Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Why Hasn't the DVI Interface Replaced D-Sub?

Posted by Cliff on from the displacing-entrenched-technology dept.

nic1m asks: "When DVI connectors started appearing on video cards I thought they were a smart replacement for the old D-Sub analog connector because DVI can support both digital and analog displays. With LCDs rapidly gaining market share I would have expected DVI to replace D-Sub by now. Almost the opposite seems to be happening, however. Many video cards still lack DVI, most LCDs still have only an analog input, and motherboard-based graphics never have DVI. Why has DVI been a relative failure in the market?"

2 of 156 comments (clear)

  1. Simple by caperry · · Score: 5, Informative

    6 foot cable length at resolutions over 1024x768. Not so much a problem on monitors, but the projector on my ceiling need a $700 DVI-fiber-DVI cable to go lengths over 6ft while still remaining in spec.

    Most good Flat Panel displays (Hitachi, Sony, etc 17" and up) do support DVI - but DVI on Analog CRTs doesn't make much sense.

    --
    -Carl "No, we already thought of that one. 'Why?' '42' - It doesn't fit." -Hitchhiker'
    1. Re:Simple by terpia · · Score: 5, Informative
      but the projector on my ceiling need a $700 DVI-fiber-DVI cable to go lengths over 6ft while still remaining in spec.


      Wrong. You've been misled. DVI at half bandwidth can travel 30 feet on a good cable. (half bandwidth currently is how computer data and HDTV are transmitted via DVI) DVI at full bandwidth travels 15 feet. And a limit of 1024x768? Not true at all. I'm running two 30' DVI cables. One to a projector sending 720p (1280x720) and one to an LCD display @ 1280x1024.


      DVIgear.com's salesmen are good aren't they? ;)

      --
      .sig wanted: Must be concise, funny, and display my cleverness.