first off let me apologize for my absence. i have been not been updating my blog for quite some time due to the fact that i have started the spring semester at Quinsig - doing my best to keep up with my studies.
that said, i want to begin with the recent announcement of one of Apple’s latest products. by now the world knows about hardware updates made to the entire Mac line-up, including the Mac Mini (MM). being an owner of two MM’s, i was very impressed with the updates Apple made to the MM line-up such as:
- faster front-side bus
- higher capacity memory
- faster Core 2 Duo
- the addition of an extra USB port
- a better graphics processor
to name a few.
it would seem that Apple made some real progress with the MM, except for one confusing thing; why did they include a mini DVI port connector along with the newer mini DisplayPort? that does not make any sense to me?
when the MM progressed from the Core Duo to the Core 2 Duo, it would have seemed like the best time to ditch the full size DVI connector in favor of the mini DVI port. this way they could have squeezed an extra USB or Firewire connector. the iMacs and Macbooks at the time included a mini DVI port, so why not the MM? well, it seems that Apple’s MM is late to the trend. the latest iteration - which contains the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M integrated video chipset - includes both the mini DVI port and the brand new mini DisplayPort. both ports are active allowing the MM capable of dual displays. which is really cool. yet for some reason having these two video ports together seems really tacky.
looking at it purely from a practical view, it does not make sense to pair up a newer display connector with an older version especially when Apple has been pushing for this mini DisplayPort as a industry standard. they have included the mini DisplayPort in all other products including the Mac Pro. none of these products - specifically the MacBooks and iMacs - utilizes the mini DVI anymore, or at all in the case of the Mac Pro. if Apple is successful in pushing the mini DisplayPort as a industry standard, that will mean future displays from other vendors will conform to it. and why shouldn't’t they? the mini DisplayPort is ideal for all notebooks and desktops alike. it’s less time spent having to screw anything down.
why include the mini DVI port with the new MM?
i don’t see any advantages of including the mini DVI port. from what i understand the mini DisplayPort can do everything that the mini DVI can do. in fact they are identical with respect to the digital signal scheme. the only difference is their physical appearance.
what about those adapters?
Apple manufactures adapters to connect a VGA or DVI monitor to the mini DVI port. they make similar ones that connect to the mini DisplayPort. so either way you're covered. but here's a slap in the face for users of the previous generation iMacs or MacBooks; what they don’t or have yet to manufacture is an adapter to connect a mini DisplayPort enabled monitor - such as the 24” LED Cinema Display - to the mini DVI port.
if you're covered either way, why remove the mini DVI port?
if there is currently no such adapter to connect a mini DisplayPort enabled monitor - such as the 24” LED Cinema Display - to the mini DVI port, then having dual mini DisplayPorts on the MM gives a user the added advantage of connecting - you guessed it - two mini DisplayPort enabled monitors. can you imagine driving two 24” LED Cinema Displays on a MM? i know that would be overkill, but having dual 24” does not make it any less sweet; just the opposite. if the MM is capable of handling them both, then why not? you’d think Apple would go with this if it could mean additional sales of their LED Cinema Display. plus if you look at the mock-up below, there’s enough real-estate back there for Apple to squeeze in another USB or Firewire 800.
why am i being so picky over this?
i guess it’s because i sometimes don’t get Apple’s reasoning over their design strategy, or the features they decide to add or take-away with every new revision of their products. in this particular case it's natural progression of technology; you know, going from 2GB to 4GB of memory, from DDR2 to DDR3, from 667 to 1066MHz FSB, from FW400 to FW800, etc. i figured Apple’s take on the MM to be all about progress; completely ditching all current standards in favor of something new and fresh, the latest and greatest.
bottom line?
if you’re going to make a point of promoting something as "new", why continue on with something old?
peace,
@riel
No comments:
Post a Comment