MiniDisplayport

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by joeltcaron, Feb 19, 2009.

  1. joeltcaron macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Location:
    TX
    #1
    Anyone else think the MiniDisplayport is the worst decision apple has ever made? I love their computers and own a few of them. I was considering upgrading to one of the newer unibody MBPs, but I just learned the the minidisplayport is the only way to get video out of it. I use a Matrox Triplehead2go frequently and this does not support it. At least they could have left the DVI port on the machines.

    Oh yeah, and $100 for a Mini Displayport to Dual Link DVI that has its bugs.

    DVI accepts higher resolutions, anyways.
     
  2. furious macrumors 65816

    furious

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2006
    Location:
    Australia
    #2
    it has stopped me buying one. :( My Rev A Macbook is falling apart. :eek: Hopefully New iMacs are released with the goods. i will get one instead. Yes I know they are also going to have MDP.
     
  3. raymondu999 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #3
    Don't mean to burst your bubble here mate, but the DisplayPort spec that the Mini DP is based on can support 30-bit color, 3840x2160, @ 120Hz. Or 4 1920x1080, or the same number of pixels in the other configurations you can think of.
     
  4. Adokimus macrumors 6502a

    Adokimus

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #4
    Yeah, but it requires expensive, cumbersome dongle adapters (some of which don't exist yet/ever). And to get the full resolution, you need a $100 adapter that has a two-star rating on apple's website (http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB571?mco=MzA3MDgxNw) and that is described as faulty all over the web.

    They should have gone with the standard DisplayPort, it's not that big.
     
  5. Quu macrumors 68020

    Quu

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2007
    #5
    I do have to agree I preferred DVI to Display Port.

    1. No monitors I have are Display Port compatible
    2. The dongles to make it compatible cost money and are of a questionable quality
    3. Display Port was an answer to a problem that no one had. DVI was fine.

    I have a 30" 2560x1600 Display that I'd like to use with my new Unibody MacBook Pro 17" but I'm not willing to pay out £70 for a connector that most likely wont work anyway. It is hard to stomach the price of the adapter but combined with a large chance that it wont work at all is enough to make me stay away.

    I hope for some cheaper more reliable 3rd party Dual-Link DVI adapters soon.
     
  6. drlunanerd macrumors 65816

    drlunanerd

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    UK
    #6
    Right now it's a case of Premature Specification.
    Apple should've held off until it was mature.
    They sure do love playing around with display connectors - see ADC.
     
  7. joeltcaron thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Location:
    TX
    #7
    Minidisplayport

    No offense taken. I hope you are right. Where is that spec located at? I looked around on the net and I guess I was viewing inaccurate data.
     
  8. Grimace macrumors 68040

    Grimace

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    with Hamburglar.
    #8
    This argument is pretty flimsy for a number of reasons:

    1. Newer monitors are being updated to also include DisplayPort (even if Apple uses it exclusively)
    2. Newer computers with DP or MDP can use an inexpensive adapter to get to VGA or DVI inputs on monitors.
    3. Those who need dual-link (30 inch monitors) and a more expensive adapter can usually afford it.

    The only place where it may be ahead of its time is with Apple monitors that only have DisplayPort inputs -- that requires a computer with DP output, and those are pretty new.

    p.s. Apple had DVI on it's Powerbooks long for years while everyone else was using crappy VGA.
     
  9. kolax macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    #9
    I had to buy two adapters - MDP to DVI and MDP to VGA.

    But I prefer Mini DisplayPort. It is so much easier to pop in the tiny adapter than it was to have to lung in a big awkward cable like DVI.
     
  10. kasakka macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #10
    Only Apple don't have the most obvious adapter - Mini-DP -> regular DP at all!

    I don't know if it's the hardware or the adapters, but there seem to be all kinds of problems with them even with Apple's own monitors.
     
  11. lordthistle macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Location:
    Italy
    #11
    I agree. By the time DisplayPort becomes a true standard (meaning that many screens provide that interface), these notebooks will be obsolete.

    Furthermore, a Display Port would have been (almost) fine. There is a mini Display Port and you will still need an adapter when DisplayPort is a standard.

    - thistle
     
  12. semitry macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    #12
    You have to pop in the adapter AND "lung in a big awkward cable"
     
  13. kolax macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    #13
    Adapter stays connected to the DVI cable all the time...what's your point?
     
  14. lordthistle macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Location:
    Italy
    #14
    What about different monitors on different desks? Like home - office...

    thistle
     
  15. kolax macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    #15
    If I had two monitors, home and office, then I'd probably buy two adapters just for the convenience.

    Same reason I have two chargers - one stays at my desk and one for on the road.
     
  16. raymondu999 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #16
  17. Consultant macrumors G5

    Consultant

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    #17

    re: 3
    Actually the often asked question of:
    can I play Blu-Ray... (which might be solved in the future after all models get DisplayPort).

    The $100 adapter is a bit silly though. I won't be upgrading my 17" MBP anytime soon.
     
  18. kolax macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    #18
    $100 for the Dual Link adapter is quite reasonable... there's a lot of technology in that adapter.
     
  19. danny_w macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #19
    $100 may be reasonable if the converter (not adapter) actually WORKS. From the postings and reviews that I have read it quite often doesn't.
     
  20. lordthistle macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Location:
    Italy
    #20
    Obviously you can buy two or more notebooks, a dozen of adapters, ten chargers, ... that's not the point.
     
  21. kolax macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    #21
    Calm down.

    All I said is I'd buy two adapters if I were to work at home and office using external displays.
     
  22. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #22
    Whether or not a person can afford something is not justification to price gauge customers.

    Unless I'm getting gold plated connectors, 99.99% pure copper wires, no justification to pay more for something that's $1 to manufacture. Even with said enhancements, still not justified since it's all digital—it works or it doesn't; in this case it doesn't.
     
  23. danny_w macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #23
    Sorry, that's not quite true in this case. The dual-link dvi converter is an active processor converter, not a simple adapter, so it certainly costs more than $1 to manufacture. The real reason to be upset here is that Apple made this change that requires an active converter in the first place.
     
  24. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #24
    So maybe I exaggerated the cost of materials a bit, but the idea is it's not even close to $99.
     
  25. lordthistle macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Location:
    Italy
    #25
    Considering also that the same super-processor was included in the previous (smaller) MBP...

    -- thistle
     

Share This Page