Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Tilpots

macrumors 601
Original poster
Apr 19, 2006
4,195
71
Carolina Beach, NC
Seems to me HDMI is now the standard for home entertainment. How come only the :apple:TV has this connection? I tried searching for HDMI and was amazed at all the recent results. I would think most people should benefit from their computers having this connection, yet only one product offers it. Whatcha think? HDMI ports on the horizon, or not anytime soon?
 

edesignuk

Moderator emeritus
Mar 25, 2002
19,232
2
London, England
Apple TV is a product to connect to modern TV's. Modern TV's have HDMI.

Apple computers are designed to connect to computer monitors, though other standards are coming through (DisplayPort) Apple (as with most) standardise with DVI.

There's is nothing odd about this, it makes complete sense.
 

Tilpots

macrumors 601
Original poster
Apr 19, 2006
4,195
71
Carolina Beach, NC
Look at all the people on this forum who are connecting their computers to an HDTV who are not using the :apple:TV. HDMI offers one less cable to deal with.

I use a MBP for video production and I often have to show clents their work at their place of business. It would be much easier to give a presentation on a nice big HDTV with an HDMI output.

Lots of people who use this forum want to be able to use their HDTV's as computer monitors, for slideshows, video chats, and a ton of other reasons. Shouldn't Apple make it more convienent for them?
 

Tilpots

macrumors 601
Original poster
Apr 19, 2006
4,195
71
Carolina Beach, NC
Solution: buy a DVI-HDMI cable, it's not difficult.

Thanks, I already have one.


A good point about video cards, but don't many of the PC media centers use these already? I know people complain about the :apple:TV video cards enough already, but are they all that bad/expensive?

I'm not up in arms or anything here. I just wanted to see what people here thought some possible factors might be for Apple not using the new home entertainment standard.
 

davidjearly

macrumors 68020
Sep 21, 2006
2,266
373
Glasgow, Scotland
I'm not up in arms or anything here. I just wanted to see what people here thought some possible factors might be for Apple not using the new home entertainment standard.

I agree with the others.

Why would Apple work hard to include a 'home entertainment standard' in their computers? Did you ever expect to see a scart or component connection on your Mac?

Apple desktops and notebooks are not home entertainment products, although they may be used for such purposes in certain circumstances. This is why the DVI-HDMI cable exists.
 

Tilpots

macrumors 601
Original poster
Apr 19, 2006
4,195
71
Carolina Beach, NC
I agree with the others.

Why would Apple work hard to include a 'home entertainment standard' in their computers? Did you ever expect to see a scart or component connection on your Mac?

To keep up with people's habits. Different technologies brings different uses. People are integrating their computers into their living rooms nowadays, not just putting them on a desk tucked away in the home office.

Apple desktops and notebooks are not home entertainment products, although they may be used for such purposes in certain circumstances. This is why the DVI-HDMI cable exists

If they're not home entertainment products, what are they? They're certainly not geared to sell to business. Apple's marketing is predominantly focused on how to use a computer for your own personal enjoyment.
 

nutmac

macrumors 603
Mar 30, 2004
6,097
7,486
Two reasons: (1) Apple does not want to pay HDMI royalty and (2) DVI-to-HDMI cables are cheap.

That said, I think Macs will get HDMI output with Blu-Ray. Without Blu-Ray or other features that work better with HDMI, there isn't much need for HDMI on current Macs.
 

wmcoverdale

macrumors newbie
Dec 24, 2009
1
0
Dvi is a video outlet and does not output sound. Even an optical cable only carries dolby digital sound. My understanding is that only HDMI is capable of outputting lossless sound. I'm no expert but it seems that even the most expensive apple desktops or notebooks, which all seem to lack an HDMI output are incapable of outputting Lossless high quality sound, or even dolby Digital sound to an AVR for play.

Personally, I play my computer music on my 12 year old Yamaha AVR via an optical cable from my cheap ACer desktop and great fantastic 24-96 PCM stereo sound + subwoofer. I don't think you can get this quality stereo sound from an Apple via its earphone output. My DVI to HDMI cable does get my high def quality video on my 50" hd monitor.

A notebook with an HDMI output could connect to an AVR to a HDTV with a short HDMI cable, and avoid the long cable connection problems of desktops located far from the TV or AVR.

To argue that a computer is not a home entertainment instument is not a very futuristic outlook. I have cloned my computer display to my tv for years and played my computer music over my AVR for at least 10 years while surfing my computer. My wireless mouse uses the TV display to control the primary computer display. High speed cable allows me to stream movies instantly from Netflix. etc. The computer is already a home entertainment device.

Think of Apple as a store rather than a computer. This store uses its computer to funnel its fans into the store to buy its products. This store has wonderful products, so most of its fans don't look or buy elsewhere, less there activities be known to their friends causing them to be viewed as an outsider and shunned.

Now, if Apple's technologically superior desktop or notebook had an HDMI output, some of its fans might figure out that a $5 HDMI cable would provide a superior connection to its $200 Apple TV (another kind of Apple store that only allows Apple movies to be shown on your large screen TV), whereas the $5 HDMI cable could play anything the computer can play. Its fans might even figure out that music sounds better when played on adult sized large speakers than the $10 speakers TV sets traditionally offer.

HDMI is simply a superior connection for sound and video that Apple does not offer on even its high end products. There must be a reason for that shortcoming and the only reason that I can think of is the Apple store. Similarly, there must be a reason why the Iphone will not "multitask" to allow you to listen to free Pandora radio music while you surf the internet or do mail. Maybe, Apple is losing its edge but just like GM and Ford, it continues to do a lot of business and make a lot of money. Unfortunately, GM and Ford had Toyota and Honda. Apple has Google, and Google's motto is not that the horse and buggy offer a quieter and smoother ride. Maybe Apple should start making a superior product with state of the art connections, before its many fans figure out that you really can get much more for less elsewhere.
 

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
17,011
4,973
Displayport has better specs than DVI and HDMI 1.2 and like the latter, it can also transport audio. Period.
 

agl82

macrumors regular
Jul 27, 2008
120
0
Displayport has better specs than DVI and HDMI 1.2 and like the latter, it can also transport audio. Period.

Yeah, let me hook my MacBook Pro up to the DisplayPort connector on my HDTV...oh wait. It doesn't have one. FAIL
 

QuarterSwede

macrumors G3
Oct 1, 2005
9,801
2,066
Colorado Springs, CO
Two reasons: (1) Apple does not want to pay HDMI royalty...
That's exactly why they don't. They opted for the open Displayport standard. This is also exactly why BluRay hasn't made it in a Mac yet. And for those of you who think that the cables are expensive, buy them from Monoprice.com. Dirt, freaking, cheap. If Apple only did this so that you'd buy a cable from them then they would've slapped an authorization chip inside like they do for other products.

I'm not saying I like it but I certainly don't like companies passing the royalty off to the consumer like almost all of them do for HDMI.
 

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
17,011
4,973
Yeah, let me hook my MacBook Pro up to the DisplayPort connector on my HDTV...oh wait. It doesn't have one. FAIL

Dual-mode DisplayPort interfaces generate also HDMI/DVI signals, requiring only a simple adapter, so it's 3 connectors in 1.
 

cjmillsnun

macrumors 68020
Aug 28, 2009
2,399
48
Two reasons: (1) Apple does not want to pay HDMI royalty and (2) DVI-to-HDMI cables are cheap.

That said, I think Macs will get HDMI output with Blu-Ray. Without Blu-Ray or other features that work better with HDMI, there isn't much need for HDMI on current Macs.

1. Macs will never get Blu-Ray. Steve would much rather you download your movies on iTunes than support Blu-Ray

2. DisplayPort supports HDCP and Apple can SELL you a nice adaptor and make more $$$ for themselves
 

pdjudd

macrumors 601
Jun 19, 2007
4,037
65
Plymouth, MN
2. DisplayPort supports HDCP and Apple can SELL you a nice adaptor and make more $$$ for themselves

Apple doesn’t control display port any more than they have control over HDMI - they could sell you an adapter no matter what if you do not have the appropriate connector. Not to mention that you can get the necessary adapter from someone else just as easily outside of Apple.

Apple used DisplayPort because it is deliberately designed for computer displays and their are no royalties - Apple intends for your to connect your computer to a monitor - not a TV. That’s their goal.
 

FX120

macrumors 65816
May 18, 2007
1,173
235
Hell I would have been happy if they'd just gone with normal size display port which is becoming the new standard on corporate issue laptops, and actually making some headway at replacing VGA on boardroom projectors.

But no, instead they have to come out with another obscure port.
 

Goona

macrumors 68020
Mar 11, 2009
2,268
0
You haven't picked up on the Apple mentality yet, have you? Apple decides what their users' habits are, not the other way around.

You could say the same about any company. They make their products with what they want in it and the consumers go out and buy it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.