Over the years, we’ve seen a good number of interfaces used for computer monitors, TVs, LCD panels and other all-things-display purposes. We’ve lived through VGA and the large variety o…

Over the years, we’ve seen a good number of interfaces used for computer monitors, TVs, LCD panels and other all-things-display purposes. We’ve lived through VGA and the large variety of analog interfaces that preceded it, then DVI, HDMI, and at some point, we’ve started getting devices with DisplayPort support. So you might think it’s more of the same. However, I’d like to tell you that you probably should pay more attention to DisplayPort – it’s an interface powerful in a way that we haven’t seen before.

  • Cosmoooooooo@lemmy.worldEnglish
    449·
    2 months ago

    Fuck displayport! it’s open source or nothing.

    You want stupid apple bullshit? Because this is how you get stupid apple bullshit.

    New HDMI is fine. Again, fuck displayport.

    • ramble81@lemmy.zip
      23·
      2 months ago

      open source or nothing New HDMI is fine

      Are you a troll or just stupid? (And I ask that sincerely). HDMI is a proprietary licensed specification.

      DisplayPort is royalty free and has a larger consortium backing the implementation.

      • MHLoppy@fedia.io
        14·
        2 months ago

        It’s not quite fully open though https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort

        VESA, the creators of the DisplayPort standard, state that the standard is royalty-free to implement. […]

        While VESA does not charge any per-device royalty fees, VESA requires membership for access to said standards.[70] The minimum cost is presently $5,000 (or $10,000 depending on Annual Corporate Sales Revenue) annually.[71]

        That doesn’t change how it’s, hm, questionable to prefer HDMI on the basis of “open source or nothing” compared to DisplayPort, but still.

          • MHLoppy@fedia.io
            1·
            2 months ago

            I’m not judging whether it’s good or bad, I’m saying that despite their weird attitude, the root level comment is right that the design is not “open source” because the design is not freely accessible despite being royalty free for paying members to implement and use.

            The same argument you’re presenting could be used for commercial open source enterprise though, and that’s not completely impossible to do via support fees and such.