http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/07/kensington-teams-with-displaylink-for-usb-dual-monitor-adapter/ Engadget Comments for Kensington teams with DisplayLink for USB Dual Monitor Adapter http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/07/kensington-teams-with-displaylink-for-usb-dual-monitor-adapter/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/07/kensington-teams-with-displaylink-for-usb-dual-monitor-adapter/
You've got a max *theoretical* throughput of 60Mbps, right?

1440 x 1050 x 32-bit output x 60Hz of data = 346Mbps... right? So, er, you'd need SIX dedicated USB2 connections working in parallel... right?

And that's presuming that the USB2 bandwidth isn't being shared by other devices that want to communicate... what happens if that DVD-quality video you want to stream is stored on a USB2 drive?

Now, it's entirely possible that this device is doing some kind of compression - e.g., if there's some kind of software on your machine that pushes (to the Kensington USB2 device) only the portions of the screen that have changed since the last update. That might compress it a lot... but at the expense of a *ton* of CPU usage, right? No wonder they make no promises about "gaming performance" - your CPU might redline just trying to evaluate what parts of the video image are to be sent to the Kensington device...

Look, this just doesn't make any technical sense, and it probably runs poorly. I'd love to read some hands-on reviews, but there aren't any... so... Caveat Emptor!
]]>Jun 5th 2008 5:20PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/07/kensington-teams-with-displaylink-for-usb-dual-monitor-adapter/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/07/kensington-teams-with-displaylink-for-usb-dual-monitor-adapter/
I wouldn't buy video hardware from a company that calls 1440x1050 widescreen. ]]>Jan 7th 2008 11:55AM