Slashdot Mirror
Why Hasn't the DVI Interface Replaced D-Sub?
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?"
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'
Dell, lately, has been shipping lots of FP monitors and video cards with DVI connectors. The caveat is that Dell has been using lots of weird monitor connectors for which we have to use odd dongles (and boy do we have some odd dongles cluttering up our desk drawers now, thank you Dell).
So I guess the question should be, why has DVI been so slow to penetrate the low-end/mainstream/low cost market? I imagine the DVI connector is a more complicated part and more expensive to produce, especially if you're like Dell and using weird connectors that require the extra expense of dongles. Additionally, if all you use is a DVI you have to include a VGA adapter, another item that slowly pecks away at the bottom line.
Let's face it, for most hardware manufacturers what's cheaper than simply using the old tried and true D-sub VGA connector?
Maybe they're skipping DVI, since it already has a replacment.
http://www.hdmi.com
Analog connectors and signals are good enough for now. I run an LCD in 1280x1024 resolution and it's fine, though I had to use a good quality cable. Once resolutions go higher, then the digital signals will become more important. The DVI connectors haven't failed, it's just that they haven't succeeded yet. They will. Right now, the cables cost more money too, and that's always a factor.
This is America, damnit. Speak Spanish!
I remember when I used to work in a computer store around 1998->1999. We started getting systems with USB header pins on the board and support for it in the BIOS but no connectors and no devices. It is only in the last couple of years that USB has really taken off.
:)
My video card has a DVI connector and standard D-Sub on it but my LG 19" inch has no DVI connection. I have yet to use it. Until the displays start featuring it on them its not much point having it on the computer. Also its not much point having displays that use DVI without having many systems supporting it. I would almost say that each one is waiting on the other
Also you need to look at the upgade cycle. Not everyone is a computer geek, not everyone has the latest graphics cards and computer gear. When new technology gets released it will take a while to penetrate and become common place.
(\(\
(^.^)
(")")
*This is the cute bunny virus, please copy this into your sig so it can spread
I don't think anyone knows why motherboards come with the connectors they come with.
Why can't I buy a motherboards without a serial port, a parallel port, two ps/2 ports, and a line-in audio port? Why do motherboards come with built in video, but not bluetooth and wireless networking?
Why isn't there a standard for external power supplies, instead of having a blasting-hot power supply inside the temperature sensitive case, while a half-dozen wall-warts hang off my power supply driving all my peripherals?
In short, why are PC compatibles such heaps of shit?
Slashdot is jumping the shark. I'm just driving the boat.
Well, I needed the D-SUB, 'cos I knew I'd be hooking it to an iBook, and all consumer-market Apple products come with VGA out, rather than DVI.
But I also planned to use it as the second monitor on a Power Mac G5 months later - and allcurrent professional-market Apple products come with DVI out (at least - the Radeon 9800 in my G5 has an ADC connector for an Apple Cinema display, and a DVI out for whatever else I want.)
Folks who say it's "high-end" are pretty much right. It's something the UXGA (1600x1200) and WUXGA (1920x1200 like my Cinema) folks have a lot more use for than the 1280x1024 folks. Right now, that's largely the pro market still.
When I can walk into WalMerde and see even a single DVI connector, then I'll know it's achieving mass-market penetration.
HDMI is bad news for consumers as it incorporates Digital Restrictions Management (DRM).
"Windows has detected you want to connect a high resolution display to your computer. Your current Windows license doesn't allow displays over 1024x768. If you wish to upgrade, please insert appendage you wish to pay with..."
DVI connectors, cables, and designs still cost more than VGA -- both for the consumer and for the producer. On top of that, there's a chicken-and-egg problem where people need DVI to VGA converters for compatability with existing equipment.
If my video card and your video card have the same chipset, but you use VGA and I use DVI, my card'll cost a little more. If I include a DVI to VGA adapter, it'll cost even more. Since our cards have the same chips, most people will buy your card.
--
What I wanna know is where are the DVI-based KVM switches? I was recently in the market for one and couldn't find any. A 4-port DVI+USB would've been my ideal, but alas such a thing doesn't exist afaik and that's why I'm still using VGA.
-h3
Why has DVI been a relative failure in the market?
I was under the impression that specs for the digital part of DVI interface didn't let it show eg 1600x1200 resolution in any sensible refresh rate. I distantly recall reading some years ago about plans of some sort of HR-DVI that would address this isue, but never heard about it again.
Could someone knowing exact specs correct me?
Robert
Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162
As many posts have covered, it costs more for a manufacturer to offer DVI. So as a result, VGA continues to be the default offering, despite the fact that it sucks.
Even 10 years ago higher ended monitors and cards came with BNC connectors. Why? Because the VGA connector isn't meant to deal with high res graphics - you start getting crosstalk between pins, and that shows up as visual artifacts. IBM designed the standard for 640x480x256 colors. It wasn't meant to scale to high-res 32 bit.
Consumers, however, won't spend an extra $50-$100 to get the better visuals. I'm all DVI, and the quality difference is substantial. Sharper text, no ghosting, more vivid colors. Generally easier installs, too.
At any rate, you're dealing with a consumer base that choose VHS, wouldn't spend for SCSI, and won't spring for a Mac. They don't know the difference, and they don't _want_ to know about the difference. And the marketplace has responded.
Jonathan
To see where the industry is going, take a look at Apple. The technologies Apple uses today, will be the main stream technology I few years down the road in the PC universe..
Cases in point: The Mouse, The Graphical User Interface, 32-bit processors, Color Displays (8-bit), True Color Displays (24-bit+), CD drives in every computer, USB.
Apple didn't invent any of it, they were just one of the earliest adopters. But these technologies are now used in almost all PCs you can buy today.
Apple Today: Digital only display connectors (DVI, mini-DVI, ADC) (pro systems), CD-R/DVD drives (every system but 1), 64-bit processors (Powermac/Xserve lines), wireless networking...
The smart bet is all these technologies will be common place in the PC industry one day.
I know this is nuts, but Macrovision-protected DVDs don't play on my Windows box when my LCD is plugged into the DVI output on my graphics card.
:-)
Don't you just love Microsoft? The problem, they say, is some failure to initialise analogue copy protection. I assume a Mac will play the same disk over a digital monitor line, so all we can say here is Windows is poo. But until that kind of thing works, DVIs aren't going to work for mass-market.
Or is there just something horribly horribly wrong with my system?
Not that it's much of a problem, I just watch those DVDs with Xine
Miri it is whil Linux ilast...
Great post. Add FireWire and widescreen displays to that list.
Vino, gyno, and techno -Bruce Sterling
Your DOS apps will be asking "What USB?" when you run them safely isolated from reality. Now I have to find a working 5.25" floppy drive so I can have a go at getting my old DOS games back. You can print to file, take screenshots of games with no native screenshot capability, use devices like USB optical mice or graphics tablets that the game authors never even dreamed about.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing