Logical Fallacies - Cheap Bastards with DSUB Displays with High-End Video Cards

Where do you guys manage to find monitors without HDMI, DVI-D or Display ports? Are these bottom of the barrel monitors or are they several years old?

 

Read my post above again.

 

Buying an adapter is definitely an option, but why saddle your customers spending money on that? Especially since the vast majority of the installed based of 1920x1080+ monitors is probably still DVI.

Yes, that, and the fact that DSUB VGA has lower quality, unlike the others. And it requires a DAC on-die, which is likely to be bigger than a pure digital interface.

Look: Hercules is gone. So is CGA and EGA. ISA is no more, neither is EISA and old school PCI. My 5 1/2 floppies are a distance memory, but maybe I can find a 3 1/2 one somewhere, but of course drives for it have long disappeared.(*) I still have a clickety-clack IBM PC keyboard, but no matter how hard I try, that huge round connector just doesn't want to fit into my USB port.

VGA is next. Just accept it. Nobody owes you anything.


(*) I was wrong! Looks like 3 1/2" drives are still being manufactured, so it can't be outdated!

 

Funny, Apple have been using DVI since 1999 and then replaced by Mini DisplayPort in 2008.

I don't know a single person who still has a VGA monitor?! I would rather they ditched DVI-D on high-end graphic cards as well and just used Mini DisplayPort.

 

Maybe it's just you at UK then, I can't personally even remember last time seeing D-SUB-only display for sale, aside from some speciality displays with insane pricetags

 

Got it, thanks.

 

lol great thread subject.

 

Yes, this. Thank you! DVI is a pain-in-the-bitch connector. For starters it's friggin enormous, so it blocks air vents on high end vidcards, and like any D-shaped connector with discrete pins it's very hard to plug in blind behind/under a PC or monitor. All that coupled with that heavy, thick and rigid cable - especially for dual-link DVI, and often coupled with big fat ferrite beads adding even more weight near the ends - it becomes very unwieldy. And don't get me started on when the screw standoff comes out of the video card connector when you unscrew the cable...jesus.

I. Friggin. Hate. DVI.

(Not as much as I hate VGA though. Death to VGA I say, and death to anyone who defends it.)

 

Yes it's possible to buy a cheap VGA only monitor. It is also possible to buy a DVI-D equipped monitor for the same price from the same store. http://www.pcworld.co.uk/gbuk/deskt...f-ultra-thin-23-led-monitor-07677510-pdt.html

It is also possible to buy an IPS monitor with VGA, HDMI and DVI all included for £10 more. http://www.pcworld.co.uk/gbuk/deskt...-22ea63v-22-ips-led-monitor-21324849-pdt.html

Which of these monitors would best serve your customers and why?

That's an honest question btw as you seem to be genuinely peeved that you can't connect a 290x to a VGA only monitor without a £14 adapter.

 

Here is one for the same price that includes HDMI,DVI & VGA: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Asus-VE228H...646729&sr=1-3&keywords=monitor#productDetails

It looks to me like VGA only monitors are low end devices that are slowly being phased out.

AMD has no reason to use analog inputs on their high end cards when it's being phased out and is only needed for cheap ass monitors used by people who will most likely not buy a high end GPU.

 

No, its not.

 

Microsoft has estimated of late (like, uh, the company is waking up to realize where its real markets are) that somewhere between ~1.4-1.5B (as in "billion") non-touch PCs are currently in use world-wide and are definite markets for Windows, most of which are already running some version of Windows or DOS. Analog monitor connections (not CRTs!) are the only things useful for this gigantic trove of hardware. Prediction, it will be quite sometime before analog (VGA) circuitry is phased out for good. Personally speaking, its presence doesn't bother me because I haven't used it for several years--HDMI since ~'08, give or take a year. But--my very young grandson's laptop is an old AMD Dell notebook with a 64-bit Sempron inside, two gigs of ram, hard drive, and a Radeon mobility something or other (13?)running under Win7x64--anyway, I hooked him up a 1920x1080 LCD through VGA and was pleased as punch to discover that the ATi mobility chip supported that resolution without a problem--it hands off the picture to the external monitor. (Not good for games, of course.) I think VGA connectors will be with us for quite sometime, actually.

But, really, who cares? As long as I don't have to use it I don't mind the presence of the connector. Not in the least threatening...

Edit: I'll tell you what I find bizarre. Motherboards today with PS/2 mouse connectors! Egad!

 

I don't see how any of that is relevant to removing of the vga connector from a monster high end video card. You'd have to be out of your mind to plug this thing into a vga monitor.

 

You can apply that logic to any legacy technology - i.e. why does the display industry industry not keep support SCART, why do GPU vendors not support AGP, etc.

Constant support of legacy functions for dwindling return equals worse support for new functions and the majority of people paying for functionality they do not require. Removing legacy technology means the costs for supporting that functionality can either be passed back to the end user by through direct cost returns, or using that silicon/BOM cost for more performance or relevant features, as well as better support for more relevant features/technologies.

 

Those using that "trove" of hardware obviously don't want to spend money to upgrade their system, so why should new and expensive products support them if they have no intention of purchasing said products.

AMD and other manufacturers obviously care as they are the ones phasing it out due to it being replaced by a superior connector.