Possibly because projectors are video equipment, not monitors, and as such need to connect to things other than computers (such as Blu-Ray players, which will only support HDMI for HD output), and projectors don't have to support >1080p resolutions (that monitors do).
HDMI doesn't work beyond 1920x1200, and monitors are far larger. Thus Apple uses a more flexible standard. You can drive an HDMI TV with a $20 dongle. You cannot drive a 2560x1600 monitor with HDMI, period. Newer computers will use Thunderbolt, which includes mDP.
So in essence, you want Apple to abandon a more capable port that is the basis for Thunderbolt and has increasing adoption in the PC space, for one that is limited to HDTV resolutions and can be replaced with a $20 dongle.
Thank God you don't run Apple.
Yes, I understand that there's nothing wrong with Mini DisplayPort, technically. But the problem is that I have yet to come across a video device that uses the connector. I don't like adapters, they're expensive, bulky and I never have them with me when I need them. All the VAIO people have VGAs on their netbooks and they can connect to our university projectors instantly. All the Mac people need to run around for hours on campus trying to find someone with an adapter, only to find out that it's the wrong kind (Mini DisplayPort or DVI, or the
other (big) DVI, that makes 3 connectors, while people who stick with 20 year old technology still have it easy).
I like technology that makes my life better, not technology that should or could make it better.
I have no idea how these standards work, but Mini DisplayPort is pretty useless to me. Maybe it's great for monitors, but I'm more likely to connect my MacBook Pro to a projector for a presentation or a TV screen to watch a movie than a monitor. If my MacBook Pro had VGA or HDMI
in addition to Mini DisplayPort, I'd be fine. The thing is Apple thinks that just because "you can get an adapter", it's all fine. No, it's not fine, because you need to pay £20 for it, and then you have to have it with you all the time. How come cheap laptops get to have HDMI?
Yes, I know, it would take up more space on the motherboard, which means something could get compromised (a component would get removed or the whole laptop would be thicker), but I'm not an engineer, I'm just speaking of a user's viewpoint. All the Mac people in my class are always pissed off at not being able to hold a presentation when they find out that the ultra-modern projector isn't compatible with their ultra-modern laptop.
Who's fault is it? Everyone's, probably: the projector people aren't adopting current technology. But then maybe current tech is too expensive. Maybe Apple should have stuck with old tech. Maybe adapters should come free with the computer. Maybe this should all go by USB somehow. I have no idea, but why is the most expensive computer also the most annoying one when it comes to making an ad-hoc presentation?
