I see still got really old fashioned DVI port!
Actually cancel that question, I found this:
In which world is DVI old fashioned? You probably mean VGA, which is still very common built into walls for beamers
Sadly display port is still not available on most monitors…
In this world. It’s a complex connector that’s tricky to implement and takes up a lot of room, and has been improved upon in every way by its intended successor DisplayPort all the way back in 2008.
It’s still very widespread. It still gets the job done for most people. It’s still useful. But it is definitely old-fashioned…
Just realized that the Plugable USB-C dock that I posted is only for one external display
So Pluggable has two USB-C docks, one that supports just 1 external display and one that supports 3 external displays.
Makes perfect sense. Sigh.
Yes, but you have to replace it first at the monitors and then on the computers/docks since you probably won’t buy a dock and an adapter to use that dock with your screen
But I think before we let DVI die and remove it everywhere we should start with VGA which really is outdated but widely used until now
But we are far away from the topic right now^^
As far as I know the V will support only 2 external Displays together with the internal one. So 3 in total.
Ya but I want the dock so I don’t have to deal with constantly plugging and unplugging monitor cables into the V.
I do not want to talk this dock bad, I did not even open your link tbh
I just wanted to inform you that you can only use 2 external monitors with the V, regardless of the Docking solution. Since I for myself was very surprised that some laptops handle 2 some only 1 external Display regardless of the number of ports.
Are you sure about that? Typically the limitation is 3 displays (internal and external together). Connecting 3 external displays will disable the internal one.
@Community Managers: could you please Split the topic, since it is getting off topic from this point on
Continuing from another thread:
You’re wrong, consumers value money more than anything just like all people…
No, but a good DAC and a good amplifier is more complicated… If you want something decent in the tiny form factor you described, without constant buzzing or other problems, it ought to be very expensive.
And the worst part is that you need to buy a separate DAC. For each. And every. Flippin’. Pair of earbuds.
That is true
The DACs on the lightning to 3.5mm adapter are decent. Many people say the sound is much better from the adapter than listening to their onboard DAC in their iPhone 6. So no, a good DAC doesn’t need to be complicated or expensive or big. That adapter costs $9 USD. Do I think it’s the best DAC in the world? No, but for the average consumer, it does the job.
What do you mean by this? If you’re using your own 3.5mm headphones, you buy an adapter. Just buy one. If the headphones are built in with an onboard DAC, why does that matter to you? Unless you’re strictly talking about price increase due to additional hardware.
USB-C with Thunderbolt 3 is HUGELY important to me because it eliminates a ton of clutter by allowing to plug in one single cord and connect to everything. Alternatively, when I get home from work I would plug in the power cord, plug in my MIDI keyboard into one USB port, plug my audio interface into another USB port, and have a couple other things still to plug in (or use a dongle, but still have multiple cords to plug in each time).
With Thunderbolt 3 I can plug in one cord and have EVERYTHING attached at once while also powering my PC.
ALSO - Thunderbolt 3 is a requirement for me so I can connect an external graphics card for intense graphic and video design.
I will not buy any computer without a USB-C port with charging and Thunderbolt 3 capabilities.
Guys, you are forgetting one thing
The USBC is devised to carry a larger wattage of power than is the USBA or USBB cables. This is why all the rapid charging alternatives use USBC and PD uses USBC. Thunderbolt is an extension of USBC with greater speed and more, but as I see it the implementation of what the standards call for is highly subjective at this point.
Maybe there will be some clarity at some point, but some devices implement USBC and thunderbolt over one channel, meaning that the speed of the Thunderbolt /USBC port is limited to 5 MB per second, while others use multiple channels and go up to 20 MB per second. That of course with a cable designed to handle that speed (most USBC cables are rated to handle 5 MB per second, the same theoretical limit of USBB).
What I have found with PCs that have both ports, the USBC port is generally 3 - 5x faster than the USBA or USBB port. There is no scientific basis behind that conclusion however.
Whether you believe that USBC is the future or whether it will be some sort of wireless connectivity over some variant of wireless networking or bluetooth is an open discussion that has merit but will also have a flurry of conversations that will think this statement is more heresy than anything else.