Apple ponies up free Mini DisplayPort spec licenses

Apple has just announced that -- in addition to shipping all new computers with the Mini DisplayPort -- they're offering no-fee licenses to companies that develop products utilizing the connection, hoping to create a de facto standard. Of course, the VESA-approved DisplayPort hasn't been widely adopted, so it remains to be seen whether its miniature sibling will ever take off. At any rate, it looks like the company might have learned a thing or two back in the day, when FireWire's steep licensing fees slowed its progress as a serious contender to USB. You hear that, hardware developers? You can be part of Apple's latest obscure connector revolution -- for absolutely nothing.

[Via Ars Technica]

[PyRo1509 @ Dec 1st 2008 10:45PM]

Compatibility! FTW

[Tinu @ Dec 1st 2008 11:02PM]

What will be the approval process for this be like for this? I think...
1) Product must have white wire, similar to iPod headphones.
2) If product is battery-powered, battery must be non-removable.
3) Must not display any media players on the monitor other than iTunes.
If rules are violated, free license will be revoked :-X and companies product will be banned in next firmware.

Hey....it could happen :-P :-P.

[justanotherperson @ Dec 1st 2008 11:58PM]

hmm...
notice a trend in apple?
there's always a regular to start off with.
and then a mini(ipod).
and then a nano.
so whats next? nano displayport? i wonder how much smaller it will get with apple leading the way...

[PyRo1509 @ Dec 2nd 2008 4:02AM]

The order goes:
release product to great fan fair.
everyone buys it all at the same time so no one can test it out and realize its broken OTB
then they release a series of firmwares to fix the problems.
2 years later... most of it is ironed out.

[superhobo @ Dec 2nd 2008 4:46AM]

At first I was like ":O, Apple doing something NICE"
Then I realized ":-/, the original DisplayPort isn't huge either"

like JerkFacedFed says (scroll down) "Yes, the VESA creates a standard port, then Apple cant fit it on their mobo so they create a useless mini version and then call it a standard. Then the idiots at engadget think they are being generous by allowing their "standard" to be freely used. Genius at work."

[Information Central @ Dec 2nd 2008 5:33AM]

Compatibility? NO, that's not what we have here.

What Apple should have done is put an HDMI port on there that could operate beyond the HDMI spec when connected to devices that called for higher resolutions or data rates. This would have proved far more useful to customers and might have pushed the HDMI spec forward at the same time.

But no. Apple cuts corners and basically ruins the MacBook by leaving out Firewire, while inventing yet another ridiculous connector instead of reusing an existing standard. They never learn. They already blundered by requiring a new connector for Firewire 800, while USB is about to enter its third generation with the same (or, in the case of USB 3, backward-compatible) connectors.

Use some common sense, Apple.

[strider_mt2k @ Dec 2nd 2008 7:57AM]

Standards FTL. :(

[Evoss @ Dec 3rd 2008 3:57PM]

display port is sit ...

[allislost @ Dec 1st 2008 10:47PM]

CAns it do?

[chuuchdizzle @ Dec 1st 2008 10:49PM]

I hope for consumers sake no one picks this up, I mean unless you're a fan of carrying dongles.

[mabhatter @ Dec 2nd 2008 12:02AM]

why? Full size display port was speced out a few years ago to handle Dual-Link DVI and DRM responsibilities by Intel and co. Apple's mini port is the perfect upgrade to the spec nobody is using, supposedly able to drive a 30" monitor and tiny as heck there's no reason not to use it. It will work on all the small form factor computers allowing mini-pci cards in slim cases to take off with 2 "full size" plugs on the card.

[Jon Nelson @ Dec 2nd 2008 1:00AM]

I carry my dongle everywh--

Oh wait..

[AVG @ Dec 1st 2008 10:50PM]

Free licenses?! That's even better than NOT being greedy pricks and using an already established connection in the first place!

[john12ik2 @ Dec 1st 2008 10:51PM]

how about using a regular size displayport which is close in size to a usb port?

what's the point of using mini-displayport?

[Marty @ Dec 1st 2008 10:55PM]

why use a mini-displayport? because Apple wants to be FIRST!1!!!!11!
Just like those retards on message boards.

[who? @ Dec 1st 2008 11:10PM]

That reminds me...

[Mario @ Dec 2nd 2008 5:23AM]

I expect their tactic is the same one favoured by their arch enemy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

It's particularly sad as one of the great things about DisplayPort was its license-free and royalty-free nature. After Apple have subsumed the standard, expect licence fees for their mini-DP to burgeon.

[Saad Rabia @ Dec 1st 2008 10:52PM]

I guess no one is interested, eh?

[JerkfacedFed @ Dec 1st 2008 11:10PM]

Yes, the VESA creates a standard port, then Apple cant fit it on their mobo so they create a useless mini version and then call it a standard. Then the idiots at engadget think they are being generous by allowing their "standard" to be freely used. Genius at work.

[E. Leigh @ Dec 1st 2008 10:54PM]

Just a word to those adopting the standard - support all of the different standards for different computers, please! That way when Apple does it's next iteration of the Macbook and the MBP, it won't be so upsetting when they drop the obscure standard and port (and the hardware won't become obsolete, ala Firewire).

I'm cool with Apple being proprietary and all, if that's your cup o' tea, but quit trying to make everyone else's junk proprietary. Some of us work on different platforms daily!

At least yay for progress! 'Free' when it comes to licensing isn't a term oft heard.

[Skrying @ Dec 1st 2008 11:05PM]

Uh, why should anyone support this? How about not and forcing Apple to actually adopt the same port that every other computer company in the world is? There is absolutely ZERO REAL NON-GREED FUNDED REASON for Apple to do this. It's to force their users to pay for expensive dongles which in turn is revenue for Apple. This is why I hate Apple. A company like Dell couldn't get away with this in today's market, they would be pointed out and trashed in the media for their greedy ways. But no, this is Apple and the media loves the small multi-billion dollar company that screws over its users by releasing and dropping ports like no other company.

Then people like the poster above. You are willing going to take this? You're seriously going to pay extra money simply because Apple wants it from you? You're not going to speak out about a company changing a plug for no other reason than to create revenue by forcing you into their products for common use? You want to know the real reason why Apple is not going to charge a license for this port? So on court day they have a "oh look what we did" mark so they don't look like a monopoly. Sure, they hold a small margin in the overall PC market. But when you buy into the Apple ecosystem you're in deep, far worse than buying into a Windows machine.

[E. Leigh @ Dec 1st 2008 11:50PM]

I think you have gravely misunderstood my post. I was simply asking those who would adopt to think of more than just the small market-share that is Apple. I haven't drunk the koolaid and purchased a Pro or any Mac notebook. I'm simply asking that those who bow to the will of the fruit that hath fallen off the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil actually think of the Good for once and help multi-platform users out. Of course this is new technology is stupidly ridiculous, but you think they actually listen? Copy and paste, anyone?

Let's get one thing straight. I am a multimedia editor happily running a Lenovo T61 at home, but the University that I work with wants to have what's cliche, overpriced, and "what all the cool kids want" in the form of Macs for editing media (I work with audio and video more than photography). I HATE editing on a Mac. And I think that the standard port should have been used - that seemed like a huge no-brainer. The statement that Jobs made about HDMI being a "bag of hurt" is probably the stupidest one he's made in a while. I find it hard to believe anyone takes him seriously after that one (especially those who work in broadcast media...well, any type of media). So before you go spreading rumors about "posters" saying this or that, I suggest you actually think about what they are saying. If I could - I'd teach the University something more about editing - AVID runs on "not" Macs.

As for my personal opinion, the funky crowd can have their Macs and the adults can have their "PCs" (Windows or Linux).

[KarlW @ Dec 2nd 2008 12:13AM]

I don't know why they developed this - I'm not intimately familiar with the standard. Your point of view is greatly skewed by already hating Apple. It doesn't fit the facts.

- Proprietary connectors are more expensive. Apple wouldn't lower the retail cost, so they're just eating their own margin by using mini displayport without a good reason.
- They also take time to develop. As does everything. They had to design the connectors, prototype and modify them. There are expenses associated with that. And unless it's necessary, you're paying people for not doing anything productive.
- There has been some talk of extending the standard to include mini-DP. Evidently there is a reason, even if you or I don't know it.
- They're giving out the dimensions for free. All this is is a redesigned connector. It's still DP. Now, if any other companies are experiencing the same problems that led to Apple designing mini-DP, they can use these dimensions to ensure compatibility.

I can't really see how this can be seen in a negative way. There's obviously a reason that Apple did it, and if there is, it's a fair bet that other companies will run in to it. This allows them to solve the problem in a compatible way. Perhaps a standard amendment would have been less controversial.

People like you, who naturally hate Apple and everything they do, is why Engadget's such a mess. Any positive news is jumped on by people with no logical reason to dislike the particular action, and any negative news is defended by fanboys like they're fighting for their lives.

[AVG @ Dec 2nd 2008 12:17AM]

"I can't really see how this can be seen in a negative way. There's obviously a reason that Apple did it, and if there is, it's a fair bet that other companies will run in to it."

The kool-aid compels you!

[KarlW @ Dec 2nd 2008 12:19AM]

No, it's called logic. I can understand why haters would get them confused.

If you see a flaw in my deductions, point it out.

[E. Leigh @ Dec 2nd 2008 12:21AM]

I don't hate Apple. I don't like editing on an Apple, but I do like certain things about the OS. I think what they did with the ports is foolish, but I am not biased against them as a company - I just don't like some of the things that they do. I own an iPod, enjoy it, and have very little problems with it. I can also appreciate the clean design. I do think that Jobs has said some silly things, but hey, I like capitalism, and if you can get folks to buy your product (and, truth be told, they are more expensive), then great. Just adopt SOME norms is all I am asking for because it helps when you work across platforms.

Low Rank in 3, 2, 1....

[John @ Dec 2nd 2008 12:23AM]

So your logic is:
a) It would be stupid to create this adapter without a really good, fair minded reason
b) Therefore, Apple must have had a really good and fair minded reason.

Genius!

[CraigJ @ Dec 2nd 2008 12:43AM]

FYI Jobs never said HDMI was a bag of hurt. He said BluRay was a bag of hurt. I think he is full of crap in this regard, but at least get your quotes straight.

[Skrying @ Dec 2nd 2008 1:05AM]

KarlW you have to be kidding. They didn't design it for no reason. I stated they designed for their own greed. It's clear that the intention of miniDisplayPort is to force Apple users into buying a dongle. Guess who is the largest supplier of said dongle? That's right, it's Apple. The peripheral market is huge and that can be seen in a number of areas. Sony and Microsoft are able to sell consoles at a lost partially because of the money made off of selling peripherals. Apple can give these licenses away because they can just as simply revoke them.

All companies are MONEY MOTIVATED. They have to be, in fact by LAW THEY HAVE TO BE. In capitalism you must have educated and smart consumers who realize that a product is designed simply for cash flow. You should pay for something if it increases your productivity, entertainment, etc. But miniDisplayPort does none of that, in fact it does nothing but negatives. It forces the user into spending money on a dongle, which they also have to carry around. The standard DisplayPort certainly does not take up extra space to cause a need for a thinner port. Additionally since the ports are compatible without conversion (the dongle does nothing but rearrange the pins) that means miniDisplayPort is electrically identical.

KarlW you strike me as someone who actually believes companies are generally good, as if they are not money motivated. I'm sorry, but the world does not operate in such a manor. Educate yourself.

[KarlW @ Dec 2nd 2008 1:15AM]

@Skyring

Yes, and releasing the spec for free is clearly going to bring them millions.

If they did actually want to lock people in to proprietary connectors and dongles, there wouldn't be this royalty-free license. The most logical answer is that normal DP didn't fit their needs, so they had to design an alternative connector.

Yes, companies are designed to make money (otherwise they'd be charities). However, it's not as simple as you make it seem. Logic comes before all else, and there is no logical reason, given that the spec is free, to claim that mini DP was a diabolical plot to make money with no practical benefit to system design.

[Skrying @ Dec 2nd 2008 2:11AM]

Again, you completely ignore the fact that the biggest supplier of dongles for this port is Apple. That's the logical reason they'd make it, to make more money. There is absolutely nothing at all that would prevent them from using the normal DisplayPort port. As I stated earlier, being electrically identical also means that hardware wise besides the physical port there is nothing that would even need to be designed. Reshape it and solder it on the board, you have a winner. As for opening up a port that is only on THREE DEVICES that represents a small percentage of the market means that companies actually using miniDisplayPort are going to be minor because it would only address only three devices in the entire world. Furthermore I would guess there are major legal issues for only reshaping the DisplayPort port and then charging for it.

But oh well, clearly they have a good reason. You know like... well wait. It's electrically identical, normal DisplayPort takes up virtually no more space... hmm... well there is that nice dongle thing they sell.... hmm... it's all coming clear now. This isn't hard. MiniDisplayPort is a money grab that cost Apple virtually nothing. It follows their previous history as well, the previous books had a mini DVI that was pointless as well.

[James @ Dec 2nd 2008 2:45AM]

Whatever Steve says much be correct. I shall adopt every new standard apple puts put...nooo what am i saying, sorry ive been listening to my ipod too much need to stop working out.

[Heshmati4 @ Dec 1st 2008 10:58PM]

Why can't we all have just one universal video configuration?? VGA to DVI now we have so many options: DVI to HDMI or DisplayPort or this "mini" DisplayPort. Only Apple cares about how small the port is so they could make their computers thinner and thinner. Other companies could care less.

[Skrying @ Dec 1st 2008 11:05PM]

Have you seen a DisplayPort port? They're tinny already. The standard port would do NOTHING towards making their computers thinner. Thinner systems exist that use real standards.

[Jaimi @ Dec 1st 2008 10:59PM]

And how is apples "mini display port" any better than HDMI? Lets see: The bandwidth is the same as HDMI 1.3, so there's no advantage there. And every display in the world made in the last couple of years has HDMI. And the older ones have DVI which can be connected with a converter. Ah, sorry, I mean "every display except the apple 24 cinema display".
It appears "mini display port" is unneeded, and unwanted.

[dagamer34 @ Dec 1st 2008 11:08PM]

Licensing fees. For example, if it cost $1 for Dell to stick in an HDMI port into a laptop, and they ship 10 million computers in a year, then they've just "lost" $10 million dollars.

HDMI has licensing fees, DisplayPort does not.

And I really doubt that Apple has the legal ability to modify a spec and then charge people for access to it. Sounds like IP theft with a paint job to me.

[Skrying @ Dec 1st 2008 11:20PM]

DisplayPort can be placed on a Dell just as easily and it would be in legitimate form, not some non-standard customer abusing form. DisplayPort itself is a great technology and will become popular, it is the feature. However, miniDisplayPort is a rip off and was not needed for any reason at all. It's simply Apple forcing their customers into purchasing a dongle.

[Jimmy @ Dec 2nd 2008 11:23AM]

"Licensing fees. For example, if it cost $1 for Dell to stick in an HDMI port into a laptop, and they ship 10 million computers in a year, then they've just "lost" $10 million dollars."

i think i'd rather pay an extra dollar for a laptop with a widely adopted standard than 1 dollar less and hope that display port (or mini display port) becomes more common.

[ZeroCorpse @ Dec 2nd 2008 11:37AM]

Some of you have apparently not seen inside the new MacBook (which I happen to be typing on at this moment)... THERE'S NO DAMN ROOM FOR A FULL-SIZE DISPLAYPORT.

Seriously. The hard drive/battery access takes up the entire front end of the Macbook. The mainboard doesn't even go there.

The two USB ports, Mini DisplayPort, Magsafe/AC power port, Audio in, Audio out, and Ethernet hog all the space available. If you look at the guts, you'll see that there's simply no more room. You can't add even half of a port-- There's simply no space. The other side of the MacBook has the optical drive,

Where would you propose they pull the space for an extra firewire port AND a full-size DisplayPort?

I suppose they could have made it a bigger computer, but frankly, I like the compact size.

This isn't "Apple trying to get money from selling adapters" -- It's sacrificing full-size ports in favor of a smaller form factor for the computer as a whole. If you don't like that design, then get the other version of the MacBook. It's really Just That Simple.

Me? I'm glad I moved up to the Aluminum. Yes, I had to shell out $30 for an adapter, and yes, I would like more space between the USB ports, but other than that, this is an truly excellent computer and will serve me for years to come.

[Jaimi @ Dec 1st 2008 11:00PM]

We do have a universal standard. It's called HDMI. Now, why doesn't apple use it?

[Jaimi @ Dec 1st 2008 11:01PM]

Hmm. The comment system seems broken - it forgets it's a reply if you change tabs. This was a response to Heshmati4 above.

[rogerdodger00 @ Dec 1st 2008 11:21PM]

'cause display port is better than HDMI and it's the future

[maveric101 @ Dec 1st 2008 11:35PM]

the only important difference is that HDMI has DRM, which the studios and people want for movies and stuff. off the top of my head, i can't think of a (legal) situation in which the DRM would get in the way. HDMI is much more established, so i don't know why we don't just use that.

[steven @ Dec 1st 2008 11:38PM]

Because HDMI is a bag of hurt.

[xValentine @ Dec 1st 2008 11:50PM]

@steven, no Blu-Ray is. According to Jobs.

[mabhatter @ Dec 2nd 2008 12:10AM]

because HDMI and HDCP is licensed with steep terms about protected path of sound and video to the port internally. It's wide spread for electronics but already maxed out with regular HDTVs.. and you have to pay a bunch of money to get your hardware certified to get the HDCP keys issued. For something as multi-use as a computer it's just not practical for everyday monitor use.

[John @ Dec 2nd 2008 12:26AM]

what do you mean not practical for everyday monitor use. It's a small adapter that's prevalent on quite a lot of equipment. And guess what, it supports HDCP too.

[Jon Nelson @ Dec 2nd 2008 1:02AM]

@ xValentine

Yes. We know. That was the joke.

[_||_ @ Dec 2nd 2008 2:30AM]

i completely agree with you. even dell, who was the driving force behind displayport adoption, makes hdmi ports available on their computers and monitors for compatibility. and they did not mess with the (already tiny) connector size despite being first to market with displayport

[jordan @ Dec 2nd 2008 6:50AM]

Simple, I think: money. The DisplayPort spec, has no licensing fees, and Apple can change the standard, offer no-fee licensing for now, then turn around and decide to charge for it later.

It's suprising, to me, to see so many HDMI supporters on Engadget simply because "it's more widely adopted." Am I the only person to have headaches switching inputs on the TV and having to unplug/re-connect the HDMI cable because the signal is lost from time to time, and it tells me to re-establish the connection? HDCP = not your friend. :( I'm more in favor of a connection that won't judge my connection; just send the video feed, and perhaps query for the proper screen resolution...don't try to DRM it up.