Dell's DisplayPort Folly

Discussion in 'Dell' started by Journey, Mar 24, 2008.

  1. Journey

    Journey Guest

    Thanks for the info. I would choose a computer with HDMI because
    that's what my HDTV uses and it seems to be the standard with home
    theater too.

    I would like to know why HDMI cables cost so much though.
     
    Journey, Mar 24, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Journey

    Journey Guest

    Yeah... before I had a HDMI cable for my Apple TV, I used composite
    video (or component, I get them confused) and the picture was great.

    I'd like to find a good basic learning remote. I love my Samsung TV
    but to get to different sources I have to cycle through them -- there
    isn't a button to jump right to a source.
     
    Journey, Mar 24, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Journey

    Journey Guest

    Thanks for the link. I like the way it looks. Some of them look like
    they came out of an old sci-fi movie.

    I guess there are always things to learn in geek-world. The first
    thing I need to find out is whether my Samsung accepts a command to go
    directly to a specified source, or if it only cycles through.

    I've started to watch over the air HD broadcasts and wow, the quality
    is amazing.
     
    Journey, Mar 24, 2008
    #3
  4. Journey

    Ablang Guest

    Dell's DisplayPort Folly
    The PC giant is championing an interface we don't need and shouldn't
    have to pay for.
    Tom Mainelli, PC World
    Thursday, February 07, 2008 2:00 PM PST

    http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,142270/article.html?tk=nl_ptxcol

    Dell is on a mission to prove it's a technology leader by making sure
    that DisplayPort--the DVI replacement that it's pushing hard for the
    industry to adopt--appears on your next notebook, PC, and monitor.
    There's just one problem: We don't need DisplayPort. It currently
    doesn't offer any real cost or performance benefits over the well-
    established HDMI interface, which is appearing on a growing number of
    products. DisplayPort's introduction is likely to cause confusion and
    frustration for buyers seeking a monitor that will work with their
    notebook or PC at home. Worse, Dell plans to eventually launch
    DisplayPort-only monitors that will lack backward compatibility with
    every single PC shipped to date. This is not technology leadership.
    The DisplayPort Dilemma

    In addition to writing GeekTech, I'm a research analyst for IDC
    covering monitors and projectors, so I've watched DisplayPort's
    evolution closely. Dell, HP, Samsung, and other monitor industry big
    shots first started kicking around the idea that became DisplayPort in
    2003--and back then it made sense. After all, the old analog VGA
    interface was dead (although to this day it refuses to lie down) and
    the DVI interface had become technologically moribund, unable to keep
    up with the promise of next-generation, ultrahigh-resolution monitors.
    DisplayPort would be the ultimate digital interface for PCs, and it
    would be an open standard with no associated royalties, unlike the
    then-new HDMI interface, which was starting to show up on televisions
    (companies that implement HDMI today pay 4 cents per device plus a
    $10,000-per-year fee).

    If DisplayPort had launched then, we'd probably be merrily using it on
    our PCs today. Instead, the standard took years to mature (as they
    often do). In the meantime, high-definition TV sales took off, and so
    did the acceptance of HDMI: Today that interface is on just about
    every HDTV sold, and most people with any technical prowess know what
    it is and how it works. After several tumultuous revisions, HDMI
    reached version 1.3, which can support even today's highest-resolution
    30-inch monitors. As a result, HDMI now ships on many PCs and monitors
    from just about every major vendor, including Dell.

    When HDMI became the de facto digital interface standard, development
    of DisplayPort should have ceased. Alas, the wheels were already in
    motion, and Dell--the standard's most vocal proponent--and VESA (the
    Video Electronics Standards Association, brought in to administer the
    specification) pushed forward, continuing development and issuing
    specifications. Finally, in January this year Dell rolled out the
    first-ever DisplayPort-enabled monitor, its 30-inch UltraSharp
    3008WFP. Interestingly, the $1999 LCD also includes an HDMI port.

    Why put an HDMI port on the company's first DisplayPort monitor?
    Because even Dell's top DisplayPort evangelist, Bruce Montag, senior
    technical staffer in the office of Dell's CTO and chairman of the
    DisplayPort task force at VESA, acknowledges that HDMI is too well
    established to omit. Though Dell plans to continue offering HDMI on
    its consumer gear, it thinks DisplayPort makes more sense for future
    business products.

    I couldn't agree less. Why on earth should my work monitor, notebook,
    or desktop have a different digital interface than my products at home
    do? Every day I take my work notebook home, where I often connect it
    to my consumer desktop monitor. Plus, small-business buyers mix and
    match consumer and corporate hardware all the time.

    DisplayPort backers like to point out that future implementations of
    the interface could offer compatibility with HDMI, but such support is
    optional, not required in the specification. In addition, it would
    need an external dongle and chip sets that can interface with both
    standards, since the two technologies work in fundamentally different
    ways (unlike, say, HDMI and DVI). In the end, both the vendor--and the
    consumer--would end up paying more for the luxury of using HDMI
    through a DisplayPort connector. Wouldn't it be easier, and less
    expensive, if everything used just HDMI?
    Future Promises

    Other arguments in favor of DisplayPort also fall apart upon closer
    examination. For example, backers suggest that because DisplayPort is
    royalty-free, the interface will be less expensive to implement. But
    in reality there's no guarantee that contributors to the specification
    won't ask for royalties later. Meanwhile, the up-front hardware costs
    of supporting the new standard are undoubtedly higher than that of
    HDMI--even considering HDMI's 4-cent royalty fees--since HDMI's parts
    are already produced in high volume and enjoy economies of scale. And
    for every monitor that a vendor such as Dell creates with both
    DisplayPort and HDMI, the company must pay the hardware cost of
    implementing both standards, plus the HDMI fees it originally sought
    to avoid.

    Engineers agree that DisplayPort's micropacket architecture is pretty
    slick. It can drive multiple monitors using a daisy-chain
    configuration, and it could enable future setups such as integrated
    USB hubs and Webcams that run through a single DisplayPort cable.
    However, a USB-based technology called DisplayLink already offers
    multiple-monitor support. And the USB and Webcam features aren't
    included in the current DisplayPort specification, which means owners
    of first-generation products won't have access to them even if they
    become available later. Anybody can promise future features.

    Finally, Dell says DisplayPort will let the company build what it
    calls direct-drive monitors, models that contain fewer internal
    electronics, which could mean potentially lower prices and allow
    thinner designs. That sounds great, too, until you realize that such a
    "dumb" monitor could work only with DisplayPort-enabled PCs or
    notebooks and not with the millions of laptops and desktops that exist
    today.

    DisplayPort was a good idea that missed its window of opportunity. By
    forcing the issue, Dell and other DisplayPort backers are only going
    to bewilder consumers. If you're in the market for a new laptop,
    desktop, or monitor in the coming months, be sure to take a close look
    at the connectors on the back. How irritated would you be to find that
    the best connection on your new high-end monitor won't work with the
    best connection on your high-end notebook?
     
    Ablang, Mar 24, 2008
    #4
  5. Journey

    Rich Guest

    Because people are dumb enough to believe the salespeople that the expensive
    HDMI cables are better. They probably make a bigger profit percentage-wise
    on the cable than on the TV.

    Rich
     
    Rich, Mar 24, 2008
    #5
  6. Journey

    Boris Guest

    http://tinyurl.com/yrfma7

    I was given one for Christmas. Works pretty good. If you can find one
    on sale, I'd give it a try.
     
    Boris, Mar 25, 2008
    #6
  7. Journey

    Journey Guest

    The Samsung 4061 remote doesn't have buttons for each source, so even
    if I have a learning remote I don't know if I could program different
    buttons for different sources. Oh well, I think I'll just live with
    it this way for now. Googling didn't bring up anything right away --
    maybe Samsung has tech. support that I could call.
     
    Journey, Mar 25, 2008
    #7
  8. Journey

    Tom Scales Guest

    Far as I know it just rotates. If you figure it out, let me know.
     
    Tom Scales, Mar 25, 2008
    #8
  9. Journey

    alien Guest

    I have a Harmony 880 remote made by Logitech and a 42" Dell plasma. The
    source change, using the original remote or the buttons on the TV itself,
    was the rotating type. However, the 880 has individual input buttons you
    can program to show on the remote control's screen. Maybe call Logitech
    support and ask them if they know if it would be similar on a Samsung.

    alien
     
    alien, Mar 25, 2008
    #9
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.