DailyTech - DailyTech Digest: DisplayPort

Submit News

Blog: Hardware DailyTech Digest: DisplayPort
Kristopher Kubicki (Blog) - April 4, 2007 12:22 PM

E-mail

del.icio.us

8 comment(s) - last by nah.. on Apr 6 at 10:05 AM

VESA shines with DisplayPort 1.1, but did consumers really win a champion?

Up until about six months ago I really thought UDI would be the next-generation PC high-definition interface. And why not, it was royalty free, electronically compatible with DVI (and HDMI), and supposedly, cheap to implement.

DisplayPort, on the other hand, is not electronically compatible with any of the DVI derivatives, introduces a separate copy-protection scheme and still doesn't have a shipping product. UDI technically doesn't either, but since it's built on DVI, the only real hurdle is pushing the manufacturers to implement.

Today, it's looking like DisplayPort is pretty much going to happen. AMD and ATI were both big proponents of DisplayPort even before the merger, and that has only amplified with the merger.

Philips, the company behind the DisplayPort Content Protection scheme, has deep relations with virtually every major PC manufacturer. Not surprisingly, Philips also has the most to gain from DisplayPort as DPCP is not royalty free. HDCP, the de facto DRM standard on HDMI, DVI and UDI, is licensed by a subsidiary of Intel.

Several weeks ago I had a conference call with Intel to discuss its position on UDI, which solidified my feeling that the standard is dead in the water. In a nutshell, the company isn't pursuing UDI development anymore -- DisplayPort has taken the center stage.

Intel is technically still members of the Unified Display Interface Work Group, though the only PC manufacturer actively exclusively involved in the project is Apple. Silicon Image, a heavy advocate of HDMI and all things HDCP, is quite possibly UDI's strongest proponent left. However, the reason many vendors jumped to the DisplayPort camp was to avoid royalties from HDCP and HDMI certification aggressively promoted by Silicon Image.

Of course, with the DisplayPort 1.1 ratification yesterday, VESA has brought the whole train full circle. For interoperability with HDMI devices, vendors will need to adopt HDMI certification. Instead of just HDCP, we now have DPCP and HDCP -- neither which are interoperable but we will most certainly get a third-party technology to bridge that gap which will certainly not be royalty-free. And finally, instead of refining the DVI platform further, as with HDMI and UDI, DisplayPort introduces a new electronic setup that vendors have no experience dealing with yet.

It certainly is ironic to see the DVI and HDMI pitfalls VESA promised to avoid take center stage in the DisplayPort 1.1 ratification.

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Vote with your feet.

By masher2

(blog) on 4/4/2007 2:55:14 PM , Rating: 2

People are getting too worked up over the situation. If you don't like the standard and don't feel it has any benefits-- don't buy any equipment which includes it. If enough people agree with you, it'll die on the vine.

RE: Vote with your feet.

By oTAL

(blog) on 4/5/2007 6:35:51 AM , Rating: 3

Well... most of us enthusiasts thought the netburst architecture sucked pretty bad (some people warmed up to Northwood but nevertheless...) yet it still prevailed for 7 years. Right now, when standards are agreed upon, the user has little opportunity of avoiding it without loosing out. Usually there is only one mainstream standard and that is the way to go, whether you like it or not... think MS windows! ;)

Parent

RE: Vote with your feet.

By masher2

(blog) on 4/5/2007 10:22:19 AM , Rating: 3

> "Well... most of us enthusiasts thought the netburst architecture sucked pretty bad (some people warmed up to Northwood but nevertheless...) yet it still prevailed for 7 years..."

But the Netburst architecture didn't "suck bad" for all those 7 years...and it sold like hotcakes in the early years, back when there were plenty of alternatives. That's why it lasted so long, because it was the most succesful cpu of all time, from a sales perspective.

The same goes for your Windows example. Back in its early days, there were over a dozen different Intel-based GUIs. Windows only became a standard because people bought it in droves, forcing its competitors out of existence.

The same goes for DisplayPort. Frankly, I'm not seeing much of an advantage for it....and if people agree with me, it will never become a widespread standard, no matter what certain manufacturers want.

Parent

RE: Vote with your feet.

By oTAL

(blog) on 4/5/2007 12:46:24 PM , Rating: 2

First of all, netburst sucked from the start!
Did people buy P4s? Yup! Did that make them suck less? Nope!
It was a marketing driven architecture that was all about elevating the Ghz count while the rest was clearly secondary. Every enthusiast complained about the low IPC back then but if you read the recent interview of the guy who worked in the Pentium M project in Israel you'll get that exact feeling on an internal level (a better architecture was being put in the closet because netburst had the larger numbers).
Northwood sucked less, but that's when you compare it to Willamete or Prescott. Compare it to P3 Coppermine (way earlier) and you'll still feel like it's a step back.

As for windows, you are right. It initially did not sell for the lack of alternatives. Now it does. I use it and I think it's a great OS. Could be better, more open and with more respect for standards. Competition creates those things. It has none.

As for DisplayPort... if manufacturers install them on cards and displays then even you will eventually get them... If it's good, the change will be pretty quick. If it offers little or no advantage but it is embraced by the industry, then the change will still come, albeit slower (think DDR2).

Cheers,
Nuno

Parent

RE: Vote with your feet.

By nah on 4/6/2007 10:05:33 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
But the Netburst architecture didn't "suck bad" for all those 7 years...and it sold like hotcakes in the early years, back when there were plenty of alternatives. That's why it lasted so long, because it was the most succesful cpu of all time, from a sales perspective.

Exactly what were the alternatives--apart from Athlons, and later on Athlon64s
The architecture didn't "suck bad" ?--even Intel disagrees--or it would have stuck with the NetBurst architecture

It lasted " so long" because Intel took their time coming up with something new--from 1999-2006 AMD increased their market share by 10 %--hardly a sign of confidence by the public in Intel's architecture

Parent

Just pin it fools

By OrSin on 4/4/2007 2:08:36 PM , Rating: 3

This is insane that this is not compatible with DVI. It should be very easy to make it compatible. Just add a few more pins for what you then and bam we done. The onyl reason i can see if it have enough bandwith so the 30" monitor dont need dual DVI. But really even if this goins thought how many monitors will get it ont he next 3 years. Consider how long it too to even get HDMI on Video and true monitors I bet something better iwll be coming along before its even mainstream.

RE: Just pin it fools

By THEiNTERNETS on 4/4/2007 7:59:12 PM , Rating: 3

Well that's really the problem isn't it? If companies keep switching to newer, "better" standards faster and faster, it is ultimately the consumer who pays the price.

The problem is further worsened because Display Port is destroying the convergence HDMI was offering between computer, TV, receiver, and so on by developing something PC manufacturers will respond to while TVs go their own separate way.

I won't even get into the extra-extra DRM issue which should already scream user-UNfriendly, I would just point out that the simplicity of one cable for all your monitor and audio needs would be highly preferable to these competing standards which take up more space on the back of devices and cost the consumer more money.

The R600 & G90 generations of videocards will probably be the last that operate universally well with your HDTV and your PC monitor. But when you can crank out a few extra bucks by adding connectivity options (ASUS, I'm looking at you here) it's no surprise the videocard manufacturers are embracing a fracturing of the video standard rather than a unification.

Parent

Forget the end consumer

By Kougar on 4/4/2007 2:30:37 PM , Rating: 2

Just how much do the royalties for HDCP / DPCP generate? Add in whatever royalties they eventually decide to ask for Displayport use, it's no wonder they are introducing a new display standard. It is all about the royalties they rake in by the ton.

Gotta love it... they enforce their DRM, and we pay them to do it to us.

"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer