×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

704 comments

why phase out DVI? (5, Insightful)

Spy Handler (822350) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762818)

it gives me crystal-clear digital connection to my monitor, and unlike HDMI, it works every time without fail.

Re:why phase out DVI? (5, Insightful)

godrik (1287354) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762860)

Trying to close the analog hole I guess. Using "smart" HDMI can more easily be used with DRMs. Coupled with machine you can not choose the OS of, and you might have quite annoying copy protection schemes.

Re:why phase out DVI? (5, Insightful)

Ynot_82 (1023749) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763004)

The "Analogue Hole" is unaffected by digital restrictions
It's the illegitimate* analogue re-capturing of a legitimately decoded digital stream
Think TV-capture card

* From "their" POV

Re:why phase out DVI? (4, Informative)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763234)

Pirates don't even need the analog hole. Both HD-DVD and blu-ray have been cracked enough to just decrypt the disc.

Re:why phase out DVI? (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763284)

The "Analogue Hole" is unaffected by digital restrictions
It's the illegitimate* analogue re-capturing of a legitimately decoded digital stream
Think TV-capture card

* From "their" POV

Which is rather pointless anyway. Most of the broadcasts I've seen on Youtube (before they get shut down) are from a video camera pointed at a TV screen. Low tech, but still effective for the nondiscriminating market for inauthentic video.

Re:why phase out DVI? (5, Informative)

PhrostyMcByte (589271) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763140)

HDCP supported DVI before it supported HDMI, and has been available on graphics cards for years. This won't be closing any holes.

Re:why phase out DVI? (5, Funny)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763240)

Trying to close the analog hole I guess. Using "smart" HDMI can more easily be used with DRMs. Coupled with machine you can not choose the OS of, and you might have quite annoying copy protection schemes.

Yep. Hollywood and Big Media will be pushing for a monitor standard which detects uncertified video, blocks it, reports you and sets your house on fire.

Re:why phase out DVI? (5, Funny)

kimvette (919543) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762872)

and unlike HDMI, it works every time without fail.

That is why it is being killed off.

Re:why phase out DVI? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38763138)

Just as long as they dont get rid of D-SUB!

Re:why phase out DVI? (2)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762900)

Because futurists are moronic and don't understand that dvi = hdmi in terms of quality.

Re:why phase out DVI? (5, Insightful)

Anrego (830717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763222)

DVI was confusing to non-geeks.

You had, what..

DVI-D, DVI-A, and DVI-I .. plus "single link" and "dual link" thrown in for good measure, and different cables supporing subsets of those and adapters and a variety of "this works with that, but not this other thing".

HDMI is HDMI .. you plug it in and not worry about whether you are using the right mode / cable for your setup.

Re:why phase out DVI? (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763250)

Well, the HDMI connector seems a bit more robust from a physical standpoint, and seems like it would use a lot less metal.

I don't think that's the reason though.

Re:why phase out DVI? (4, Informative)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762914)

the port connector's huge. Not to mention Dual Link DVI is a pain in the ass.

Display Port/Mini Display Port is tiny and free.

Re:why phase out DVI? (4, Interesting)

PIBM (588930) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763148)

The port connector might be 'huge' by your standard, but at least it won't get out by itself, from either the computer or the monitors. I'm using 3 30" monitor in 2560x1600, and the images are always perfect, switch on immediatly too.

On a TV gaming setup in the basement with HDMI, when there's way too much bass and the TV is vibrating with the sound (older retroprojection TV in which there is a lot of air), there happens some time where the security signal is lost and we lose the image for a few seconds, until it synchronize back. Doesn't happen with the DVI connector, which is a big plus for them.

Anyway, what was your point about the dual link DVI being a PITA ?

Re:why phase out DVI? (2, Interesting)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763274)

This could be solved without actually modifying the HDMI "connector" itself - just some body work around it.

No technical reason you couldn't put securing screws around an HDMI connector, is what I mean.

Re:why phase out DVI? (2)

bemymonkey (1244086) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763172)

Don't you mean lack of dual link DVI is a pain in the ass? What problems are there with dual link, other than cheap graphics cards from 5 years ago not having had it?

Re:why phase out DVI? (2, Informative)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762918)

It lacks any "copy protection". Don't worry, the (MP|RI)AA thought police will be around shortly to help correct your faulty logic. If this fails, then they will work with their friends in the government to put you someplace safe and quite where you cannot be a threat to others with your silly notions.

Re:why phase out DVI? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38762954)

DVI can support the same HDCP protection as HDMI because it's the same fucking thing with a different connector shape. The anti-HDMI fud here is idiotic.

Re:why phase out DVI? (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762984)

In fact, technically you need a HDCP compliant monitor, video card and HDMI cable to play back blu-ray movies under Windows 7.

Re:why phase out DVI? (4, Informative)

YesIAmAScript (886271) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763164)

No, you can also play Blu-ray movies with an HDCP compliant monitor, video card and DVI cable. Or you can do it with VGA. Or you can do it on a integrated display (like a laptop). You just can't do it with non-HDCP digital video out whether HDMI or DVI (well, not at full res you can't, it must be downsampled to 960x540).

Re:why phase out DVI? (5, Insightful)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763212)

Indeed. Or you can use various unlicenced decryption methods, in which case you don't need an HDCP compliant anything. Pirates win again.

Re:why phase out DVI? (5, Informative)

Megaweapon (25185) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763262)

DVI can support the same HDCP protection as HDMI because it's the same fucking thing with a different connector shape. The anti-HDMI fud here is idiotic.

Making HDMI ports requires a license/royalty (whereas things like DisplayPort is an open VESA standard and requires no royalty payments).

Re:why phase out DVI? (4, Informative)

Fahrvergnuugen (700293) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763000)

Not true. DVI supports HDCP just like HDMI does [wikipedia.org].

It is in fact electrically compatible with HDMI (2)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763258)

You can cross connect them without issue. Now they each support features the others don't. HDMI can do audio, DVI can't, DVI can do analogue, HDMI can't (of course the ports can be made to work either way), but the video signal is the same electrically.

The real difference is just connector size. Also normal HDMI connectors don't do dual link, but that isn't such an issue these days as we can just use higher frequencies to get higher bandwidth.

Re:why phase out DVI? (3, Interesting)

JoeMerchant (803320) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763168)

I just had a funny thought last night...

Say you're a consumer electronics manufacturer, like, oh, Sony, and you make audio, then later video recording devices "for the masses," you sell them in quantity, get them in the hands of Joe Average, and let him record whatever he wants, which you know is about 98.9% copies of commercial works and 1% his garage band (playing cover tunes without a license) or 2 year old reciting the cereal commercial from T.V., and 0.1% actual, legitimate use.

So, what's your next move? Why, get into the commercial content industry, of course... music, movies, basically anything that makes something worthy of copying with the very same consumer electronics you've successfully sold for the last decade or three... It's a booming industry, lots of money to make there.

And, then what? Well, of course, you go and clamp down on all this horrid copyright infringement that you yourself have been enabling and implicitly promoting for 50 years.

Entrapment is (rarely, but sometimes) a valid argument against the police, why not corporations?

Re:why phase out DVI? (2)

Bobakitoo (1814374) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762922)

it gives me crystal-clear digital connection to my monitor, and unlike HDMI, it works every time without fail.

I suspect this is the problem. There are better option that are Defective By Design compliant, i don't see why we should settle for anything less in 2012.

Re:why phase out DVI? (1)

Rich0 (548339) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763026)

Actually, this news should make us all VERY happy if we don't like defective-by-design.

You have millions of perfectly working monitors that are about to become obsolete, unless you use an HDMI-to-VGA converter.

That looks like a huge market, and products always come out for huge markets. Every corporate interest in America except for the MPAA is going to be in favor of being able to display full-resolution on their existing VGA displays.

I'm typing this on a CRT monitor attached to a VGA cable. My LCD display at work as a VGA port. I just bought a brand new LCD with only VGA (it was cheap). I doubt that anybody is going to be able to make it completely obsolete in only 5 years...

Re:why phase out DVI? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38762966)

This is true. I have a DVI/HDMI HD monitor, and I've tried both connections. I've seen the DVI do a better job than HDMI when it comes to screen fonts. And until we're no longer reading on computer screens, I think it's necessary to keep that DVI port.

Re:why phase out DVI? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38763108)

Single-link DVI and HDMI are the same signal! They have the exact same TMDS pins! The ones and zeroes are identical! It's the same thing!

Re:why phase out DVI? (1)

Millennium (2451) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762990)

it gives me crystal-clear digital connection to my monitor, and unlike HDMI, it works every time without fail.

Actually, those are the exact reasons: to force people into an upgrade cycle, and to plug the so-called analog hole.

Re:why phase out DVI? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38763012)

From the consumer's standpoint - displayport and HDMI are nice, small connectors. Smaller connector means you can build smaller devices. Thinner laptops. More dense arrangements of ports on the back of your box, etc.

From the standpoint of the media companies, it's another step towards getting rid of analog output.

Re:why phase out DVI? (1)

bemymonkey (1244086) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763048)

DisplayPort/HDMI type plugs are nicer on mobile devices, I imagine - I still have DVI and VGA on some of my laptops, and plugging and unplugging them makes me cringe because I'm going to break pins any day now (after thousands of pluggings)...

Re:why phase out DVI? (1)

poltsy (1897872) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763100)

Perhaps because the connector is inconveniently large. How exactly doesn't HDMI work every time without fail? It's the same signal, no?

Interesting (5, Interesting)

Oxford_Comma_Lover (1679530) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762826)

The one that was introduced 13 years later is being phased out at the same time as the one that was introduced thirty-six years ago? How odd.

Re:Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38762874)

Thirty six? I'll give it to you but only because it's friday..

Re:Interesting (0)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762992)

almost 35 actually, VGA introduced with the IBM PS/2 line in 1987

Re:Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38763070)

Check your math. I was born in 1978 and I'm not yet 35. I suspect you meant 25.

Re:Interesting (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763236)

Ugh, the PS/2. Burn in hell.

My company paid, IIRC, about $12K for a PS/2-80 (16MHz 386 + 4MB RAM). The MCA bus was a nightmare to design for as it was an asynchronous bus and the timing changed for each model. I had a shelf of IBM technical docs released for each new model with the new timing specs which too often broke compatibility with existing MCA cards. So much "innovation". The cases were built like grotesquely heavy tanks though, for better or worse.

Re:Interesting (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38762906)

I was introduced in 1986 as well, so please refrain from making me older than I actually am.

Re:Interesting (2)

daid303 (843777) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762994)

I guess DVI will stay, but DVI-A and DVI-I which both still have the VGA signal in the DVI connector are going to be a thing of the past. DVI without analogue is just HDMI without audio. Do you see HDMI go anytime soon?

EGA was introduced in 1984. VGA in 1987. Guess VGA hold up pretty well, but it's time for VGA to go. It's pushed to the limits, and if you connect a large resolution monitor to VGA you will notice it.

Re:Interesting (1)

Gideon Wells (1412675) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763204)

VGA were the safe, stable port. Above a threshold, DVI took off like crazy. They never took off for the most part. I would liken DVI to the clear improvement, but it just didn't take off in the general population. HDMI, dear god HDMI. I think even my toaster has an HDMI port. This thing is the clear next safe, stable port.

HDMI is being widely accepted. DVI wasn't. It is time for VGA to die. *Takes off hat, and mourns*. The logical thing from a business standpoint is just go all in with the new format. Doubly so with the apparent trend of twiggy portable devices.

Sweet! (1)

jawtheshark (198669) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762832)

Millions of monitors (Hey, up until recently many cheaper LCD panels were VGA-Only) and more importantly many projectors will become useless. Projectors aren't your 150€ "special" at your local electronic store. Furthermore, if you've been thinking of buying a monitor now (for example, the 2560x1440 are finally getting into "acceptable" price range), think again... Your next computer might just not like it if it's DVI/VGA.

That said, I've seen the trend (with comsumers) to simply buy a smaller TV with HDMI/VGA and use that as a monitor. It's often cheaper than an equivalent monitor. Go figure...

Yet another adapter to carry around, *if* you can even use an adapter.

Re:Sweet! (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762926)

I suspect you would have a difficult time finding a 2560x1440 panel that doesn't support HDMI. DisplayPort does seem to be slower to catch on though.

That said, phasing out DVI seems entirely premature. I wonder if NPD is one of those trade groups that still has its panties in a bunch because DVI is unencrypted and could theoretically be used by pirates.

Re:Sweet! (1)

jawtheshark (198669) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763050)

You're probably right... I haven't shopped much around, but I have been tempted ever since my wife got her iMac 27". Anyway, if you've got a defective monitor now and the story is true, you're in a bad position. Monitors usually last much longer than computers. Heck, I still have my 1024x768 15" LCD flat panel (VGA, obviously), which I bought in 2000 or so. It was insanely expensive, but it was worth it because it saved so much desk space. It is currently connected to my parents server, for occasional console work. Usually ssh suffices though.

Re:Sweet! (1)

prefect42 (141309) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763052)

Dell 3007WFP (2560x1600), but I concede that's old stock.
Barco Coronis Fusion 6MP DL is a current monitor 3280 x 2048 with a pair of dual-link DVI connectors and nothing else.

DisplayPort I've found to be particularly annoying. You /can/ end up having to reboot a monitor to get rid of display corruption, and a normal display port (DP+) on a graphics card can't output to a dual-link DVI monitor without an expensive active Displayport->DVI adapter.

Re:Sweet! (1)

v1 (525388) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763182)

I suspect you would have a difficult time finding a 2560x1440 panel that doesn't support HDMI.

I'm not too technical with how VGA works, but doesn't higher monitor resolution require more (serial?) bandwidth? And hit some sort of wall of bandwidth when the resolution gets high?

Re:Sweet! (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763020)

An adapter or a converter. I'd imagine intelligent pc monitor and tv manufacturers would retain those ports for decades to come to maintain compatibility. I had a stupid Hanns G monitor once that I ordered off newegg, that had ONLY 1 HDMI port (I didn't read, was a good deal), it also came with a hdmi male / dvi male cable (single wire), never seen anything like it, but worked like a charm. I guess they're similar enough where you can do a crossover cable..?

Also the smaller tv is cheaper due to the inferior resolution, your desktop and media will always look better on the PC monitor. When a tv says its pc compatible, it means it supports a common pc resolution as opposed to something like 1368x768 or something that a lot of graphics cards struggle w.

This means I will have a motive to stick with old (1)

roguegramma (982660) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763046)

This means I will have a motive to stick with old pc hardware even longer, to make use of my monitor

Re:Sweet! (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763080)

You can do HDMI to DVI with a very simple, cheap adaptor. Or vice versa.

VGA to HDMI or vice versa requires a complex, expensive adaptor.

Re:Sweet! (1)

silas_moeckel (234313) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763268)

DVI as a connector seems to do everything HDMI can do along with VGA. Many video cards can output full HDMI over a DVI port and use a simple adapter (no active parts just a change of form factor) and do the same for VGA. Moving to a HDMI connector gives us less flexibility it should never be better except for size. I'll take a positively locking connector over HDMI's friction fit any day.

Why would you buy a TV that only does 1920x1080 when you can get a higher res monitor? 1080P is not a lot of pixels nowadays it was the upper end of what they though they could do what 20 years ago when HDTV was being created? If anything the HDTV market is stagnating the pixel count on monitors.

So Long DVI... (1, Troll)

camperdave (969942) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762848)

So long, DVI... I never knew ya. I've never hooked up, or to my knowledge even used a monitor that was connected via DVI, and now it's being phased out.

It'd be nice if the summary mentioned what they'd be replaced with.

Re:So Long DVI... (1)

Myopic (18616) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762962)

No? Really? I've been using exclusively DVI for, huh, maybe five years now. I haven't owned a computer with VGA since 2006, and the big (30-inch) screen I just bought won't even work with VGA (it has a VGA hookup, but VGA won't drive all its pixels). DVI is a great standard. Even at work my two 19-inch monitors each use a DVI connection from the dual-port graphics card in my Dell tower.

HDMI is okay, it does have that nice petite connector, but all the DRM bullshit means I will only use it when I have to, and I've never had to.

Re:So Long DVI... (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763016)

Yup, the only place I ever saw a DVI connector was on a few TV sets, but since nothing else ever has a DVI port, there is no point in providing it.

Re:So Long DVI... (1)

prefect42 (141309) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763090)

Then you really have been missing out or you've been using CRT monitors. DVI's been giving people pixel perfect output on their LCD monitors for years, and DisplayPort and HDMI have only relatively recently appeared to take over the roost.

Re:So Long DVI... (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763110)

HDMI on most desktops, displayport on Apple (With optional HDMI adaptor), mini-HDMI on tablets and ultrabooks where the full HDMI is too big. Electrically HDMI and DVI are equivilent, but HDMI has a smaller and more robust connector.

Re:So Long DVI... (1)

DanTheStone (1212500) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763174)

I've used DVI. It's been nice for monitors that got signal interference on RGB from noisy power supplies.

Re:So Long DVI... (1)

Gideon Wells (1412675) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763254)

Probably HDMI. DVI is a buffed up, HD capable VGA sized port. HDMI plays a similar niche for casual electronic enthusiasts, it is a port used by practically all electronics already and it is smaller.

Adapters (1)

NabisOne (2426710) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762850)

..and the adapter makers all rejoice!

MPAA (2, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763144)

Until Columbia, Disney, Fox, Paramount, Universal, and Warner use whatever SOPA and PROTECTIP become to shut down the web sites and finances of the makers of such adapters.

Great! just Great! (1)

xmorg (718633) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762858)

so we can have even MORE "mix and match, and omg, i cant find the right connector so i have to go to office depot and buy a converter, what the heck is with these stupid monitor manufacturers and their nonstandard parts" moments...

All about HDCP (5, Insightful)

TankSpanker04 (1266400) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762884)

I suspect the driving force toward HDMI-only is anti piracy efforts in the form of mandatory HDCP on any new display hardware.

Re:All about HDCP (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763008)

HDCP will work over DVI. HDMI is just DVI with a different form factor and audio/USB lines.

Re:All about HDCP (1)

NixieBunny (859050) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763170)

I suspect the driving factor is saving the $3 that the redundant DVI connector and cable set costs, since they're all starting to put HDMI connectors on motherboards and video cards, and HDMI~=DVI.

They're getting rid of VGA because it's not digital. If you don't think that's important, you've never bought a $5 pair of "digital stereo headphones".

Ain't happening (5, Insightful)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762904)

We've still got serial ports. There are still motherboards with a parallel port, for goodness sake. VGA ain't going away anytime soon.

Re:Ain't happening (2)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763056)

Sure it is. When the source of your video signal no longer includes a DAC to generate the VGA signal, there's no point in including the connector on the mainboard. If Intel and AMD are dropping VGA support for their integrated GPUs, then your only option will be an external GPU for VGA. And even then the significantly reduced usefulness of a VGA port means it'll be rapidly dropped from new monitors.

We've still got serial ports. There are still motherboards with a parallel port, for goodness sake.

I haven't seen a recent board with a parallel port. Even serial ports have been reduced to headers on the motherboard that you need to cable out (and even that's missing on some hardware.)

Re:Ain't happening (5, Informative)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763058)

I've never seen a motherboard *without* a parallel port or serial. they're not connected, but they are there. hell, my two month old motherboard with the trendy eSata and DVI for six core chip has floppy and "game" port on it!

Re:Ain't happening (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763086)

to clarify, not connected to plug on exterior case, but certainly working and functional if ever needed.

Re:Ain't happening (1)

Rich0 (548339) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763094)

Yup, and at work I just deployed a multi-million dollar COTS application that among other things has serial port interfaces to other devices.

RS232 is the lowest common denominator - EVERYBODY uses it for non-consumer-oriented stuff. No drivers, etc.

My state-of-the-art cable tuner that gets digital video off of coax after being transmitted to the house over fiber uses RS232 to change the channels.

And that is nothing compared to the number of VGA-only monitors out there. Monitors can last decades - VGA won't be going away anytime soon. If they stop putting VGA ports on monitors tomorrow people will need to use VGA for 20 more years.

So what's left then? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38762916)

Oh that's right, the thing that needs to do cryptic handshaking to check you're not one'a dem filshee peerates before considering whether it'll function properly or not. And you thought you got to own that hardware when you paid for it.

I'm sorry, but that will not do. VGA and DVI remain hard requirements here for the foreseeable future.

Re:So what's left then? (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763132)

DVI supports exactly the same DRM scheme. The only difference is that for DVI it's an optional extension that not all equipment impliments, whereas with HDMI it's a required part of the specification.

Displayport (1)

b.emile (1222958) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762934)

Hopefully MS fixes its frosty piss issues with Displayport hotplug compatibility. We've got some 27" DP monitors here that will disconnect and rearrange all your windows every time the monitor goes to sleep. It's driving us nuts.

Re:Displayport (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38763128)

Same here, with 19" and 21" monitors. It's a real pain.
 
Updating the video drivers seems to alleviate it but it doesn't make it go away.

Re:Displayport (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38763186)

27"? Now that's some serious DP!

And switch to HDMI? (1)

HerculesMO (693085) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762960)

I had HDMI on my monitor, and on my PC. And it sucked.

I swapped back to DVI for reliability's sake.

RCA Jacks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38762968)

When will RCA jacks for video be placed? Until then all this is about nothing, you let one technology though that doesn't do DRM then the whole stack of cards falls.

Deep breath everyone. DVI==HDMI (5, Insightful)

slimjim8094 (941042) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762972)

While I like DVI and have a monitor that uses it, going HDMI only is not a big deal. HDMI is just DVI plus a little extra, for audio, and the cost of that "little extra" is already negligible.

This means that a DVI-DVI, HDMI-HDMI, and DVI-HDMI cable are the same price. I spent $5 on one a few years back.

No difference! Unbunch your panties

30 Years of VGA (5, Insightful)

scorp1us (235526) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762978)

Lets hope that whatever follows has the same longevity as VGA. In a world where we've invented USB 3 times (USB, mini USB and micro USB) with non-compatible connectors in just 11 years, the future does not look as good.

HDMI fasteners? (3, Interesting)

planckscale (579258) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762982)

One concern I have with HDMI are the connectors in PC's and how they are fairly easy to disconnect and damage. Also one of my HDMI cables became damaged because of a sharp angle. Sure there are adapters and alternative cables like these http://www.smarthome.com/81271/HDMI-Cable-with-Secure-Connection-Screw-in-Fastener-15-Feet/p.aspx [smarthome.com] , but they are not the standard. I've never really had a problem with screwing in VGA or DVI connectors except for the random stripped screw.

Half true... (1)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | more than 2 years ago | (#38762996)

VGA has already been phased out. It takes effort to find a graphics card that supports it nowadays. The only products that use it are either embedded or are designed to support legacy hardware (projectors, etc).

DVI, on the other hand, will probably be around for a long time, at least until replacemt has convincing reasons to cause people to switch. The blight of HDMI (inconsistent throughput for even the PALTRY 1080p in most cables) will certainly not replace the other two formats as long as their cost/length remains higher/comparable to DVI.

Re:Half true... (1)

PIBM (588930) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763256)

Most video cards that have a DVI output also support a VGA output from the same port using a simple adapter that is often provided with the video card.. Video cards which have specificed DVI-D would not support the VGA output on that one though.

What ever happened to... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38763014)

HD BaseT? I was excited when I heard about it a while ago.

DVI is HDMI without sound and video cards (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38763024)

DVI is HDMI without sound and video cards are not the best for sound and PC displays do not have more then 2 speakers any ways.

Does any PC display with HDMI have some kind of DD pass though or 5.1 or more analog out?

Re:DVI is HDMI without sound and video cards (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38763280)

DVI carries audio. I have DVI going to my TV as a monitor.

In case anyone was wondering (2)

overshoot (39700) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763060)

This is one of the things that happens when you have three or four video chip sources, including the ones embedded in processors and system logic.

Ten years ago, there were enough other companies in the game that your chances of finding one supporting "legacy" interfaces was a lot better.

It doesn't really matter. (2)

lattyware (934246) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763098)

VGA has been dead for some time - even the cheapest monitors are starting to use DVI, so in 5 years, I can see it totally dying out - I mean, sure, some people will still be using it with older machines and older monitors, but in new ones, yeah.

As to DVI? It's not a big loss to loose the ports. Even they start putting HDMI and DisplayPort everywhere, it takes a simple cable to go from HDMI to DVI or visa-versa. My monitors currently wiegh in at one with 1xDVI, 1xVGA, one with 1xDVI, 1xVGA, 1xS-Video, 1xComposite, 1xComponent, and one with 1xVGA, 2xDVI, 1xDP, 1xHDMI, 1xComponent, 1xComposite.

I think 5 years sounds like a reasonable timespan to see the newer ports become big. That said, I see a lot of HDMI adoptation, but most of the graphics cards are still DVI and HDMI - the only machine I have with DisplayPort out is my laptop. 5 years is a lot of new graphics cards however.

As to the replacements, I'm not going to complain. HDMI and DisplayPort are much nicer to plug/unplug than DVI cables - and no need to worry about dual-link or not. As to VGA - I havn't used it in a long time. Due to the HDMI/DVI compatibility, I don't really see this causing much hurt to anyone either.

HDMI, uhg (1)

FierstArter (2545602) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763102)

Just the IDEA of having to use HDMI for all my video needs is sickening. I love the ability to move audio and video through one cable, but man. I can't think of a time that I used HDMI, with a computer, that didn't pose a little problem. Who am I to say though, I haven't used one in a few years. Maybe they have gotten a little better.

dp (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38763198)

dp ftw bitches!

Projectors (3, Interesting)

ironjaw33 (1645357) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763218)

I travel to give the occasional presentation and I think I've only seen one or two projectors in the past 5 years that had something other than a VGA input. This is probably why many business laptops still have VGA outputs at the expense of providing others like DisplayPort, DVI, or HDMI.

The other problem is that monitors and projectors long outlive their PC contemporaries. I've got a 20" Dell LCD that I purchased in 2003 that's still going strong today. It has VGA and DVI inputs, since only in the past few years have HDMI and DisplayPort become standard on monitors.

I'm rather partial to DisplayPort and Thunderbolt since the connectors are smaller and don't have pins that are easily bent, but these outputs aren't too common in laptops, unless you have a Mac.

Business use laptops and projectors (4, Insightful)

dogbertsd (251551) | more than 2 years ago | (#38763290)

It may be that many of you in the home market won't miss VGA, but in most corporate offices, VGA is the only common connection supported by the projectors in most conference rooms. While an adapter is an option, I suspect that laptops marketed to businesses will have VGA adapters for longer than the next five years as the refresh cycle for projectors is generally much longer than the refresh cycle for laptops.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...