Over long term HDMI is not meant to be used in computer monitors, full stop.
Over long term DP is meant to be used in computer monitors. So it is a more future-proof choice for a laptop.
If HDMI is not meant for computer monitors, then why is it everywhere? Displays, notebook PCs, desktop motherboards, desktop GPUs. Like I said, for every one DisplayPort product you have 100 HDMI products.
HDMI 1.3 and DisplayPort are both about 3.5 years now. In that 3.5 years, which connector has become the standard and dominate connector? Yeah, HDMI.
I don't see monitors or video cards who use this feature.
As you talk, it seems like older products will get new features through a magic specification upgrade
You just proved my entire argument with what you pointed out in red in your own quotation. DisplayPort is royalty free. With DisplayPort Apple gets a royalty free connector AND they pocket $29.99 from required adapter they sell you. Whats better for Apple? $10,000 + $0.04 per device or millions in profits from forced adapter sales?
And I never said that HDMI products get an upgrade via spec upgrades. HDMI 1.4 was just recently approved and will be rolled out as time goes on. HDMI 1.3 is years old now, the same age as DisplayPort. Again, both were finalized around the same time. Which one became the dominant standard?
I've not but I don't trust an anti-apple zealot about this.
How mature.
So where is the non-sense? Maybe I'm rich and I want the kind of flexibility and I'm paying the premium for having it on a 16x16cm computer.
What is not making sense is the fact that you're talking about flexibility via expensive adapters and dongles when you could get the same flexibility built-in with a PC.
If you want to discuss size, a modern PC notebook is only slightly larger than a MacBook Pro. Yet they offer far more powerful GPUs, faster CPUs, blu-ray, full size ExpressCard slots, multi-card readers, HDMI, VGA, quad core CPUs, etc. for less money.
I reapeat: how else could you achieve such a FLEXIBILITY without the "expensive dongle swapping game"? (this question also goes for the Macbooks, the Air in particular)
Again, standard PCs are only slightly larger than a MacBook/Pro of the same screen size, yet they offer all of that flexibility built-in with none of the hassle of expensive adapters. They offer more powerful hardware in a SLIGHTLY larger package, with more features as well as proper cooling systems and proper 16x9 displays.
You don't answer to this question because the answer destroy you "just for make you pay for adapters" theory. (a dumb theory, Apple could simply have raised the price of the Macs themselves of 30$ and nobody would have cared, why organize this evil adapter plot to get 30 bucks?
I did answer that question already. You just chose to ignore it because my statements ruined your entire argument.
Mini DisplayPort is all about Apple forcing the sales of adapters to get functionality that is built-in to PCs. On my PC I have VGA, S-Video, and HDMI with audio built-in. I can connect it to any display currently available without having to buy an adapter, even an old standard definition CRT TV.
Apple could easily build standard connectivity into their "smaller" systems. In fact, they did in the past. You know past PowerBooks had fullsize display connectors and S-Video, right?
If Apple didn't care about adapter sales, why did they stop including the adapters with their systems, aside from the Mac mini? The iBooks used to ship with the adapters you'd need. But not any more. Again, if Apple didn't care about adapter sales and the ridiculous profits they make off those sales, why didn't they just include mini HDMI?
Now I can answer about this, 'cause I have the Mini-DVI to VGA adapter.
It's not "useless" at all, you are over-exaggerating the thing, so I suspect it's the same for the Mini-DP to VGA.
I don't know what you expect, we're talking about VGA...
I expect VGA to present a clean signal. The VGA out on my PC notebook is extremely clean with no noise. Yet the mini DisplayPort to VGA adapter presents an image that has visible noise and color wavering, isn't sharp at all, and the colors aren't accurate even with calibration. Same with the mini DVI to VGA adapter for my old MacBooks. Using HDMI is like using a completely different computer.
Yeah I have. And guess what? Their 30" display only takes in native resolution over dual-link DVI, not DisplayPort or HDMI.
So HDMI is better than DP. Got it.
Thank you for admitting the truth.
This is crystal clear (again).
But the future is Display Port.
And the conveniently VGA-compliant, DVI-DL-compliant present is also Display Port for Apple.
Really? Is that why, after 3 years, only a handful of displays support DisplayPort while dozens support HDMI 1.3? Is that why after so many years so many PCs, GPUs, etc. support HDMI while only a couple of Dells and Macs support DisplayPort?
I guess they all use laptops as centers of their thousands dollars home theaters..... (that's the percentage I was talking about, not the total users of a home theater
No they don't. But guess what they do use? HDMI equipped PCs passing blu-ray video and audio over one cable.
You don't seem to get the questions...
I asked: how many PC/laptop users ACTUALLY hook their hdmi to a proper A/V receiver and get multichannel audio?
I don't know. Let's ask the hundreds of thousands over at AVS and then we can get an idea.
New questions: how many users have such a great sound system and such a rafinate ear to tell the difference between toslink compressed audio and hdmi high definition audio?
A better question is how many wouldn't have a system that can take advantage of the newer formats? I mean when we're talking about Dolby Digital, we're talking about 448Kbps being divided between 6 channels and the bitrate being dynamically allocated between channels. A lot of action in the center speaker? The other 5 channels get a lower bitrate.
Theres a night and day difference between the 640Kbps Dolby Digital Plus and Dolby TrueHD lossless track on The Dark Knight DVD. All you have to do is listen to the explosions. The DDP track has loud dull thuds for explosions. The lossless track will move your couch and you can feel the explosion in your gut.
Kanex makes an adapter for that.
Yay more adapters! It'd be 10x easier if Apple just followed industry standards. No need for this adapter nonsense.
Because most users will never use those ports in the whole life of the machine, so Apple decide to minimize space and uglyness of those ports in a convenient multi-purpose connector which will always give to the user only the port he needs.
So if Apple wanted to save space, why not just use mini HDMI?
Oh thats right, Apple only cares about selling adapters. If they didn't care about the profits from adapter sales, they would have never stopped including them with their portable systems.
Because apple makes extremely small/thin machines and needed such a unified solution.
Because apple probably plans to make even smaller/thinner machines in the near future...
So Apple will continue to prefer form over functionality which will reverse their growing trend and isolate their systems and customer base from the rest of the world.
This thing is getting ridicolous.
What is? Your argument that mini DisplayPort is about convenience rather than royalty free profit?
Yeah, 'cause 100% users needs to hook the laptop to external display
You never know when the need will arise. It's best to have the connectivity built-in rather than having to rush out and by a ridiculously expensive adapter. What if your display goes out and you just happen to be around an HDTV or monitor you can connect to? With a PC you can connect and be up and running right away. With a Mac you have to rush out and hope you're buying the right expensive adapter.
VGA
DVI-DL
Future-proof
Open standard
Royalty free
Future-proof by not supporting resolutions as high as HDMI. Royalty free so Apple can sell expensive adapters rather than adopt what has become the industry standard. Again, HDMI has no need for DVI-DL, and Apple's VGA adapters don't work good enough to use anyway.
Why not just design systems with functionality in mind like everyone else? If Apple didn't feel the need for their computers to lose more weight than super models, they could build PCs that were truly FUNCTIONAL and this would all be a moot point.
Again, its not like Apple hasn't provided standard connectivity before. Look at the older PowerBooks. Plus Apple included adapters in the box with the iBook. Why can't they include proper adapters in the box with the new Macs? Oh, thats right, because they profit more off of the sale of adapters.
Apple has alredy thought beyond that, as usual Read this:
Exclusive: Apple dictated Light Peak creation to Intel, could begin migration from other standards as early as 2010
We will get ethernet, data, audio, video, everything through this.
Maybe even the mini-DP is only a temporary thing.
Yeah, I read about that. Another classic example of Apple forcing upgrades by forcing perfectly functional hardware to become obsolete.
