Almost all new corporate laptops now have display port (Lenovo, HP, Dell). All AMD-based corporate desktops now have DisplayPort as the "2nd monitor" on the onboard motherboard. (e.g. HP Compaq 6005)

However - it is ironic that "display panel" makers are "anxious", because if you look at most display makers' LCD offerings - maybe 1-2 models out of 15 or so will actually have a DisplayPort port - and you'll be paying a hefty premium for that. We have to buy adapters with every computer we buy for users who want dual monitor, because we're not going to pay an extra $150-$200 to get a monitor which has native DisplayPort.

You want a bargain basement monitor? They probably won't even have DVI. Many still are VGA-only to save on costs.

agressiv

I call FUD. XP x64 is just 2003 x64, its the same kernel. 2003 x64 is rock solid, and so is XP x64.

Maybe you had a few things that didn't work, but it doesn't mean everyone did. It simply went by the wayside right away because Vista came out shortly after.

But in terms of speed and stability, nothing beats XP x64, in my opinion. I'd really challenge anyone to come up with a significant list of applications that work on Vista x64 that don't work on XP x64.

Conan O'Brien's visit to Intel HQ last year was absolutely hilarious.

http://www.istartedsomething.com/20070506/conan-intel-video/

Although, looking back, there were pieces that were really sad, such as pillars on the wall in the middle of a huge cubicle farm that made me think of parking garages.

agressiv