DisplayPort and the new MacBooks

Here is a very, very good article on DisplayPort.

Let me highlight a few things that will help shed light on Apple's new 24" LED Cinema Display with DisplayPort:

1. DisplayPort uses a packet data architecture (like Firewire and Ethernet) which is very different from HDMI or DVI.

2. DisplayPort carries audio, video, and data, all bi-directionally.

3. DisplayPort can send a DVI-type signal for conventional displays.

4. DisplayPort is designed to handle internal as well as external connectors. It's practically custom-made for laptops, with the ability to carry commands to devices such as backlight (for brightness), status lights, etc over its data channel, without adding more wires.

It's now clear to me that DisplayPort is not just another variant of DVI. (HDMI is basically DVI + audio + a specific encryption protocol, and it's not bidirectional.) This means that it could be very challenging to make the new 24" LED Cinema Display work with older MacBooks and MacBook Pros.

Not impossible, surely -- remember the $400 DVI-to-ADC adapters sold before Apple started selling their own? -- but not a simple physical adapter like Firewire 800-to-400. And, probably not cheap either, unless someone like Apple themselves throw enough business to a manufacturer to amortize the development cost across a lot more units than most niche players can expect to sell.

(Thanks to Daring Fireball for the link.)

Marginal revenue maximization

Remember the Pro/Consumer Portable/Desktop 2x2 product matrix Steve Jobs introduced a decade ago to simplify Apple's confusing product offerings? It has completely fallen apart. Let's examine what you can buy today:

Portables:

MacBook (Plastic): $999, entry level
MacBook (Metal): $1300, entry level + style
MacBook (Metal): $1600, entry level + style + CPU boost + disk
MacBook Air: $1800, light weight
MacBook Air SSD: $2500, light weight + high tech + less slow CPU
MacBook Pro 15": $2000, power user + Firewire
MacBook Pro 15": $2500: power user + Firewire + RAM + disk + minor CPU boost
MacBook Pro 17": $2700: power user + Firewire + big display (- slower GPU!)


Apple has hit the entire gamut of possible price points between $1000 and $2000, in roughly $200-300 increments. I think the goal here is not simplicity like in 1999, but maximizing revenue from each potential buyer.

Desktops:

Desktops have a similar distribution of prices, but there is less functional overlap across families:

Mac Mini: $600, entry level, BYOKDM
Mac Mini (fat): $800, entry level + disk + CPU + SuperDrive, BYOKDM
iMac 20": $1200, entry level complete system
iMac 20" (fat): $1500, entry level complete system + CPU + RAM + disk
iMac 24": $1800, deluxe complete system
iMac 24": $2100, deluxe complete system + CPU + disk + GPU
Mac Pro (CTO stripped): $2300, expandable base
Mac Pro: (standard): $2800, power user standard 8 core

Once again, they're hitting a bunch of price points, from $600 to $2800 at fairly even $200-300 increments.

Interesting.

Crossovers Chromium

Codeweavers released Crossover Chromium today, which runs Google's Chromium Browser in the Crossovers/WINE environment. They disclaim that it's not really polished yet, and was released in this state mostly to show how quickly it could be done.

I downloaded it to give it a try anyway. It took a couple of minutes to start up for the first time. Runs fine although scrolling is a bit jumpy on the iMac Core Duo I'm testing it on. Like all apps running in WINE it has a few font issues from where the original app was designed to use the commercial Windows fonts: text is displayed instead using freely available fonts, so there are display glitches such as button labels overflowing the buttons.



Due to the font issues, CxChromium can't really be used for proofing final web page designs because the pages won't look quite like they would in Windows -- but for functional testing it is a nice tool to have in the web developers' toolkit.

Plus, it gives a way for Mac users without VMware/Parallels/Virtualbox/etc to try out Google Chromium and find out what all the fuss is about.

On competition and self-interest

A MacInTouch reader wrote: Apple has no obligation to faciltate competitors in any way, shape or fashion. If they reject an App Store item because it competes with them... well, why not?

Answer: Enlightened self-interest: "Enlightened self-interest is a philosophy in ethics which states that persons who act to further the interests of others (or the interests of the group or groups to which they belong), ultimately serve their own self-interest."

In other words, a healthy ecosystem of third party developers for iPhone benefits Apple. Think on this: You can walk into Target, Wal-Mart, and Best Buy, and all of them have an entire section with nothing but iPod accessories. To someone thinking about buying an MP3 player, if all else is equal, do you want to buy a Sansa that has no add-ons available, or an iPod with dozens of cases, speaker systems, car adapters, and so forth? Which one looks like a better long term choice?

Software is the same way. Remember the dark years of the mid to late 90s when one of the reasons people switched away from Mac was the lack of software. Even today, with thousands of useful applications available, you sometimes hear "there isn't much Mac software".

It's only a matter of time until Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, etc get their act together and start creating interfaces as good as iPhone. RIM is already well on its way with the new Blackberry Bold. All of these companies already have third party developer ecosystems in place and active, open and unencumbered (few NDA limits) developer networks. When Apple's competitors finally catch up -- which they will, or close enough, just like Windows did -- what will be the compelling reason to buy an iPhone? The Apple logo on the back? I don't think so.

Apple has turned the mobile phone industry on its head and dramatically raised the bar. But that doesn't assure success, and unlike digital music seven years ago, the mobile phone industry has little market growth opportunity. The only path to significant growth in this industry is winning customers from your competitors. Today, iPhone is winning customers away from RIM, Motorola, Nokia, Sony-Ericsson, etc. In the future, they will try to take those customers back with interesting, compelling products -- and part of that is availability of third party apps, from games to productivity.

It is very much in Apple's long term interest to encourage a healthy, profitable developer community for iPhone.