DisplayPort 1.2 adds Apple's mini connector, stereoscopic 3D
By Ross Miller 
posted January 14th 2009 11:52AM
posted January 14th 2009 11:52AM
[Via Mac Rumors]
posted January 14th 2009 11:52AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
@Verythrax:
DisplayPort is used by:
Dell
HP
ATI
nVidia
Apple
and others.
I am glad Apple did this. I hope their move pushes adoption of DisplayPort.
Zak, you idiot:
I'm (and the article) talking about the MINI version of the thing that Apple created, and only Apple use. And the question is why we need that, with all other connectors already in the market?
Even someone mentioned how poor it is compared to the real DP one.
Learn how to read, for God's sake.
@Verythrax
The Mini DisplayPort is just as open as the actual DisplayPort, therefore nothing proprietary. Also, nobody is forcing you to use the Mini DisplayPort. If you dislike it so much then simply avoid Apple products and other devices that may be using it.
I'm just annoyed because it means yet ANOTHER friggin' adapter that I'll have to stock in my department, seeing as the students/faculty on campus here that own Macs can't be bothered to, you know, have their OWN adapters with their Macbooks and as this is primarily a PC campus, all the projectors have VGA ports. It's bad enough when I have to ask them over the phone if their MB has DVI or mini-DVI and they have no clue. Is it too much to ask that people actually know the computers that they're using?
Agree. Working in a university sucks for that reason. I have to listen to silly comments every day about how I should "go Mac" and yet they are amazed that I don't have this year's new laptop adapter for their shiny thin macbook. As much as I would like to, my department isn't going to provide every single conceivable adapter to hook your new machine up to our standard VGA/DVI projectors. If you want to use an unsupported laptop, you need to provide the non-standard connector.
Yes I know it is *a* standard but for LCD projectors it is most definitely not standard.
Actually, yes it is.
...I don't feel like number crunching right now, but I hope USB3 is enough bandwidth to drive displays large enough that we can marginalize everything else..
Yeah, it would be really great if the USB3 can handle enough juice for power laptops and video conections.
Then finally the one-cable dream will come true.
Gigabit Ethernet can handle all of this. Hell, 100MB can handle all of it. And the cables are dirt cheap, and therein lies the problem. Manufacturers want to sell more crap.
@eddy
Why not just tell them to go pound sand? They wasted enough money what's another $10?
For today's technology, this is a stupid standard. A much better standard for laptops would be something that is backward compatible with HDMI, yet is capable of higher resolutions.
Laptop computers are supposed to be portable, you don't want to be messing with power, video and audio cables whenever you want to make a presentation. A cable that carries both audio and video drops the cable count by one, using a bigger battery leaves you down to just needing one cable.
"It defines a new license-free, royalty-free, digital audio/video interconnect, intended to be used primarily between a computer and its display monitor" - straight from DisplayPort's Wikipedia page.
Emphasis on the "royalty-free" bit - if you want to manufacture a device or even a cable for HDMI, you have to pay royalties to the HDMI industry association for doing so.
A bit more Googling found me this: http://www.displayport.org/FAQ/default.htm
The answer to big question for everyone is at the bottom: "Why not simply use HDMI as a VGA replacement for PC monitors?"
No, I hope NO OTHER COMPANY uses these stupid ports.
Let Apple be the ones to sell adapters.
I just want my macbook's external screen to stop flashing every 5 minutes or so. What's the point of having this MiniDisplay-thing when it won't even work correctly?
I use my external monitor for hours at a time with zero issues - DP work just fine. You have a problem with your monitor, a defective converter or a problem with the DP on your MB
so does this mean that the current macbooks will get an upgrade to support 1.2 or are they already rocking some de facto version of it?
Hell no. The MacBooks don't even support audio out over DisplayPort, which has been in the spec since 1.0. And you think they're going to leap to 1.2 or post-1.2 with a software update?
so does this mean that the current macbooks will get an upgrade to support 1.2 or are they already rocking some de facto version of it?
so does this mean that the current macbooks will get an upgrade to support 1.2 or are they already rocking some de facto version of it?
FRIGGIN TRIPLE POST WHAT THE HELL?!?!??!
@Craig and @TJ
Craig wrong, TJ right. AAC - Advanced Audio Coding.
sarcasm. Apparently you were unable to reply to the post as well; Engadget's comment system really sucks sometimes.
Techwise it's seems to do the job, But on a physical level it doesn't seem to be very durable. Two screws either side of the connector would of been good.
is HDMI a free available standard for every producer or do they have to pay licence royalities? if yes, then it makes definitly sense to get (mini) dp...
HDMI is not license free. I understand it is $0.04/connector license fee.
I'll gladly pay $0.04 for something that works with equipment I already have instead of a "freebie" connector I cannot use for anything without buying an adapter (which includes the $0.04 fee anyway).
Education needed: is there such a thing as 'non-stereoscopic 3D imagery'? Holograms perhaps?
Just tell me when the DP>HDMI and DP>S-Video adapters are coming out. From a cheaper manufacturer, preferably.
There are further advantages of displayport over hdmi.
1) licensing: hdmi licensing is much, much more expensive $10k+some % vs. no licensing cost for displayport
2) signaling: hdmi/dvi uses TMDS which operates at a higher voltage than displayport which uses LVDS signaling. This allows the semiconductor circuitry to be smaller with displayport.
read http://www.edn.com/index.asp?layout=article&articleid=CA6594089 for more information
I see there's some confusion regarding DisplayPort's features and what exactly changes with DP 1.2. Just to clear that up - I'm not going to take any position here re DP vs. HDMI vs. DVI vs...etc.:
- The current DisplayPort standard (1.1A) supports up to 10.8 Gbit/sec. (the max. 2.7 Gbit/sec rate over 4 lanes). Unlike the other digital interfaces, DP can be configured (when the devices are first connected together) to use 1, 2, or 4 lanes, at either 1.6 or 2.7 Gbit/sec., depending on the needs/capabilities of the source and sink devices. This capacity is roughly equivalent to that provided by the current HDMI 1.3 spec. DP 1.2 will double the maximum per-lane capacity to 5.4 Gbit/sec., for a maximum total of 21.6 Gbit/sec.. This will use the same connector as the existing DP 1.1A standard. The full rate is available on cables up to 15 meters long, and this is not expected to change under 1.2 (although current DP cabling may not be able to carry the full 1.2 rate in the longer lengths - i.e., getting the full DP 1.2 rates for longer cables may require a cable upgrade).
- DisplayPort already supports audio data within the video stream; this feature just is not being used by most current (desktop monitor) implementations. DP 1.2 will continue and enhance the audio support.
- The mini-DP connector is fully compatible with the DP standard; the only thing that MAY change with the use of the mini connector is the maximum capacity available for a given cable length. Since the mini-connector can't handle conductors as large as the standard connector, you may not be able to get full-rate operation over longer cables if the mini-connector is used. The mini-connector is basically aimed at providing DP connectivity for smaller devices where panel space is at a premium, and it will not completely replace the full-sized DP connector.
- One of the biggest differences between DP and earlier digital video interfaces is that DP uses a packetized communications protocol. DP 1.2 will take advantage of this to support multiple independent data streams over a single physical connector - for instance, you will be able, with DP 1.2, to connect multiple monitors to a single DP output, even if they're running at different resolutions, refresh rates, or color bit-depths.
Bob M.
(speaking for myself, only)
It's so funny reading people arguing which connection is better. Well, up to a point. The best part is that this wouldn't really be an issue if Apple released, you know, more than 1-2 types of laptop per class. If you're shopping for a PC and you decide that HDMI is right for you, you choose a brand with HDMI built in. Same goes for if you decide that DisplayPort is better for you. Instead, there's only one set of connections on a Mac, so if you want to buy an Apple you basically have to accept it, and then complain about how it's the better standard or not.
Well I hope Apple will release a 40 inch 3840 x 2160 display, so I can think about replacing my 30 inch 2560 x 1600 ACD.
A 40 inch touch ACD would be sweet, especially as the new ACDs are LED and green and with built-in iSight cameras.
When are 3rd parties actually going to start releasing these, I don't want to pay apple $60 for a connector that used to be $20 and used to be included by default.