Displayport V1.2 To Take Giant Leap Over HDMI

An anonymous reader writes "With HDMI becoming increasingly common, Displayport has been slow to emerge as a widely used connection interface, but a plethora of new features in the new v1.2 standard could see that change. As well as doubling the data rate of the existing v1.1a standard to 21.6 Gbps, the update allows for multiple monitors to be connected to a single Displayport connector and adds support for transporting USB data at up to 720Mbps, enabling embedded webcams, speakers and USB hubs over a single cable. Ethernet data is also supported. The improved data rate will allow for richer, larger and higher resolution displays, and the new version is also backward compatible with the current display technology, so all the ports, cables and devices will be interchangeable, although they will revert to the lowest common denominator."

Comments

no no no no no!

[cybrthng]

HDMI is fine
Ethernet is fine

No more "super cables" for the sake of another super cable so i have to replace everything i own just to run a damned super cable.

Thanks.

Re:no no no no no!

[Fred_A]

OTOH Less cables is good as well. The cable mess is getting old pretty quick.

Re:no no no no no!

[sakdoctor]

In my day, all we had was plastic coated twisted-pair coat-hanger wire for all purposes, and it was good enough.

Re:no no no no no!

[Cornelius the Great]

Multiple display support, for one. You can use DisplayPort to daisy chain multiple screens. While there is a dual-link spec for HDMI, it only supports 2 display devices and isn't supported by anyone.

Also, DisplayPort was designed from the ground up for bidirectional communication (ie- touch input, camera, mic input, etc). These features have only recently been shoehorned into the HDMI 1.4 spec, and may be some time before one can actually use it.

Re:no no no no no!

[mad_minstrel]

Well if you're worried about security that much, I recommend duct tape over the lens.

Re:no no no no no!

[dkuntz]

At least you had plastic coated!

Re:no no no no no!

[bennomatic]

So it may not seem like a huge advantage to do ethernet over your display cable, but the way I see it, that allows for a really nice consolidation of cables into a simple hub. If you've got a hub with an ethernet cable, a couple of USB's and a couple of these display port dealios, then you could have your whole desktop setup waiting for you when you get to your office/home with your laptop, and with one plug, you're wired to your network, keyboard, mouse, printer and display.

For my setup, I use wireless for printer and network, and I tried to do wireless (bluetooth) for keyboard and mouse, but it just wasn't quite the same, so when I get to my desk, I have to plug in power, monitor and USB to get going. Not a huge deal, but sometime in the not too distant future, I'm sure that'll seem archaic.

Re:no no no no no!

[snowraver1]

Yeah, but my TV I spent $2000 on 7 months ago doesn't have a displayport. Neither does my xbox or media pc. I only have one TV in my man-cave so I don't care about daisy chaining. Don't care about touch screen as I sit on the couch. Display port is fine for computers, and I expect my computer to go out of date, but HDMI is fine for TV.

If you want to address the cabling mess, start with the speakers. I have 6 speaker wires running around my man-cave. It's a freaking mess behind the audio reciever.

Re:no no no no no!

[b0bby]

Except that one cable to rule them all requires a ridiculously expensive cable to replace

I bet monoprice will have them cheap ;)

Light Peak?

[hart]

I wonder how long it will last as the "standard" with Light Peak allegedly only a year away? Source: http://techresearch.intel.com/articles/None/1813.htm

HHii!!

[goldaryn]

II aamm ppoossttiinngg tthhiiss ppoosstt iinn 33DD ffoorr tthhoossee ooff yyoouu wwiitthh DDiissppllaayyPPoorrtt vv11..22 33DD SStteerreeoossccooppiicc ddiissppllaayyss.. HHeelloo!!

Re:HHii!!

[ch0rlt0n]

II aamm ppoossttiinngg tthhiiss ppoosstt iinn 33DD ffoorr tthhoossee ooff yyoouu wwiitthh DDiissppllaayyPPoorrtt vv11..22 33DD SStteerreeoossccooppiicc ddiissppllaayyss.. HHeelloo!!

I have a headache. Please check the parallax in your post.

Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate Apple as much as the next guy, but not mentioning them at all in the summary is a bit... crude. Also, here's a list of all the new stuff (taken from http://www.hardmac.com/news/2010/01/11/displayport-1-2-validated).
        * Doubling bandwidth mostly to support 3D: 21.6 Gbits/s.
        * Connect even more monitors from a single DisplayPort. Dedicated hubs should soon be available.
        * As for the HDMI, transport USB data between a computer and a display, supporting Display USB functions such as a webcam and USB hub.
        * Connect to display with 3840 x 2400 resolution at 60Hz, or a 3D display (120Hz) at 2560 x 1600.
        * Audio Copy Protection and category codes
        * High definition audio formats (such as Dolby MAT, DTS HD, all BD formats,etc.)
        * Synchronization assist between audio and video, multiple audio channels, and multiple audio sink devices using Global Time Code (GTC)

Re:Apple

[Orbijx]

Why yes, you can.

You can either get a cable, or just the dongle, whichever you prefer.

Re:Apple

[TheRaven64]

Depends. Some devices can produce DisplayPort and HDMI (DVI-D) signals. You can get a cheap adaptor for these that just changes the physical form factor of the connector. The formats for HDMI and DisplayPort are very different though, so if this isn't supported by your hardware then you need something that will decodes one signal and produces the other signal after buffering a frame. This is how the DisplayPort to Dual Link DVI adaptors that Apple sells work, and if you check the reviews you'll see that they are very unreliable.

Doubt it

[lyinhart]

DisplayPort seems like one of those technologies that have great mind share, as well as some advantages over the competing technology, but will never gain mainstream adoption (See: Firewire).

Re:Doubt it

[QuantumRiff]

The new Thinkpads that my office has been getting has Displayport on the back of the laptops, and docking stations. Of course, Lenovo doesn't make a monitor with displayport under something like 24".

Monster?

[MortenMW]

Has Monster started producing these yet? I cant wait to get some high-quality cables!

Re:Monster?

[rolfwind]

Monster? Ha! A cheap fabrication for those who don't know better.

Ever since I switched to triple platinum-plated (no cheap gold here!) Pear Anjou cables, the colors on my monitor have been much deeper, richer and more vibrant, truly life-like! That's because they have a proprietary hybrid geometry, and the platinum plating provides ultra-low electrical reactance and the underlying copper is fully annealed 99.999% pure oxygen free. Not that cheap copper you get everyplace. All this combines to allow for new levels of digital accuracy.

Re:Monster?

[Rogerborg]

Oh... are people still using platinum? Well, I guess if you're willing to settle, rather than pay for unicorn horn, then it won't degrade your signal too much. Probably not enough to spoil your enjoyment, but a true videophile can tell.

Re:Monster?

[goldaryn]

Using real monsters? That's a complicated way of getting round the Trade Descriptions Act!

Re:Monster?

[StreetStealth]

Not to drag this dry videophile discussion out too long, but I presume you're not using cheap factory-raised unicorn horn, notorious for its poor standing wave sync-sweetening and shallow inter-bitstream raster resonance?

Only unicorns raised in the Swiss Alps have the protein content in their horns that allows a digital signal to hit such crisp, sparkling 1s and deep, thick 0s.

Re:Why Arnet We Just Using Fibre???

[bill_mcgonigle]

shouldn't fiber be the ultimate?

"I'm sorry, ma'am, you'll have to increase the radius of the curve of that cable going from your computer to your monitor, the index of refraction is too small for they way you have your cable coiled up."

Argh!

[Jason daHaus]

All my cables are obsolete again!

Re:I want supercable!

[Spatial]

I for one am very glad to be getting rid of HDMI/DVI/VGA cables and have just one cable to rule them all!

The surest solution to this problem: yet another cable!

Re:Why Arnet We Just Using Fibre???

[stevelinton]

This problem was solved a few years ago. Look up ClearCurve. They clad the fibre in tiny reflectors that recover the stray signal.

HDMI is not fine though

[Sycraft-fu]

One of the big ones, a reason that Display Port was developed to begin with, is HDMI needs additional chips/control circuits on the transmitting and receiving end to deal with encoding and decoding. Display Port is directly compatible with the display panels themselves and as such needs less hardware. It can be used internally in a laptop as the bus to the integrated display, and as output to another display. All in all it equals the ability to make smaller and slimmer displays because there's less in them.

Another somewhat related is Display Port doesn't cost any royalties. HDMI does. Added together it can lead to reduced costs. Less stuff in the display and less licensing fees equals less cost.

The bandwidth thing is a potential issue too. Even HDMI 1.4 doesn't have near as high a bandwidth (1.4 is actually the same bandwidth as 1.3). Now it doesn't matter a whole lot at the moment, but could in a few years. If we see more high refresh displays, which are useful for 3D and also look nicer, as well as higher resolutions we are going to hit in to bandwidth limits. Would be good to have a connector that is going to scale up to those.

can somebody explain to me...

[pointbeing]

...why we don't just do all this crap over an optical link?

Re:can somebody explain to me...

[crunchly]

Try this: http://techresearch.intel.com/articles/None/1813.htm

Re:can somebody explain to me...

[hazydave]

Expenses. The Sony/Philips optical is about the only consumer optical in common use, but that's over plastic, driven by LEDs. Pretty cheap. For optical at these rates, you'd need real lasers (LEDs peak around 500Mb/s) something like 10GBASE-R or 10GBASE-SR cable (LOMMF/OM3). None of that's crazy expensive... unless you compare it to electrical. And in particular, the electrical that the equipment makers are actually paying for.

Keep in mind, these are the industry guys who got together to create DisplayPort, at least in part because they got bent out of shape having to pay US$0.04 per device to use HDMI. They're not likely to replace a $0.50 electrical connector with a $2.00 optical connector and $5.00+ laser. And of course, lasers go one way... you actually need a laser at each end, if you want 2-way traffic. Or a custom cable, with electrical backchannel.

Well, why not.. I have some video cables around here with integrated optical audio channel.

So this is the next one up, after DisplayPort, but designed as a general purpose standard: Light Peak. I think this started out as an optical answer to Firewire at Apple, but rather than do it themselves, change too much for the spec, and have Intel (and the rest of the PC industry) go and create an alternative, this time Apple brought it to Intel. Maybe.. at least that's one story.

Anyway, read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_Peak

The nice thing about Light Peak... it's fast enough to do the HDMI/DisplayPort thing. And replace SATA, USB, Firewire, anything else you want. Of course, like all optical interconnects, the connectors are an issue (dirt kills), and unless they go to some kind of FDM, they'll need one cable in each direction, just like 10Ge uses in its various optical forms. Then there's the issue of power... we're kind of used to USB and Firewire cables providing power for small devices. But it's still a work in progress, 10Gb/s on launch, up to 100Gb/s on the roadmap.

Encoding and decoding for DRM

[tepples]

HDMI needs additional chips/control circuits on the transmitting and receiving end to deal with encoding and decoding. Display Port is directly compatible with the display panels themselves and as such

...can't display motion pictures published by six American companies. Home users who expect to watch high-definition feature films will choose an interconnect that does "encoding and decoding" because the publishers of feature films on high-definition home video demand "encoding and decoding" for digital restrictions management. Sure, DisplayPort 1.1 and later allow for DPCP, but then you lose the advantage of no "encoding and decoding".

Re:Encoding and decoding for DRM

[tepples]

DRM is a defect and needs to die in the marketplace.

But unfortunately, the proponents of this defect own the incumbent news media. This makes it more difficult for free culture advocates to get the message out that DRM is a defect.

Re:Encoding and decoding for DRM

[linhares]

One problem is framing. Take "the pirate bay" for instance. They look at the MAFIAA and tell them to stick it. The Jon Doe Homer Simpson Bozos will never support anything called the pirate bay, because he's seen on TV that it's run by pirates==terrorists==pedobear==enemies of the state.

But what if it were called "HumanCulture.Org"? It's much easier to say "I support closing the website ThePirateBay.org and jailing its criminal members" than it is to say "I support closing the website HumanCulture.org and jailing its criminal members".

Stupid answer

[FranTaylor]

My "Display" has a webcam and speakers. It is not some futuristic device.

It would be nice if it only needed one cable instead of three to hook it up to the computer.

Cable wars

[michaelmalak]

How is it that VGA was good for 15 years (1987-2002) and now we have, counting conservatively, three standards in 8 years (DVI, HDMI, DisplayPort)? DVI itself has multiple incompatible sub-standards. Before VGA, CGA/EGA was good for 6 years.

Is it a lack of engineering foresight, or is it a cable war with companies jockeying for position?

I've noticed that new Dells are now coming with DisplayPort, and discovered that Dell was one of the instigators.

Another unrelated observation: this could obsolete USB, and thus USB thumb drives, and thus yet another data storage format becomes oprhaned. This was inevitable. USB has had a good 14 year run so far. It couldn't last forever, despite what people thought about USB "being different this time" regarding being able to access old data -- that somehow it was going to be different from floppies and tapes.

Migration path?

[TheRaven64]

Okay, I have a new rule: You're not allowed to define a new standard until after you've thought about how people will migrate to it from their existing stuff.

Once upon a time, we had VGA. This was a pretty simple analogue signal, which was great for driving a CRT. At high resolutions it got a bit blurry though and it was a bit silly to convert a digital signal to analogue and back for displaying on a TFT. So then we had DVI. The DVI connector incorporated the VGA signal as well as a new, digital, one. If you got a new display that supported DVI then you could connect it to your old computer with a very cheap (i.e. containing no electronics) adaptor. Then, when you got a new video card that supported DVI, you just threw away the adaptor and used the digital signal.

After a while, most things used the digital signal, so you started getting DVI-D devices, where the analogue pins weren't connected to anything. Then came HDMI, which used exactly the same signal as DVI-D. You could, once again, connect HDMI devices to DVI-D devices with a trivial adaptor. Because these adaptors are cheap, a few months after they're introduced you can usually find someone who has one if you need one and forget yours.

But now we have DisplayPort. It is digital, but it uses a completely different kind of signal to HDMI / DVI-D. If you want to connect a DisplayPort device to something that only supports VGA or HDMI then you need an expensive adaptor that decodes a frame in one format into a buffer then reencodes it in the other format.

So the migration path from DVI to DisplayPort is for graphics cards to be able to produce both kinds of signal and for monitors to be able to accept both kind. This immediately eliminates two of the big advantages of DisplayPort: no license fees and simpler electronics. Add to that the fact that you have three kinds of connector for DisplayPort (DisplayPort, Mini DisplayPort and Micro DisplayPort), so you probably need an adaptor anyway, just to plug one DisplayPort device into another, and it's easier to just use HDMI.

This is a shame, because DisplayPort is a much better spec than HDMI.