DisplayPort 1.2 adds Apple's mini connector, stereoscopic 3D

If Apple's no-fee licensing wasn't enough to entice manufacturers, the Mini DisplayPort connector is now being added to VESA's DisplayPort 1.2 specifications. The update will also double the available bandwidth to 5.4Gbps, which can be used for 1920 x 1080 stereoscopic 3D imagery, four 1920 x 1200 screens, or one massive 3840 x 2160 display. According to Register Hardware, the 1.2 standard will be published by the middle of this year.

[Via Mac Rumors]

[Waveblade @ Jan 14th 2009 12:00PM]

Still doesn't make it any less annoying. Expect ripoffs on cables regardless in local stores.

[216 @ Jan 14th 2009 12:03PM]

pre much

[NoAndThen @ Jan 14th 2009 12:12PM]

Are you talking about it not making hdmi less annoying? Cuz I agree.

Displayport is better than hdmi and dvi in just about every way; please see my earlier post on the subject. Fewer wires, WAY less interference, less voltage issues, ability to send aux data like screen brightness... I can keep going but I already did in another post.

There does not actually need to be a de facto standard for every tech, lest we lose innovation.

I think this is an excellent adavancement, and may have been a smart move for apple in the long run.

All you angry tech geeks and some of you fanboys need to get off your high horses and realize that there are people out there who use tech differently than most folks round engadget.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Jan 14th 2009 1:24PM]

HDMI: 19 wires.
DisplayPort: 20 wires.

HDMI dual channel does have more wires. DisplayPort gets around this by increasing the signaling rate instead, but that also decreases the maximum cable length for high-bandwidth connections to 6 feet. Which is useless in many situations.

Neither has less or more voltage issues, both use low voltage differential signaling. Electrically they are by far more alike than they are different.

HDMI has aux data, it's called HDMI CEC.

Anyway, the main point is DisplayPort is too late. DVI/HDMI already won. DisplayPort may be technically better, but then again, so was Beta.

[potato @ Jan 14th 2009 2:46PM]

Less wires? No way. I have a DisplayPort MacBook Pro and I *still* have a separate audio wire (and a bunch of converters) if I want to output to a TV. HDMI can carry an audio signal. So much for fewer wires...

[Gordon @ Jan 14th 2009 4:18PM]

Well hopefully it'll make finding cables easier. I was looking at the newer model of MBP and thought, "Well great, I can plug that into my Dell 2409 over DisplayPort."...THEN I realized it's mini and there's no mini to regular DisplayPort cable out there...not that I could find anyway.

[Gnormie @ Jan 14th 2009 12:02PM]

Doesn't change the fact that DisplayPort won't see widespread adoption, as HDMI already has a tight enough grip on the market.

[Randy @ Jan 14th 2009 12:05PM]

For consumer electronic devices yes. but for Desktop Computers and Laptops, VGA still has the crown. I think Displayport will will be the successor to VGA.

[Zak @ Jan 14th 2009 12:07PM]

Right, because HDMI is the standard on laptops and desktops.

Oh wait, no it isn't.

[Ross @ Jan 14th 2009 12:13PM]

Many of the HDMI devices out there have a limited resolution (HDMI 1.2 max is 1080p I think) - nothing compared to DisplayPort's 3840 x 2160. Also, HDMI carries audio, which is great for TV connection, but nearly useless for computer monitors and projectors, which DisplayPort suits much better.

Also, you say HDMI has a tight grip?? Not on computer monitors and projectors it doesn't, which are surely the main target for DisplayPort...

[Gnormie @ Jan 14th 2009 12:27PM]

Almost every consumer graphics card for desktops now comes with HDMI port or connectivity through a provided adapter, in laptops almost every manufacturer except Dell and Apple is using HDMI, and Dell also has it on a lot of their models. DisplayPort is good, but currently it isn't seeing anything near widespread adoption with manufacturers either ignoring it entirely or only using it in professional grade monitors. HDMI doesn't have the hold it does in the TV market but considering that most dedicated graphics and even some motherboards now have HDMI ports, and the widespread availability of cables that it will be very difficult for DisplayPort to make any headway in anything but the high grade professional market.

[CraigJ @ Jan 14th 2009 12:56PM]

From DELL: http://en.community.dell.com/blogs/direct2dell/archive/2008/02/19/46464.aspx

HDMI is intended as an external consumer electronics connection for HDTVs. It is rapidly replacing S-Video and component video as the primary connection to TV sets. HDMI appears on consumer monitors so that they can be connected to Blu-ray Disc players, game consoles, and other consumer electronics. This allows the monitor to be used as an entertainment display. HDMI is also found on PCs to enable connectivity to HDTVs.

In contrast, DisplayPort is the digital interface for connecting flat-panel displays to computer systems. It will eventually replace VGA, DVI, and LVDS in IT equipment such as home and office PCs, projectors, monitors, and data center consoles. HDMI is not designed to meet these internal and external IT connectivity requirements...it is an external consumer electronics interface.

HDMI is based on legacy CRT raster-scan architecture. DisplayPort is designed for modern flat-panel displays and PC chipsets. DisplayPort has a micro-packet architecture with low voltage signaling that more easily enables networked displays. In the future, DisplayPort will also allow daisy chaining displays at full graphics performance, including 3D. and content protection. Today's USB-based daisy-chaining solutions do not support high performance 3D graphics or protected content.

HDMI has rules for how to implement and use the technology. Business and enterprise customers may not want to implement all of the consumer electronics features that are required in HDMI products. In contrast, DisplayPort is the display equivalent of Ethernet....anyone can implement it in any type of application. A VESA compliance program ensures interoperability for products featuring the "DisplayPort Certified" logo.

DisplayPort supports higher performance as a standard feature-every 6-foot cable supports 10.8 Gbps. With HDMI, high performance is optional and comes at a significant cost premium. DisplayPort has better support for projectors and enables cool ultra-thin monitors. It supports native fiber optic cable and offers latching connectors, features that are missing from HDMI. Down the road, DisplayPort will allow multi-function monitors with a single cable delivering display, audio, and USB connectivity. It will also support multiple monitors on a single connector.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Jan 14th 2009 1:31PM]

Max resolution on HDMI 1.2 is 1920x1200 (just over 1080p).

Solution: use HDMI 1.3 instead.

Why do you list DisplayPort's max theoretical resolution according to spec and then use HDMI figures from 1.2? HDMI's max theoretical resolution is again equal to DisplayPort's with this announcedment. Before this announcement HDMI/DVI had a higher max theoretical resolution.

You shouldn't paste Dell screed in here. That Dell person is just marketing their choice of DisplayPort. It'd be like asking Toshiba which is better, HD-DVD or BluRay. The article was also well and accurately rebutted.

[Graham @ Jan 14th 2009 1:41PM]

@Zak

HDMI is on a lot more common on laptops and Desktop PCs then Display Port or Mini Display port. And I'm not even including the manufactures who include the adapter to convert DVI to HDMI. Just to list a few:

Dell Studio Hybrid
Several Asus Laptops (like the M50 series)
Sony Vaios (like AW Series)
HP Pavilion (ex. dv9922us)

Also several Video Cards on the market come with HDMI has a second output... Also there is a growing standard for onboard video cards on motherboards destined for HTPCs to have HDMI as well.

[Nick @ Jan 14th 2009 2:30PM]

@ why not the LS2LS7?

"It'd be like asking Toshiba which is better, HD-DVD or BluRay."

I don't agree on that. Unlike Toshiba with HD-DVD, Dell did not invent DisplayPort. Obviously, Toshiba thought HD-DVD was better since they kind of created the format (with help from other companies). The article from Dell that CraigJ posted, is just Dell's opinion about DisplayPort, it's not that they HAVE to promote it or anything. And I thought it was very clarifying, the way it explained which advantages DisplayPort has, opposed to HDMI.

(Sorry for any bad English, it's not my native language).

[CraigJ @ Jan 14th 2009 3:49PM]

@Nick, the primary reason I linked to the Dell article is that a lot of people seem to think this is an Apple conspiracy or something. I thought that seeing the same basic opinions from Dell about DP would bring a little objectivity to the subject.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Jan 14th 2009 4:30PM]

Nick, that article is from the DisplayPort evangelist at Dell. He's not at all neutral.

[Nick @ Jan 14th 2009 4:47PM]

@ why not the LS2LS7?

What reason do you have to think that he's pro-DP? His information is all based on facts, he is in no way promoting DisplayPort, or taking down HDMI by his own opinion. In the article, DisplayPort sounds like it's the better option, but the writer actually NEVER gives his opinion. Like I said, he's just telling the facts, and it's for you to decide wether DisplayPort or HDMI is, or will be better.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Jan 14th 2009 9:27PM]

Because he trying to patent part of DisplayPort.

http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20090003331

Like I said, he's not a neutral party.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Jan 14th 2009 12:04PM]

It now matches HDMI on bandwidth (again). But I'd still rather have HDMI over it.

VESA, why couldn't you have done this before DVI/HDMI took over instead of after?

[CraigJ @ Jan 14th 2009 1:03PM]

DP is an Apple standard just like AAC stands for Apple Audio Codec

[CraigJ @ Jan 14th 2009 1:03PM]

sorry, wrong button...

[TJ @ Jan 14th 2009 1:36PM]

@CraigJ

Are you sure? I always thought AAC means Advanced Audio Coding.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Jan 14th 2009 1:44PM]

AAC does stand for advanced audio coding, and it's a Dolby standard. It's part of the MPEG-4 standard and was even before Apple used it for the iTunes store.

DP is a VESA standard, Dell adopted it first, followed by Apple. Mini DP is an Apple thing.

Like all VESA standards, DP is free, and the VESA standards require that extensions to it be free too, so mini DP is also free.

[Major4Play @ Jan 14th 2009 2:00PM]

@ CraigJ

Apple did not create AAC you sad fanboy, try googling your "facts" next time.
They just created the evil DRM layer for it.

[CraigJ @ Jan 14th 2009 3:53PM]

I'm sorry, I sometimes overestimate the ability of Engadget readers to figure thing out. That response was intended for another post as indicated by the follow up post and was in response to Familyguyrokx's point that DP is an Apple thing. Of course AAC is not an apple standard and neither is DP. That was the point.

[Familyguyrokz @ Jan 14th 2009 12:10PM]

Apple's complete disregard for any industry standards in asinine. Display Port is just another in a long line of "we can do whatever the hell we want because we're Apple" dick moves. If anyone else only used non-standard_formatX, people would be calling it out left and right, like they did with Intel for making BTX. Computer are varied enough as it is, do we really need format-war pissing contests like these?

[Ryan @ Jan 14th 2009 12:14PM]

Congrats on not reading the article and looking ridiculous. They submitted this standard as open source. There is no "grip" on the market for these cables. Now that the standard is official anybody can make this cable. Also, Apple is taking the high road here. There are no licensing fees for using DisplayPort. You might even say they were doing what was best for the little guy here.

But hey, you running your mouth off works too.

[John Ellenich @ Jan 14th 2009 12:16PM]

You do know that display port is an industry standard– not something that Apple just thought it would be a good idea to "invent" right?

[Zak @ Jan 14th 2009 12:16PM]

Are you just stupid or something? DisplayPort was an official universal standard before Apple did anything with it. It's not even Apple's standard! Apple simply brought out a mini version of it, and please don't tell me you're dumb enough to believe that Apple did that without clearing it with VESA first.

Again, Apple didn't invent this. Buy a clue.

[Nathan @ Jan 14th 2009 12:28PM]

WTF are you talking about .. Apple has adopted hundreds of industry standards. This is a unique situation where there was a clear need for a cable for smaller devices. Now that this is VESA approved it's going to be a good thing as it means netbooks can become smaller and still do video out. HDMI simply doesn't cut it when you want to display on very large monitors.

[loocas @ Jan 14th 2009 12:40PM]

Apple will surely soon enough patent it, thou... ;)

[KarlW @ Jan 14th 2009 12:56PM]

Whilst I disapprove of the mini connector (I liked that DP just had one connector, so one cable is all you need no matter which two devices you connect), Apple is a massive supporter of standards.

- WebKit
- Darwin
- Huge PDF support in OSX (makes reading/writing PDFs as easy as it was meant to be)
- Integrated support for MS Office formats in free OSX apps (like TextEdit), means you don't have to buy another app to read your documents. Will soon also support Exchange out-of-the-box
- XML-based property lists for applications (instead of custom binary formats)
- iCal format, CalDAV

Apple uses a lot of open-source code, and contributes code to open source efforts as well. Not as much as Google, but certainly a lot more than Microsoft. It's a mutually beneficial relationship - open standards mean data isn't restricted to one operating system, which makes OSX more attractive to customers, but they often need more development, which is where Apple helps by merging their changes back.

This is also why Microsoft doesn't like open source. They want data to be restricted to Windows or MS applications. That's why they broke internet standards so badly to tie people in to IE and kill Netscape, and why they created custom binary formats for Office.

[dan @ Jan 14th 2009 1:19PM]

Surely MS Office's 'custom binary formats' have been around since long before any standards for Office-style documents existed...

[athousandleaves @ Jan 14th 2009 1:28PM]

I guess this guy has never heard of a company called SONY...

[CraigJ @ Jan 14th 2009 3:55PM]

dan, I think the point is that MS claimed to be more open by using an XML format for office documents (.docx, .xlsx, etc) but then just stuffed proprietary crap in them

[Quikboy @ Jan 15th 2009 12:33AM]

@KarlW: Microsoft is in transition to going more open source. Of course, there's still some departments that are far from it, but it's moving towards more open source.

Microsoft has it's own open source project hosting site: http://www.codeplex.com/
IE8 has really improved in standards, and though the rendering engine still leaves more to be desired, it's getting there.
MS has been working to make Silverlight work for Linux with Moonlight
They even have an open source section on their site: http://www.microsoft.com/opensource/default.aspx

[Itsuru @ Jan 14th 2009 12:10PM]

Does it support sound?

[Like_A_Glove @ Jan 14th 2009 12:50PM]

Not only it support sound, it also support backward sound transfer, microphone, webcam, since version 1.2 support USB over DP

[Verythrax @ Jan 14th 2009 12:11PM]

I hope it sink, it's just the Memory Stick of the monitor conectors.

[Zak @ Jan 14th 2009 12:18PM]

Wow, another dumb one. Oh wait, yeah I forgot, these are the Engadget comments.

DisplayPort is not an Apple invention, you mouth breather. it's a VESA STANDARD. Holy crap there are some stupid people posting here.

[Verythrax @ Jan 14th 2009 12:22PM]

Hey smartass, I don'1 care who made it. We already have enough conector standards without that this little thing that by some coincidence, only Apple uses.

How about A real standard, instead of several, for a change?

[MioTheGreat @ Jan 14th 2009 12:25PM]

DisplayPort was SMALL ENOUGH.

The Mini DisplayPort is a neutered version of it. No audio channels, MUCH lower bandwidth (ie: lower max resolution) and no peripheral channels!

It was completely unnecessary.

[Verythrax @ Jan 14th 2009 12:26PM]

And the Mini version (what this article discuss) IS made by Apple.

Sorry, Zak.

[ANTCEP @ Jan 14th 2009 12:39PM]

it's the sd card of connectors hdmi is the memorystick and vga film

[superhobo @ Jan 14th 2009 12:50PM]

More like nano M2

[Zak @ Jan 14th 2009 1:35PM]

Verythrax - That's like saying the USB port in a Dell machine means USB is "made by Dell". DisplayPort is an OPEN STANDARD developed by VESA. The sooner you understand this concept, the sooner you will stop looking like a dimwit.

[Verythrax @ Jan 14th 2009 1:40PM]

Zak,

Just tell me HOW MANY companies uses the Mini DisplayPort, or even the normal DisplayPort, for a start. And consider how widespread DVI and HDMI are, without mention VGA, of course.

I think I don't need to tell you how unfortunate your comparison with USB was.

[Zak @ Jan 14th 2009 2:00PM]

...what? It has nothing to do with how many are in use. It has to do with your misguided belief that DisplayPort is "made by Apple". My USB example was completely accurate. You seem to think Apple is responsible for creating some kind of proprietary video port, when in fact it is a DisplayPort, which is an open standard developed by VESA. This article is about how VESA has incorporated Apple's implementation of their open standard into the 1.2 spec.

Seriously, how could you possibly be confused about it at this point?

[oZ @ Jan 14th 2009 2:11PM]

Verythrax: How many people used USB in 1997 vs Serial, Parallel, and Joystick connectors?

Just because it's the case now doesn't mean it will continue to be so. Watch as DP replaces VGA and DVI.