?

To me, such a decision was only made in the interest of Apple. More $$$.
To use anything else, requires a special adapter, you'd have to likely get from Apple due to the custom designed Mini DisplayPort connector.

Mac's aren't budget computers to begin with, and people get upset when they are forced to buy an adapter cable that wasn't actually needed.
Whether it's cheap or not.

 

[nyisles84]

i was wondering. I have a 32 inch samsung LCD tv. If I was to buy the mini display port to VGA adapator, anyone know if the quality would really suffer on the TV?

 

[Pigumon]

Actually, now that I've read a little more and found that the mini display port is actually an industry standard that (hopefully) will be adopted in the next 2 years, I'm not so against it.

Jobs said right in his keynote that they've switched to the new industry standard mini display port! Not proprietary AT ALL. Please- READ before RANT. Think before speak.

Anyway, it's great. But why not just make it HDMI? Can HDMI not handle the resolution? Then you'd have audio along for the ride.

it bothers me that you have to hook up a silly headphone adapter to the audio part of your tv.

 

[danny_w]

Jobs said right in his keynote that they've switched to the new industry standard mini display port! Not proprietary AT ALL. Please- READ before RANT. Think before speak.

Anyway, it's great. But why not just make it HDMI? Can HDMI not handle the resolution? Then you'd have audio along for the ride.

it bothers me that you have to hook up a silly headphone adapter to the audio part of your tv.

Display Port can carry audio as well as video, and is an (emerging) industry standard, but Mini Display Port is Apple proprietary. I don't care what Jobs said, nobody else make a mini display port anything. Look it up yourself. I would really like to see some alternative, but there isn't one (yet at least).

 

[nanofrog]

Jobs said right in his keynote that they've switched to the new industry standard mini display port! Not proprietary AT ALL. Please- READ before RANT. Think before speak.

Yes and No, so that statement isn't correct.

DisplayPort, is a VESA standard (1.1) enacted in 2006. There is no provision for a miniaturized version, or even proposed at this time. I double checked VESA.org to verify.

Then I went to wiki.
Here's what (little) they had to say on Mini DisplayPort. If this were a standard, the standards organization, in this case VESA, would be listed.

I even went to various electronic component suppliers and looked. Nothing. This is not a standard connector.

Anyway, it's great. But why not just make it HDMI? Can HDMI not handle the resolution? Then you'd have audio along for the ride.

It has to do with royalties. You have to pay to use HDMI, $0.04USD per device. Not much, but Apple has historically refused to do so, and has either created their own (ADB for example), or found a royalty free alternative.

 

[clinto89]

If we all just used patience and would wait more than two days after release to make a huge deal about how there is absolutely NO cables for connection we would probably be less upset about the lack of cable and connection availability. I'm sure a company like Belkin will have some sort of cable developed soon enough.

Also consider: DisplayPort is industry standard. So, although Apple has taken the concept and developed their own version (Mini DisplayPort), I wouldn't be surprised if Mini DisplayPort were to be the next "industry standard"
Why? It's a compact version of the latter meaning it can be thrown into computers and take up less space allowing for a more compact design. Also, Apple tends to be a large leader in the tech world, especially with computers and. From my own observation it seems that Apple releases something, such as Mini DisplayPort, and the rest of the industry begins to follow. Another example: Apple released the iPhone. I think almost every cellular phone manufacturer now has a touchscreen mobile phone on the market.

 

[geekynerd]

is anyone able to connect a VGA to the mini DisplayPort thru mini DisplayPort-DVI and DVI-VGA adapters?

 

[nanofrog]

I'm sure a company like Belkin will have some sort of cable developed soon enough.

Maybe, if they can get the connectors, and would be willing to pay Apple a licensing fee/royalty.

From my own observation it seems that Apple releases something, such as Mini DisplayPort, and the rest of the industry begins to follow. Another example: Apple released the iPhone. I think almost every cellular phone manufacturer now has a touchscreen mobile phone on the market.

It may become a standard, if Apple is willing to forgo any licensing/royalty requirements for the connector, as they likely have made a patent application for it. This is why manufacturers prefer to use royalty free standards. They might use it in the end, assuming the market is large enough to justify it (HDMI comes to mind), but would resist doing so for as long as they can. Apple's current refusal to accept HDCP qualifies as "resistance" for example. Though the switch to Mini DisplayPort may change this. Leaves the door open anyway.

As for the touchscreen phone, Apple doesn't own the concept. No one does. So long as they don't violate any Intellectual Property used in a specific device, they can make their own without fear of prosecution for Patent Violation.

 

[Chundles]

is anyone able to connect a VGA to the mini DisplayPort thru mini DisplayPort-DVI and DVI-VGA adapters?

You most likely won't be able to.

The adapters that convert to DVI carry only the digital signal so converting that DVI plug to a VGA one with a second adapter won't work because the analogue signal isn't coming through.

If you want to use an analogue VGA screen you'll need the mini DisplayPort to VGA adapter.

If you want to use a digital DVI screen up to 1920x1200 you'll need the mini DisplayPort to DVI adapter.

If you want to use a display with greater resolution (2560x1600 for example in most 30" monitors) you'll need the mini DisplayPort to Dual-link DVI adapter. This also takes up a USB port to power the adapter.

So to run a HDTV you just need the DVI adapter, to run a 30" Dell or Apple or HP or whatever monitor, you'll need the big dual-link adapter.

 

[zepharus]

Thanks for clarifying. Good information to know if I'm ever asked.

I just realized (five minutes ago) that my monitor has an optional DVI connection. Should I be connecting that way instead of VGA?

Compared to VGA, DVI is MUCH better.

VGA = Washed out hazier image -This is an Anaolog connection

DVI = Very crisp , sharper images - This is a Digital Connection

 

[xraydoc]

Apple took a standard (DisplayPort), and shrunk it into a proprietary version (Mini DisplayPort).
How is this best for consumers?

To me, such a decision was only made in the interest of Apple. More $$$.
To use anything else, requires a special adapter, you'd have to likely get from Apple due to the custom designed Mini DisplayPort connector.

Mac's aren't budget computers to begin with, and people get upset when they are forced to buy an adapter cable that wasn't actually needed.
Whether it's cheap or not.

I'm surprised his Steveness still uses standard USB connectors. I mean, the mini-B connectors are pretty small - why doesn't Apple develop some kind of mini-A connector for their laptops? Then, they could nickel and dime us some more and make us buy mini-USB to standard-USB adapters.

Apple does a lot of things well, and a lot of things really, really badly. Its ADC all over again. Here come new, pricey adapters to add to your drawer full of other Apple-made dongles. $100 for a mini-DP to dual-link DVI adapter? Even if its chock full of electronics... geez!

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

Mini-DP is small, and universal. Before, using Mini-DVI/Micro-DVI, you couldn't power a 30" display with resolutions greater than 1920 x 1200. That's why the previous gen MBP had the full size dual-link DVI. In an effort to standardize display output, Apple chose DisplayPort and made it smaller. They also upgraded the graphics chipset so that even a Mbs and MBAs can power displays with resolutions greater than 1920 x 1200. Those are the bare facts so don't accuse me of fanboyism.

Sure there are sacrifices, such as adaptors. But you get a uniform port that drives both audio/video with any type of resolution and supports the older VGA and newer DVI standard. More like an all-in-one which Apple is known for. For example, the eMac, which was an all-in-one design back in the early 1990s. Now PC vendors are just beginning to brag about their all-in-ones like it was their idea.

 

[nanofrog]

Mini-DP is small, and universal.

How?
For Apple perhaps, but not for the rest of the world.

The connector isn't available to other manufacturers. I never saw it available with any of the parts suppliers I use. (Digikey, Newark, Mouser, Allied Electronics...).

When looking at the photos on iFixit, there was room enough on the pcb. They only would have had to move/shift the connectors over enough to fit a standard DisplayPort connector. It wouldn't have been that difficult.

 

[Digital Skunk]

....

Those aren't bare facts, you are right though. Apple went with Mini display port for 1) so it could fit across the board, and more importantly 2) so that they could actually have an external connector of some kind in the MB and MBP.

When you look inside the case and the Mobo, the battery and HDD compartment takes up 99% of the forward part of the case. There just wasn't much room for a full sized DP let alone a FW400 or 800 or eSATA port on any of the books.

I'd rather have full sized DP so I could use any monitor without adaptors at any time, but such is life... Apple users are always making sacrifices.

The eMac didn't debut in early 1990, it was the bondi blue iMac first in 1999/2000, then they split the iMac into the lamp shade in '03 and the eMac which carried on the revised iMac design.

 

[cube]

When you look inside the case ad the Mobo, the battery and HDD compartment take up 99% of the forward part of the case. There just wasn't much room for a full sized DP let alone a FW400 or 800 or eSATA port on any of the books.

Is it a sin to have ports in the back?

 

[Digital Skunk]

Is it a sin to have ports in the back?

Hell no!

I would take an eSATA port sticking out the top of my MBP any day. I am getting very fed up with Apple's sacrifices for the sake of design.

And very tired of people touting USB as being the end all be all for connectivity.

 

[cube]

I am getting very fed up with Apple's sacrifices for the sake of design.

BAD design. Good design is that which enhances function.

 

[nanofrog]

BAD design. Good design is that which enhances function.

This is how I've always seen it.
Some of the best products are more "form follows function" than force fitting a severely compromised product in a pretty package. Style should be added to enhance the end result, not compromise its function.

 

[Digital Skunk]

BAD design. Good design is that which enhances function.

This is how I've always seen it.
Some of the best products are more "form follows function" than force fitting a severely compromised product in a pretty package. Style should be added to enhance the end result, not compromise its function.

QFT both of you guys/gals.

The poor part about the design front is that Sony's lappies are doing a good job of both. A great job in fact. Just looking at the BTO options they have and their plethora of screen sizes makes me really want Windows to get their act together for Windows 7 (or whatever). That and the Adobe Master Collection CS4 + Lightroom would have me pulling farther and farther away from the Mac.

Although, this is just a minor caveat for now. Let's hope the 17" MBP redesign doesn't take away functionality. Same thing for the Mac Pro.

 

[ddarko]

Ok, I have the new MBP and two MB's on the way.

My current MBP is connected to my Dell 30" Monitor. Does this mean I need the new 99 adapter and not the 29 one?

Damn it, this is so confusing!

To answer your question - which doesn't seem to have been answered yet - you will need the $99 dual-link DVI adapter to connect your new Macbook Pro to your 30" monitor. The $29 adapter is a single-link DVI connector, which does not have enough bandwidth to drive the 30" monitor at its native 2560x1600 resolution. So budget another $100 to get the dual-link DVI adapter.

 

[danny_w]

To answer your question - which doesn't seem to have been answered yet - you will need the $99 dual-link DVI adapter to connect your new Macbook Pro to your 30" monitor. The $29 adapter is a single-link DVI connector, which does not have enough bandwidth to drive the 30" monitor at its native 2560x1600 resolution. So budget another $100 to get the dual-link DVI adapter.

But since the Dell has a regular DisplayPort connector, it ust seems so silly that he can't just get a miniDP-DP cable. Apple really needs to provide this cable, or allow 3rd party suppliers to do so. It would be MUCH ceaper than $99 I am sure.

 

[ddarko]

But since the Dell has a regular DisplayPort connector, it ust seems so silly that he can't just get a miniDP-DP cable. Apple really needs to provide this cable, or allow 3rd party suppliers to do so. It would be MUCH ceaper than $99 I am sure.

Well, he didn't say which Dell 30" monitor he has, I think the current one has a DisplayPort but older ones don't? I get the impression he's got an older 30" monitor that doesn't have DisplayPort. Of course, I agree that as more monitors come with DisplayPort, a mini to full size port will be needed. I don't really understand why Apple didn't stick a regular Display Port on the monitor where space isn't at a premium. There seems to be a lot of uncertainty whether this mini DisplayPort is part of the DisplayPort spec, there are in-depth threads running on both the Macworld and Apple Insider forums. No one seems to know for sure. I think it's good to move to DisplayPort over HDMI because DisplayPort is royalty-free while HDMI isn't but as usual, Apple adds a wrinkle to it to get a couple more bucks. Apple has made nickel-and-diming into an art.

 

[danny_w]

Well, he didn't say which Dell 30" monitor he has, I think the current one has a DisplayPort but older ones don't? I get the impression he's got an older 30" monitor that doesn't have DisplayPort. Of course, I agree that as more monitors come with DisplayPort, a mini to full size port will be needed. I don't really understand why Apple didn't stick a regular Display Port on the monitor where space isn't at a premium. There seems to be a lot of uncertainty whether this mini DisplayPort is part of the DisplayPort spec, there are in-depth threads running on both the Macworld and Apple Insider forums. No one seems to know for sure. I think it's good to move to DisplayPort over HDMI because DisplayPort is royalty-free while HDMI isn't but as usual, Apple adds a wrinkle to it to get a couple more bucks. Apple has made nickel-and-diming into an art.

I wouldn't exactly call $99 nickel-and-diming, but I get your point. While DisplayPort is royalty-free, Apple always seems to find a way to add their own royalty (a $99 royalty at that).

 

[ntrigue]

Suppose I wanted to connect my laptop to my receiver (HDMI in) which then went to my TV (HDMI out). I would have to get mini DisplayPort to DisplayPort adapter then connect with a DisplayPort to HDMI cable?

Holy hell! Guess I'll stick to AppleTV streaming.

 

[xraydoc]

Suppose I wanted to connect my laptop to my receiver (HDMI in) which then went to my TV (HDMI out). I would have to get mini DisplayPort to DisplayPort adapter then connect with a DisplayPort to HDMI cable?

Holy hell! Guess I'll stick to AppleTV streaming.

Mini-DisplayPort to DVI ($29) then DVI to HDMI (dongle or cable, $10).