Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Dell, HP, Lenovo Announce New Display Protocol 188

Posted by ScuttleMonkey from the forward-progress dept.
An anonymous reader writes "If HDMI, DVI and UDI weren't enough for you, several major PC manufacturers have announced a joint alliance to come up with another display adapter, creatively named Displayport. The new method is backwards compatible with DVI, but offers double the bandwidth."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dell, HP, Lenovo Announce New Display Protocol More

Dell, HP, Lenovo Announce New Display Protocol

Comments Filter:

  • Re:DRM aspects (Score:3, Informative)

    by bhtooefr ( 649901 ) <[gro.rfeoothb] [ta] [rfeoothb]> on Saturday May 06, 2006 @09:34PM (#15279240) Homepage Journal
    DisplayPort is, as I understand, a direct competitor to HDMI.

    Last I heard, it was flopping horribly. Wonder what happened.

  • Re:DRM aspects (Score:5, Informative)

    by poopdeville ( 841677 ) on Saturday May 06, 2006 @09:35PM (#15279245)
    From TFA:
    The DisplayPort specification also addresses the industry need for a ubiquitous digital interface standard with a compact connector, as well as optional content protection, that can be deployed widely at low cost. A protected digital interface that can be easily deployed on a PC enables broad access to premium content sources such as high-definition movies.

  • Re:Pointless aspects (Score:3, Informative)

    by Jeff DeMaagd ( 2015 ) on Saturday May 06, 2006 @09:48PM (#15279278) Homepage Journal
    Isn't DRM on a monitor like water wings on a fish?

    Probably. It may be necessary to have it for certain "protected" media in Windows Vista, but the easy solution is to not buy that protected media. And not buy Vista as well, assuming it comes out.

  • Copy Protection Optional (Score:5, Informative)

    by doormat ( 63648 ) on Saturday May 06, 2006 @09:49PM (#15279281) Homepage Journal
    The only bright light in this spec. That and it supposedly can support *really* high resolutions.

  • Bandwidth... (Score:5, Informative)

    by setirw ( 854029 ) on Saturday May 06, 2006 @09:53PM (#15279291) Homepage
    I've noticed that a lot of users are stating that extra bandwidth is unnecessary.

    Keep in mind that today's top-of-the-line LCD displays, running at QUXGA (3200x2400) require multiple DVI dual link connections, and comprise multiple discrete panels, each with its individual signal feed. A display by IBM (T221, I believe is the model number) currently does this.

    I believe Lenovo manufactures IBM's flat panel displays. Could the T221 be a potential justification for Lenovo to co-sponsor this technology?

  • Re:Copied Apple again!! (Score:3, Informative)

    by Stormwatch ( 703920 ) <rodrigogirao@POL ... om minus painter> on Saturday May 06, 2006 @10:10PM (#15279348) Homepage
    30"? You think that's a big screen? Bah! Now THIS [plastk.net] is a big screen.

  • Re:Copied Apple again!! (Score:4, Informative)

    by crerwin ( 971247 ) <crerwin@@@gmail...com> on Saturday May 06, 2006 @10:31PM (#15279416) Homepage
    We Mac users call it Dual Link DVI

    No, the entire industry as well as the Digital Display Working Group [wikipedia.org], of which Apple is not a part, calls it (their design) Dual-link DVI. It is used any monitor with a resolution above 1920x1200 and I think it's been available on nVidia and ATI cards for a few generations.

    No, Apple does not invent as much stuff as you'd like to think.

  • Re:Bandwidth... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Jah-Wren Ryel ( 80510 ) on Saturday May 06, 2006 @10:34PM (#15279424)
    I believe Lenovo manufactures IBM's flat panel displays. Could the T221 be a potential justification for Lenovo to co-sponsor this technology?

    IBM's manufacturing partner for the T22x family was IDTech in Japan.

    IBM stopped selling the monitors almost a year ago, probably right about the time they sold their PC division to Lenovo.

    Furthermore, DisplayPort has only a negligble bandwidth lead over DVI. The total raw capacity of DisplayPort is 10.8 Gbps versus 9.9 Gbps for a dual-link DVI connection (or a "type B" HDMI connection).

    The main reason for DisplayPort's existence is the onerous licensing terms for HDMI - and some technical requirements that make it harder to miniaturize and integrate the DVI/HDMI electronics.

  • Great new DRM'ed connnection interfaces... (Score:2, Informative)

    by plasmacutter ( 901737 ) on Saturday May 06, 2006 @11:28PM (#15279557)
    quoth the very tired tagline.. "whoever wins, we lose"

    now you may mod me into oblivion =/

  • Re:Screwing it up again?!? (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 06, 2006 @11:38PM (#15279598)
    DVI was braindead from the start. The protocol limited connections to 1600x1200 (1920x1200 if you pushed it).

    Actually, no. Even 1600x1200 is just beyond the original bandwidth limit.

    Instead you see the abomination of people sitting in front of 2 smaller monitors.

    Bah, I prefer having 3 monitors at 1600x1200... The abomination is not having a choice.

  • Re:Bandwidth... (Score:3, Informative)

    by MojoStan ( 776183 ) on Sunday May 07, 2006 @04:05AM (#15280355)
    DisplayPort has only a negligble bandwidth lead over DVI. The total raw capacity of DisplayPort is 10.8 Gbps versus 9.9 Gbps for a dual-link DVI connection (or a "type B" HDMI connection).
    But if you believe VESA's hype, DisplayPort's bandwidth is "future extensible" while DVI's badwidth is maxed out at 9.9 Gbps (dual-link) per port. Ars Technica's article on DisplayPort [arstechnica.com] also mentions VESA's claim of higher bandwidth in the future.

    Here's a spec comparison (includes bandwidth) of DisplayPort, LVDS, DVI, and HDMI (I believe it's from VESA):

    http://www.audioholics.com/news/uploads/DisplayP ortDVIHDMIcompared.gif

Slashdot Top Deals

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.

Close