If the DVI switching in the 990 is a 8 bit digital switching, then it is likely you will lose higher res info than that.

Ask them. Don't assume.


The more I think about it, the more I think DVI is a mistake. Right now, today, HDMI already does what DVI does. Look at the players and displays coming out now: almost all of them have HDMI. I don't understand comments regarding any uncertainty surrounding HDMI. As far as video goes, and that is all DVI does in the first place, nothing will change with HDMI. The only things that newer versions will give is possibly transmission of SACD/DSD, and the newer high def versions of DD and DTS. So what. DVI can't do any of those anyway. So why hold off on HDMI when any new advancements won't affect video anyway? But yet HDMI passes CD audio, and DD (EX) and DTS (ES) audio *now*.

The big picture view is that i.Link + DVI = HDMI. So then why include DVI but not i.Link? Makes no sense to me. DVI is disapearing in consumer products. Going, going, gone. I can understand wanting to be in Outlaw's corner. Heck, I had a 950 and really liked it. I almost bought a 755 amp, and I still hope they do a DVD player (but I guess it won't have ... i.Link ... if they ever do. ). But to overlook the facts at hand just to emotionally support a product because you like the company ignores what is going to drive a product's sales in the marketplace.

None of this matters much anyway. What does matter, is that I now have a firm belief that Outlaw will sell a bunch of 990s. But not near as many as the 950's that they sold. I believe that the 950 had some unique features that people specifically bought the unit for. The 990? DVI but not HDMI and/or i.Link, only 2 coax inputs, and I personally view digital bass management on the 5.1 analog inputs as a step backwards from the 950's analog BM...