PDA

View Full Version : Apple Thunderbolt Cable and Promise Thunderbolt RAID Systems Hit the Apple Store




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Jun 28, 2011, 07:35 AM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/28/apple-thunderbolt-cable-and-promise-thunderbolt-raid-systems-hit-the-apple-store/)


Earlier this week, we mentioned (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/24/airplay-and-thunderbolt-may-be-limited-to-high-end-devices-to-start/) that the first Thunderbolt-equipped peripherals had briefly appeared on Apple's online store earlier this month, although they carried shipping estimate of several weeks out and were quickly removed.

http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/06/promise_pegasus_raid_r4_4tb.jpg


Those products have returned today, with a set of four Thunderbolt-equipped RAID storage systems from Promise making their debut in the store and shipping within 24 hours. The new Thunderbolt RAID systems include the Promise Pegasus R4 in 4x1TB (http://store.apple.com/us/product/H5184VC/A) ($999) and 4x2TB (http://store.apple.com/us/product/H5185VC/A) ($1499) capacities and the Promise Pegasus R6 in 6x1TB (http://store.apple.com/us/product/H5186VC/A) ($1499) and 6x2TB (http://store.apple.com/us/product/H5186VC/A) ($1999) capacities. The R4 offers bandwidth of over 500 MB/sec, while the R6 offers over 800 MB/sec.

http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/06/apple_thunderbolt_cable.jpg


In order to provide connections to the drives, Apple has also released a new $49 Thunderbolt cable. (http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC913ZM/A)Thunderbolt technology supports blazing-fast data transfer with two independent channels of 10Gbit/s each. Use the Apple Thunderbolt cable to connect your Thunderbolt-equipped peripherals to your new iMac or new MacBook Pro.

Apple Thunderbolt cable can also be used for Target Disk Mode between two Macs that support Thunderbolt, or to use a new iMac as a display for a MacBook Pro equipped with Thunderbolt.The new Apple Thunderbolt Cable is sold separately from the Promise Thunderbolt RAID systems, and ships within 24 hours.

Article Link: Apple Thunderbolt Cable and Promise Thunderbolt RAID Systems Hit the Apple Store (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/28/apple-thunderbolt-cable-and-promise-thunderbolt-raid-systems-hit-the-apple-store/)



tkermit
Jun 28, 2011, 07:37 AM
$50 just for the cable?! :eek:

uncle.zed
Jun 28, 2011, 07:40 AM
$50 just for the cable?! :eek:

yAh why not. It is so shiny!!!!


Anyway, let's hope we will be able to boot from TB.!!!! is it still unconfirmed???

xUKHCx
Jun 28, 2011, 07:40 AM
Promise don't include a cable, seems pretty cheap of them.

Granted the cable is expensive but still.

orfeas0
Jun 28, 2011, 07:40 AM
$50 just for the cable?! :eek:

all apple cables and adapters cost 50$... :/

but can't you connect 2 macbooks with the TB cable to transfer files? i mean with normal mode, not target disk mode!

Promise don't include a cable, seems pretty cheap of them.

Granted the cable is expensive but still.
SO SO SO cheap!! have you ever seen an external usb disk drive without the usb cable..?

res1233
Jun 28, 2011, 07:40 AM
$50 just for the cable?! :eek:

If you need the speed, 50$ for a cable is a price you'd be willing to pay. Same thing for those RAIDs

840quadra
Jun 28, 2011, 07:42 AM
It comes to a point were it is easy to think we are being price gouged. That is worse than most gold plated HDMI cables. That better be an ounce of pure silver wiring for that price! :eek:

Rudy69
Jun 28, 2011, 07:43 AM
All I want is a simple 2.5" HDD enclosure so I can finally add an SSD to my iMac without opening it

BJMRamage
Jun 28, 2011, 07:43 AM
back to Printer days where you need to purchase a cable to get it to work! yeah:rolleyes::rolleyes::mad:

max pl
Jun 28, 2011, 07:44 AM
nice. 50 dollar cables is just what I wanted.

Nobita
Jun 28, 2011, 07:45 AM
800. Freaking. Megabytes. Per second!

People are going to use this as something much more than just storage...

dethmaShine
Jun 28, 2011, 07:46 AM
nice. 50 dollar cables is just what I wanted.

You know the $999 RAID systems are not free with right? :P

jabbawok
Jun 28, 2011, 07:46 AM
Oh apple. $50 is just silly.
I guess its hand soldered by virgins in the Foxconn factory.

richardsonrs
Jun 28, 2011, 07:47 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

No cable even with a 2000 dollar raid purchase. Sad.

iDave
Jun 28, 2011, 07:48 AM
If everything Thunderwear is going to be this expensive, I'm going to quickly lose interest.

KnightWRX
Jun 28, 2011, 07:48 AM
999$ for host based storage, and only 4 TB's worth ? :eek:

Talk about gouging. I'll stick to NAS boxes.

Let's hope Thunderbolt filters down to more consumer levels than this, otherwise, it's not going to last long.

uncle.zed
Jun 28, 2011, 07:49 AM
All I want is a simple 2.5" HDD enclosure so I can finally add an SSD to my iMac without opening it

Exactly!!!!! or at the best 2xSSD (oCZ Vertex 3) and we easly get 800MB/s (in theory even 1GB/s)

The Phazer
Jun 28, 2011, 07:49 AM
Oh apple. $50 is just silly.
I guess its hand soldered by virgins in the Foxconn factory.

Ah, but you miss Steve's grand plan. With iOS dominance, censorship of adult content in the app store will mean everyone will be virgins, thus bringing the costs right down in the long run!

Phazer

AAPLaday
Jun 28, 2011, 07:51 AM
Holy Moly thats pricey :eek:

manu chao
Jun 28, 2011, 07:53 AM
Promise don't include a cable, seems pretty cheap of them.

Granted the cable is expensive but still.

I have oodles of USB and FW cables, if I could have bought the respective drives (and cameras etc.) without the cables and instead a $50 discount, I would have gone for that.

Granted, at the beginning nobody has any cables yet and the high-cost nature of TB will mean TB will mainly be used on devices which are in use most of the time (and thus need a cable).

Jiten
Jun 28, 2011, 07:53 AM
Looks like TB peripherals will definitely not be for the rest of us. At least not at the moment. :(

whooleytoo
Jun 28, 2011, 07:55 AM
If everything Thunderwear is going to be this expensive, I'm going to quickly lose interest.

:p Me likey!

Chaos123x
Jun 28, 2011, 07:58 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Nice! Love to see how FCP X runs using this drive on a top of the line iMac.

Lesser Evets
Jun 28, 2011, 07:59 AM
And there goes the need for me to ever buy a MacPro again. With what I use a computer for, any iMac with Thunderbolt can now become a MacPro, in essence, with one of these. The external storage now has enough speed to be worthwhile. I prefer the iMac's form to the clunky Pro; this storage can be placed out of sight or on a shelf to keep the desk clean.

Holy Moly thats pricey :eek:

Welcome to the world of premier technology.

Give it 2 years and that thing'll be half that price and the cables $20.

G4er?
Jun 28, 2011, 07:59 AM
Wish Apple would make a Mac the size of that RAID system.

Vol7ron
Jun 28, 2011, 07:59 AM
It comes to a point were it is easy to think we are being price gouged. That is worse than most gold plated HDMI cables. That better be an ounce of pure silver wiring for that price! :eek:

You obviously never bought SCSI cables back in the day. they were 80 dollars and above just for the cable....not to mention 40 dollars for the terminator....

baryon
Jun 28, 2011, 08:02 AM
Apple has also released a new $49 Thunderbolt cable. (http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC913ZM/A)

lol. Long live USB! I'm personally fine with waiting 2 minutes longer for my file transfer.

Dagless
Jun 28, 2011, 08:03 AM
^ Considering the price, yeah. I think USB is here to stay for a long time.

I would have thought selling something that isn't too popular cheaply would be a good way of making it popular.

840quadra
Jun 28, 2011, 08:03 AM
You obviously never bought SCSI cables back in the day. they were 80 dollars and above just for the cable....not to mention 40 dollars for the terminator....

That assumption is incorrect. I have a few of such cables still in a bin (likely in my garage). That being said, at least you were getting a bit more for your money then too.


lol. Long live USB! I'm personally fine with waiting 2 minutes longer for my file transfer.

Seconds? I guess you aren't copying more than a few JPEG files then ;) .

iDave
Jun 28, 2011, 08:03 AM
You obviously never bought SCSI cables back in the day. they were 80 dollars and above just for the cable....not to mention 40 dollars for the terminator....
Yeah, back in the days when a megabyte of RAM was $400. :D

ciTiger
Jun 28, 2011, 08:04 AM
I knew it wold be expensive especially in the beginning but this is too much even for Apple... :(

eawmp1
Jun 28, 2011, 08:04 AM
$50 just for the cable?! :eek:

Probably a rebadged Monster. ;)

macman312
Jun 28, 2011, 08:05 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)

Hurry up with the external hard drives!!!!!

Singin Hobo
Jun 28, 2011, 08:06 AM
I'd be all over that but for it only having Thunderbolt... I'd like to plug it into my Extreme for universal access to the storage when needed.

Samsumac
Jun 28, 2011, 08:07 AM
At this price, most people will barely be able to afford the cable..
USB3 anyone???

Thermonuclear
Jun 28, 2011, 08:07 AM
Don't buy too soon, because equipment using Apple's implementation of Light Peak with copper with a mini Display Port will soon be legacy hardware, unsupported by Apple or anyone else. Kind of like the old Apple Desktop Bus cabling. Why?

Because what Intel has promised and what everyone really wants is Light Peak running on fiber optic cabling at TEN times the speed of Apple's copper-based T-bolt. I predict the this will be available within a year or two at the most and only then will we see widespread adoption. That means that everyone who bought into Apple's copper scheme will be left with orphan hardware, slow and unsupported.

fishmoose
Jun 28, 2011, 08:09 AM
If everything Thunderwear is going to be this expensive, I'm going to quickly lose interest.

All new technologies are expensive in the beginning, then the market saturates and prices go down.

kiljoy616
Jun 28, 2011, 08:09 AM
Oh apple. $50 is just silly.
I guess its hand soldered by virgins in the Foxconn factory.

Even in China Virgins are not cheap to find and keep. :rolleyes:

islanders
Jun 28, 2011, 08:10 AM
Any indication what the Lacie T-bolt HDD will cost?

Interesting to see how this will trickle down. Is T-bolt Apple only?

tatonka
Jun 28, 2011, 08:10 AM
wohhooo .. so excited about that thunderbolt port on my MBP .. so glad it is there
</sarcasm>

honestely though, the Sony Vario setup showcases what Thunderbolt is really for and what Apple is going to use it for. The borders between different devices will vanish as you can easily plug devices together to a bigger, better machine. Your MBA will plug right into the display/docking station at home providing enough power to play games, while providing the portability when on the road.

I honestly do not believe that anybody needs a thunderbolt port for harddrive access.

T.

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 08:11 AM
lol now the products are out, and people have to complain about the price.

Ummm.... we knew these were going to be expensive from the start, why is everyone so shocked?

nilka
Jun 28, 2011, 08:11 AM
I have takkes with representatives from LaCie about the LaCie littl big disk with dual ssd and thunderbolt, and they assured me it will be possible to boot from it. As it was the guy I talked to said he was actually using a preproduction model as a boot drive for his iMac.

He also told me they would be availibal in July.

Looks promising I would say.

And yeah it's expensive but this kind of raid ain't for consumers it's for professionals that need the speed. This Promise Pegasus Raid has close to 10x the speed your average consumer NAS. And still 5x the high end consumer NAS. And com on apple charging overprice for cables ain't something new.

tatonka
Jun 28, 2011, 08:12 AM
Is T-bolt Apple only?
No and yes. It is an Intel technology, but so far it is only implemented in Apple hardware (they got a headstart).
The new Sony Vario Z also uses the technology (lighpeak) but with a different connector.

T.

BornAgainMac
Jun 28, 2011, 08:12 AM
For $1048, you can get the same exact RAID system with a FREE Apple Thunderbolt cable.

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 08:12 AM
Don't buy too soon, because equipment using Apple's implementation of Light Peak with copper with a mini Display Port will soon be legacy hardware, unsupported by Apple or anyone else. Kind of like the old Apple Desktop Bus cabling. Why?

Because what Intel has promised and what everyone really wants is Light Peak running on fiber optic cabling at TEN times the speed of Apple's copper-based T-bolt. I predict the this will be available within a year or two at the most and only then will we see widespread adoption. That means that everyone who bought into Apple's copper scheme will be left with orphan hardware, slow and unsupported.

It's not Apple's copper-based t-bolt, it's Intel's technology, and they are the ones who made it copper based for it's first implementation in order to cut costs associated with fiber, and they also need copper if they want to provide power to a device.

islanders
Jun 28, 2011, 08:12 AM
That means that everyone who bought into Apple's copper scheme will be left with orphan hardware, slow and unsupported.

I can stack that next to my FW 400 HDD and CD burner. :apple:

sonystyle
Jun 28, 2011, 08:13 AM
Erm... what does this photo mean? :D

http://storeimages.apple.com/5493/as-images.apple.com/is/image/AppleInc/H5184_AV6

Pegasus R4 only has TB port... and there's no Mac Pro with TB port yet!!!???

http://store.apple.com/us/product/H5184VC/A?fnode=MTY1NDA0Nw&mco=MjMwMzE1NTU

Bluefusion
Jun 28, 2011, 08:15 AM
$50 for the cable, huh? That's nice. Not expensive enough to begin with.

Remember when Apple included cables with their stuff?...

HiVolt
Jun 28, 2011, 08:17 AM
What a gyp, $50 for a cable....

Isn't the connector royalty free?

FriarNurgle
Jun 28, 2011, 08:18 AM
Well I won't be using the Thunderbolt port on my MBP anytime soon.

TMay
Jun 28, 2011, 08:18 AM
Don't buy too soon, because equipment using Apple's implementation of Light Peak with copper with a mini Display Port will soon be legacy hardware, unsupported by Apple or anyone else. Kind of like the old Apple Desktop Bus cabling. Why?

Because what Intel has promised and what everyone really wants is Light Peak running on fiber optic cabling at TEN times the speed of Apple's copper-based T-bolt. I predict the this will be available within a year or two at the most and only then will we see widespread adoption. That means that everyone who bought into Apple's copper scheme will be left with orphan hardware, slow and unsupported.

Is it possible that nothing that you have stated is accurate?

Intel and industry partners are still developing optical Thunderbolt hardware and cables.[16] The optical fiber cables are to run "tens of meters" but will not supply power, at least not initially.[17][18][19] They are to have two 62.5-micron-wide fibers to transport an infrared signal up to 100 metres (330 ft).[20] The conversion of electrical signal to optical will be embedded into the cable itself, allowing the current display port socket to be future compatible, but eventually Intel hopes for a purely optical transceiver assembly embedded in the PC.[19]

Oh, and Apple is using the standard Intel configuration...of Intel Trademarked Thunderbolt. Light Peak was the development name only.

baryon
Jun 28, 2011, 08:18 AM
Why are a bunch of hard drives so expensive? You can get them separately for the fraction of that price... It's like $100 for a 2TB drive, which would be $200 for 4TB, how the hell is $1000 justified for the same amount of storage?

840quadra
Jun 28, 2011, 08:21 AM
Why are a bunch of hard drives so expensive? You can get them separately for the fraction of that price... It's like $100 for a 2TB drive, which would be $200 for 4TB, how the hell is $1000 justified for the same amount of storage?

The price you have to pay for high availability, fault tolerance, and redundancy. There are cheaper options out there (Drobo for 1), however few items in this category of storage are overly cheap.

Thermonuclear
Jun 28, 2011, 08:22 AM
It's not Apple's copper-based t-bolt, it's Intel's technology, and they are the ones who made it copper based for it's first implementation in order to cut costs associated with fiber, and they also need copper if they want to provide power to a device.
It was Intel's interim technology and they have admitted as such.

As for carrying power, Intel already had that cowered by specifying TWO different Light Peak cables: the first with a pair of fiber optic strands, and the second with a pair of strands plus a pair of copper wires for carrying power and ground. This was all done before Apple made any T-bolt announcements.

Apple's T-bolt is NOT fast enough or a PCIe breakout box. Light Peak fiber is ten times faster and can do the breakout job with ease. Those that understand this will prudently wait for for the fiber version.

stefmesman
Jun 28, 2011, 08:22 AM
some people fail to see the point in what this is used for lol. this is not for transfering files most of the time. Most people who will use this, will use it for editing uncompressed video or another high demanding kind of professional use.

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 08:22 AM
Why are a bunch of hard drives so expensive? You can get them separately for the fraction of that price... It's like $100 for a 2TB drive, which would be $200 for 4TB, how the hell is $1000 justified for the same amount of storage?

well there is probably also a RAID controller in there, and you have to add the parts needed for TB itself, which supposedly cost around $100. You also have to figure they are going to mark up the price as it's brand new tech, and all brand new tech is pricey to make more money from the early adopters and "pros" who need this type of stuff.

mdgm
Jun 28, 2011, 08:22 AM
Those products have returned today, with a set of four Thunderbolt-equipped RAID storage systems from Promise making their debut in the store and shipping within 24 hours.

In an Apple Online Store I looked at (not the US one) the shipping is 2-4 weeks.

In order to provide connections to the drives, Apple has also released a new $49 Thunderbolt cable. (http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC913ZM/A)The new Apple Thunderbolt Cable is sold separately from the Promise Thunderbolt RAID systems, and ships within 24 hours.

Apple can ship the Thunderbolt cable within 24 hours, but not the peripheral to go with it, the promise RAID? Kind of defeats the purpose of shipping the Thunderbolt cables now unless you want to use a 2011 27" iMac as the monitor for your 2011 MacBook Pro.

stefmesman
Jun 28, 2011, 08:23 AM
Why are a bunch of hard drives so expensive? You can get them separately for the fraction of that price... It's like $100 for a 2TB drive, which would be $200 for 4TB, how the hell is $1000 justified for the same amount of storage?

they are server grade hard drives. not regular consumer grade ones.

BornAgainMac
Jun 28, 2011, 08:23 AM
Why are a bunch of hard drives so expensive? You can get them separately for the fraction of that price... It's like $100 for a 2TB drive, which would be $200 for 4TB, how the hell is $1000 justified for the same amount of storage?

It is always like that. The enclosure is always so expensive and then the vendor sells the drives at last year's prices since it cost a lot anyways. Technically, you are paying for the hardware based RAID implementation from the vendor that doesn't sell in high volume.

gallofilm
Jun 28, 2011, 08:24 AM
For Itunes or for Imovie "pro"? Make it for a windows machine, at least there will be some video editing going with it.

CplBadboy
Jun 28, 2011, 08:25 AM
Erm... what does this photo mean? :D

Image (http://storeimages.apple.com/5493/as-images.apple.com/is/image/AppleInc/H5184_AV6)

Pegasus R4 only has TB port... and there's no Mac Pro with TB port yet!!!???

http://store.apple.com/us/product/H5184VC/A?fnode=MTY1NDA0Nw&mco=MjMwMzE1NTU

Looks like no redesign on the MacPro come August then! Shame.

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 08:25 AM
It was Intel's interim technology and they have admitted as such.

As for carrying power, Intel already had that cowered by specifying TWO different Light Peak cables: the first with a pair of fiber optic strands, and the second with a pair of strands plus a pair of copper wires for carrying power and ground. This was all done before Apple made any T-bolt announcements.

Apple's T-bolt is NOT fast enough or a PCIe breakout box. Light Peak fiber is ten times faster and can do the breakout job with ease. Those that understand this will prudently wait for for the fiber version.
what are you even talking about, it's not Apple's T-Bolt, it's INTELS... they developed it, they own the trademark, etc. Apple helped them, and came to intel with the idea, but INTEL were the ones who decided to develop a copper based version of "light peak" (which is just a code name, it is not a separate technology) to cut initial costs. There will still be optical versions in the future. Check your facts before spewing BS

Tastic Bycrom
Jun 28, 2011, 08:25 AM
Relax and breathe, people! I'm sure MonoPrice will have a perfectly effective and affordable cable soon enough. Apple branded cables have always been overpriced. You already knew that.

imwoblin
Jun 28, 2011, 08:26 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Give it a month or so. Monoprice will have ThunderBolt cables for $1.99...

Blipp
Jun 28, 2011, 08:26 AM
It comes to a point were it is easy to think we are being price gouged. That is worse than most gold plated HDMI cables. That better be an ounce of pure silver wiring for that price! :eek:

I don't understand all the shock over the cable price. Since when have brand-new protocol cables sold from a major retailer ever been reasonably priced? They'll be on monoprice for $8 once a few more peripherals are released.

bpaluzzi
Jun 28, 2011, 08:26 AM
$50 for the cable, huh? That's nice. Not expensive enough to begin with.

Remember when Apple included cables with their stuff?...

You mean back when Apple was making external hard drive enclosures? :rolleyes:

rikscha
Jun 28, 2011, 08:26 AM
Shouldnt the whole thing have some sort of NAS functionality for this price?

I know that would kind of defeat the purpose of a thunderbolt equipped raid drive, but I would at least expect it to have a 1gbit ethernet port. You probably dont want to run it always directly connected to your mac.

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 08:28 AM
Shouldnt the whole thing have some sort of NAS functionality for this price?

I know that would kind of defeat the purpose of a thunderbolt equipped raid drive, but I would at least expect it to have a 1gbit ethernet port. You probably dont want to run it always directly connected to your mac.
I think you would buy a much cheaper NAS device if you wanted network storage, why pay the high premium for TB and its speed if you are going to use it over a network?

peskaa
Jun 28, 2011, 08:28 AM
Wow, what a lot of whinging! This is a professional RAID array, not a NAS box for home use or an external drive for Time Machine - it's not even a dog-slow Drobo.

I for one can see immense value in this. MBPs/iMacs suddenly able to edit video, with access to 500 or 800Mb/s file transfers? This was previously the domain of a Mac Pro with a fibre channel card and an Xserve RAID, which cost thousands and thousands of dollars. Instead you can be set up for $1048.

This is simply the first Thunderbolt product. It's aimed at professionals, and priced accordingly. Don't worry, cheaper stuff will emerge, along with third party cables that aren't $50.

stadlin
Jun 28, 2011, 08:28 AM
they are server grade hard drives. not regular consumer grade ones.

like the ones from Time Capsule? ;)

OllyW
Jun 28, 2011, 08:32 AM
The UK prices compare well to those in the US. Without the VAT the cheapest RAID drive is only $26 more expensive while the higher end models are actually $48 & $135 cheaper.

stefmesman
Jun 28, 2011, 08:33 AM
like the ones from Time Capsule? ;)

time capsule is not a professional product and thus apple is indeed lying to their costumers stating the time capsule has an server grade hard drive.

OT: everybody knew thunderbolt was made for professionals. and that the first wave of TB devices would be expensive. Everyone who is saying that this is too expensive needs to check their facts and is OBVIOUSLY not any professional user at all and will probably never ''need'' a thunderbolt product. (need not want.)

i do admit the apple thunderbolt cable price is a bit steep.

peskaa
Jun 28, 2011, 08:33 AM
like the ones from Time Capsule? ;)

Meh, they're probably not special HDDs in the Promise system, just 7,200rpm desktop drives. You're paying for the RAID hardware, the enclosure and then Thunderbolt. The drives are the cheapest part of the equation.

Thunderhawks
Jun 28, 2011, 08:35 AM
Give it 2 years and that thing'll be half that price and the cables $20.

And they will personally bring it to you house:-)

Unggoy Murderer
Jun 28, 2011, 08:36 AM
It's interesting that in the product images it shows the Drive connected to a Mac Pro...

Thermonuclear
Jun 28, 2011, 08:36 AM
So Apple says "Look at this shiny new interface" then the fan boys say "Ohhh, so shiny and new!" and reach for their wallets.

Getting 10 Gbps over short haul copper is neither shiny nor new. It has been around for nearly ten years as 10 Gbps Ethernet. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_Gigabit_Ethernet

T-bolt: redundant, and soon to be obsolete. But don't let that stop you from spending fifty bucks on a five dollar cable.

Azathoth
Jun 28, 2011, 08:37 AM
50 bucks for the cable is a ripoff. I'm not saying it won't sell, just that there is an extreme profit margin on that (I'm guessing around 300-400%). Anyway, can anyone tell me the technical difference between that Thunderbolt cable and a miniDP to miniDP cable? I've read that a miniDP cable *will not work* as a TB cable, but why?

z4n3
Jun 28, 2011, 08:38 AM
I do not know why everyone is complaining about the price :confused:

1699.00 Euros for 12TB RAID system that is from the same company that took over Apples X-Raid and X-Serve business is VERY cheap, this coupled with a MacPro Server for 2899 euros you are looking at a home or small business server with 14Tb of RAID space, MacPro etc. etc. for just 4598 euros! which is nothing for the hardware you are getting!! I paid a little less than that for my Titanium PowerBook in 2001 which did not come with 14Tb of space :mad:

Maybe us Mac users from way back see everything cheap in comparison :p

P.S.

50 euros for a cable is nothing for those who have had to purchase a FireWire 800 Cable when they came out!

Just as FireWire was not for everyone, ThunderBolt is not going to be different, it all depends on your needs, if it is to move and store your pirated Blue-Ray collection! you do not need this, so price is irrelevant, if it is on the other hand to move or store your RED ONE video footage then this price is peanuts and a HUGE achievement and advance for small companies and freelance workers.

My 2cents

manu chao
Jun 28, 2011, 08:38 AM
Why are a bunch of hard drives so expensive? You can get them separately for the fraction of that price... It's like $100 for a 2TB drive, which would be $200 for 4TB, how the hell is $1000 justified for the same amount of storage?
Yes, two 2 TB drives might cost you $200 net (drives only) but four 1 TB drives will still cost you $350 at least + $100 4-bay case + $100 RAID controller. So, even if you built this yourself (using eSATA or FW800), you'd be looking at $550.
And that is before the server-grade harddrives, the brandname well-cooled 4-bay enclosure, the brandname RAID controller and the TB premium. And FW800 is 100 MB/s max (reality a bit lower) compared to 500 MB/s.

Pentad
Jun 28, 2011, 08:39 AM
lol. Long live USB! I'm personally fine with waiting 2 minutes longer for my file transfer.

Sadly, I understand you frustration but I wish it was only 2 mins longer! We use 3 TB backup drives (I think we spent $200 or $250 for them) and they are ungodly slow at USB2.x.

I've reached a point where I consider USB2.x unusable for large backups since they take *hours* now given the amount of data, FW800 is slightly better, but USB3 or TB would make things more reasonable.

I know many here support SSD TB devices but I do *NOT* want an SSD solution. For backup purposes, I can't imagine a drive smaller than a TB and honestly find 3 TB to be the sweet spot right now. A 3 TB SSD would be insanely expensive.

Either give me a a TB HD enclosure that support SATA/3 and SATA/6 or a TB to USB3 adapter.

-P

SimonTheSoundMa
Jun 28, 2011, 08:39 AM
The fiber cables that are coming have inline lasers and receivers. The laser will be built in to the connector, not the computer.

PCIe breakout box. Why not, the signal is PCIe, two channels at 10GB/s. That's fast enough for an Avid, Protools, AJA, SSDs etc. to go to a breakout box.

There is only one standard of connector, and it is mini Display Port. The USB form factor was just a development idea, and is not mentioned anywhere in the spec.

Light Peak was the development codename, it is now defunct.



As for carrying power, Intel already had that cowered by specifying TWO different Light Peak cables: the first with a pair of fiber optic strands, and the second with a pair of strands plus a pair of copper wires for carrying power and ground. This was all done before Apple made any T-bolt announcements.

Apple's T-bolt is NOT fast enough or a PCIe breakout box. Light Peak fiber is ten times faster and can do the breakout job with ease. Those that understand this will prudently wait for for the fiber version.

Anaemik
Jun 28, 2011, 08:40 AM
All I want is a simple 2.5" HDD enclosure so I can finally add an SSD to my iMac without opening it

Me too, but the reason I'd want to add an SSD would be to use it as my main drive, and from what I've managed to gather so far, in its current implementation TB devices are not bootable (although it is said that this will probably change at some point). I can sort of understand Apple not making TB bootable for now, but I hate their likely reasons - having customers locked in to their pricey and (comparatively) under-performing SSDs (when compared to a Vertex 3 or Intel 510 for e.g.) must be a nice perk that Apple is reluctant to relinquish just yet.

Here are my sources for TB not being bootable by the way:

http://www.tidbits.com/article/11993
http://ihnatko.com/2011/02/25/new-macbooks-new-interface-new-os/

mdgm
Jun 28, 2011, 08:40 AM
Shouldnt the whole thing have some sort of NAS functionality for this price?

A good device will not try to be a NAS and a peripheral drive you connect to a computer at the same time. If you want NAS functionality from it, share it from your Mac.

If you look at the good NASes out there, they only allow sharing over the network, you can't connect them to a PC and use them as a USB drive. You don't try connecting a PC to another PC via USB or Firewire or whatever for regular usage. They're not designed for that.

Now if Thunderbolt could provide an affordable way to do 10Gbit ethernet it could be very useful when it comes to using fast NASes which you could regularly connect to over gigabit ethernet, but perhaps directly connect to over 10Gbit ethernet when you really need super fast speed (of course the NAS would need a 10Gbit ethernet port).

baryon
Jun 28, 2011, 08:41 AM
Waiting for the day when you'll have four SD card-sized slots in your MacBook Pro, and you can just buy SSDs for the same price as today's hard drives and plug them in. No moving parts, no cables, no power source, no fuss!

Just a matter of years...

Lone Deranger
Jun 28, 2011, 08:43 AM
I wonder how loud/quiet these things are. 6 x 7200 RPM drives must be quite noisy.

stefmesman
Jun 28, 2011, 08:45 AM
Waiting for the day when you'll have four SD card-sized slots in your MacBook Pro, and you can just buy SSDs for the same price as today's hard drives and plug them in. No moving parts, no cables, no power source, no fuss!

Just a matter of years...

theres already SSD express cards for the 17'' macbook pro ;)

RobQuads
Jun 28, 2011, 08:46 AM
All new technologies are expensive in the beginning, then the market saturates and prices go down.

USB3 cables cost a fraction of that Thunderbolt cable (OK not 'quite' as good tech but its still a new technology)

spazzcat
Jun 28, 2011, 08:46 AM
$50 just for the cable?! :eek:

You just spent $1999 on 8TB. Does $50 even matter at that point?

mdgm
Jun 28, 2011, 08:46 AM
I wonder how loud/quiet these things are. 6 x 7200 RPM drives must be quite noisy.
Depends on a variety of factors. You can find that a 6-drive device is quieter than 4-drive device as a 6-drive is designed to be bigger and can have a better bigger quieter fan and better airflow.

manu chao
Jun 28, 2011, 08:47 AM
Getting 10 Gbps over short haul copper is neither shiny nor new. It has been around for nearly ten years as 10 Gbps Ethernet.

And do you know the price of 10 Gbps Ethernet router?

Azathoth
Jun 28, 2011, 08:49 AM
50 euros for a cable is nothing for those who have had to purchase a FireWire 800 Cable when they came out!

My 2cents

And 50 euros for a cable it nothing compared to the 5000 USD for a 1m 50GHz Gore coaxial VNA cable. That's not the point - the fact is that able is making many hundred % profit by fleecing the consumer on some cables. I just don't like that kind of company mentality.

Lagmonster
Jun 28, 2011, 08:50 AM
Holy Moly thats pricey :eek:

Not that it isn't expensive, but I was actually guessing a bit higher for the first device to hit the market.

djrobsd
Jun 28, 2011, 08:51 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Huge apple fail. I don't care how fast thunderbolt is. I can go to best buy and get a USB 3.0 hard drive for 100 bucks, cable included. Thanks apple for screwing us over again by being so stubbOrn!!! PleAse oh god please someone come out with a thunderbolt USB 3 hub or Adaptor! I'll pay 100 just for that!!!!!

TMay
Jun 28, 2011, 08:51 AM
So Apple says "Look at this shiny new interface" then the fan boys say "Ohhh, so shiny and new!" and reach for their wallets.

Getting 10 Gbps over short haul copper is neither shiny nor new. It has been around for nearly ten years as 10 Gbps Ethernet. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_Gigabit_Ethernet

T-bolt: redundant, and soon to be obsolete. But don't let that stop you from spending fifty bucks on a five dollar cable.

You keep doubling down.

Bold.

Thunderbolt is 10GB/s with an Intel roadmap to 100GB/s, both I'm guessing would be quite a bit faster than 10Gb/s Ethernet.

Thanks for playing.

Azathoth
Jun 28, 2011, 08:52 AM
And do you know the price of 10 Gbps Ethernet router?

But the Cat 6 / 6A cable for 10Gbps is *cheap*

soco
Jun 28, 2011, 08:53 AM
I have to agree with those saying the price is reasonable if you want the speeds.

Apple understands and openly takes advantage of the fact that they have the market cornered for LightPeak.

Good for them :)

Azathoth
Jun 28, 2011, 08:54 AM
You keep doubling down.

Bold.

Thunderbolt is 10GB/s with an Intel roadmap to 100GB/s, both I'm guessing would be quite a bit faster than 10Gb/s Ethernet.

Thanks for playing.

Typo?

Thunderbolt is 10Gbps.

10GbE is 10Gbps.

Data throughput should be very similar, though the DMA mode on Tunderbolt should make it easier to saturate the interface.

dethmaShine
Jun 28, 2011, 08:58 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Huge apple fail. I don't care how fast thunderbolt is. I can go to best buy and get a USB 3.0 hard drive for 100 bucks, cable included. Thanks apple for screwing us over again by being so stubbOrn!!! PleAse oh god please someone come out with a thunderbolt USB 3 hub or Adaptor! I'll pay 100 just for that!!!!!

PleAse oh god please someone tell him this is not just a hard drive.

:rolleyes:

stefmesman
Jun 28, 2011, 08:59 AM
Typo?

Thunderbolt is 10Gbps.

10GbE is 10Gbps.

Data throughput should be very similar, though the DMA mode on Tunderbolt should make it easier to saturate the interface.

thunderbolt does 10Gbps back and forth simultaneously and has support for monitors... can 10GbE do that?... no

and on top of that its scalable to 100Gbps in the future on the same hardware.

Thermonuclear
Jun 28, 2011, 09:00 AM
A PCIe 2.0 breakout box needs to support PICe 2.0 bandwidth. What is PCIe 2.0 bandwidth?

Each PCIe 2.0 lane needs 500 MB/sec. That's bytes, not bits. A high end 16 lane graphics card needs to be fed at a rate of 8 GB/sec, so that's a bit rate of (at least) 64 Gb/sec. 100 Gbps fiber optic Light Peak can handle that, but Apple's 10 Gbps copper T-bolt can't. T-bolt can't even handle 16 lane PCIe 1.0 that is half the speed of PCIe 2.0.

If you can get by with cheap, low-demand video cards and single lane cards then maybe a T-bolt breakout box might work. Maybe.

Just wait for the fiber. You'll be glad you did.

sined13
Jun 28, 2011, 09:01 AM
999$ for host based storage, and only 4 TB's worth ? :eek:

Talk about gouging. I'll stick to NAS boxes.

Let's hope Thunderbolt filters down to more consumer levels than this, otherwise, it's not going to last long.

I bought my old Promise 4300 a few years ago at ~$400, plus 4x 500GB at ~$100 each -- so, close to $900 for 2TB (1.5TB in Raid 5 config).

Now for the same price, you get double capacity and bandwidth speed beyond compare.

scottchlee
Jun 28, 2011, 09:02 AM
Guess I am going to stick with esata on the OWC Mercury Elite Pro Qx2.

stefmesman
Jun 28, 2011, 09:02 AM
A PCIe 2.0 breakout box needs to support PICe 2.0 bandwidth. What is PCIe 2.0 bandwidth?

Each PCIe 2.0 lane needs 500 MB/sec. That's bytes, not bits. A high end 16 lane graphics card needs to be fed at a rate of 8 GB/sec, so that's a bit rate of (at least) 64 Gb/sec. 100 Gbps fiber optic Light Peak can handle that, but Apple's 10 Gbps copper T-bolt can't. T-bolt can't even handle 16 lane PCIe 1.0 that is half the speed of PCIe 2.0.

If you can get by with cheap, low-demand video cards and single lane cards then maybe a T-bolt breakout box might work. Maybe.

Just wait for the fiber. You'll be glad you did.

fiber will use the same port with transcoders on the cable ends. as has been confirmed by Intel. Thunderbolt is not made by apple its made by intel. apple was just the first to use it.

it was intel's choice to go for copper because fiber is too expensive. (for now) and when it does become affordable. they will release fiber cables with transcoders on the cable ends. have fun playing the waiting game :)

Apple Corps
Jun 28, 2011, 09:03 AM
sonystyle - it means new Mac Pros very soon. I'm sure we will also see 3d party add on cards this year.

Thunderhawks
Jun 28, 2011, 09:05 AM
Guess I am going to stick with esata on the OWC Mercury Elite Pro Qx2.

Guaranteed OWC is already working on the half price solution.

It just takes a while for things to get widely accepted.

Can't believe all the moaning.

Probably for 95% of normal household users this is a non issue or not a product they would need.

Thermonuclear
Jun 28, 2011, 09:07 AM
thunderbolt does 10Gbps back and forth simultaneously and has support for monitors... can 10GbE do that?... no

and on top of that its scalable to 100Gbps in the future on the same hardware.

10 gigabit Ethernet defines only full duplex links, so yes it can carry data in both directions at once.

Apple's T-bolt copper does video through Display Port wiring that rides the same cable; the T-bolt-only wires are not involved in video transmission.

chirpie
Jun 28, 2011, 09:07 AM
Oh apple. $50 is just silly.
I guess its hand soldered by virgins in the Foxconn factory.

If this was in the published literature, I'd buy it. ^_^

Azathoth
Jun 28, 2011, 09:08 AM
thunderbolt does 10Gbps back and forth simultaneously and has support for monitors... can 10GbE do that?... no

and on top of that its scalable to 100Gbps in the future on the same hardware.

We'll see about the scalability on existing HW - I've been in the game too long to trust those "future-proof" claims.

Moreover I was correcting a major error, presumably a typo, where the person wrote TB having 10GB/s signalling. It is 10Gb/s.
AFAIK 10GbE is 10Gbps bi-directional

The reason that 10GbE was brought up was to show that:
1. 10Gbps standards have existed for a while
2. the cabling for such standards is << less expensive than Apple's 50 buck "magic" Thunderbolt cable

aardwolf
Jun 28, 2011, 09:08 AM
All I want is a simple 2.5" HDD enclosure so I can finally add an SSD to my iMac without opening it

http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/firewire/on-the-go

That still maxes out at 800Mbps, much slower than the typical SSD which can run at 3Gbps or faster (listed as 400MB/sec for some reason)...

TMay
Jun 28, 2011, 09:14 AM
Typo?

Thunderbolt is 10Gbps.

10GbE is 10Gbps.

Data throughput should be very similar, though the DMA mode on Tunderbolt should make it easier to saturate the interface.

Yep.

Should have been Gb/s but I was in a hurry.

JazzyGB1
Jun 28, 2011, 09:17 AM
Am I the only one who currently hates Apple's Thunderbolt?
I mean, I love the throughput & bandwidth part of it - that's great! :)
I just don't get the attraction to having to daisy chain everything - that's a terrible idea.
By all means give us 5 Thunderbolt connections on a Mac that allow us to connect a HD or display or interface or whatever we like, that'd be great, but having to daisy chain stuff from just 1 port like on the MacBook Pro is Archaic and will massively hinder its adoption - not to mention make it cumbersome and untidy.
Also their choice of ports is poor too.
It wouldn't be so bad if you still had a separate display port, you'd simply connect your MacBook Pro's display to the display port and your thunderbolt product to the Thunderbolt port, but changing the display port into a Thunderbolt port is just confusing. On some Macs a display port will now allow you to add audio interfaces & hard drive arrays - on another Mac it'll just be a display port?
It would have made far more sense to leave the display port as a connection for displays and to make the USB ports Thunderbolt capable (like Sony have).People are used to attaching HD & interfaces via USB, so this method would be far more natural than a mini display port.
its just not natural to connect a display to a HD array!!!
Not to mention the savings you'd make on not having to buy new leads - at 50 a go Thunderbolt is VERY expensive.
I can see it dying a death as ADC did before, not because it isn't good, but because it's confusing & poorly put into practice. Different versions and implementations of Thunderbolt by different manufacturers is only going to fragment sales and confuse the end user further.
A new high bandwidth port for super fast HD's...great!
A new high bandwidth port for everything...Big thumbs down!

DustinT
Jun 28, 2011, 09:18 AM
Tremendous first offering! Awesome speed, decent price.

scottchlee
Jun 28, 2011, 09:18 AM
And don't forget the $2,000 option (http://store.apple.com/us/product/H5187VC/A?fnode=MTY1NDA0Nw&mco=MjMwMjkxMTY&s=topSellers) at the Apple Store Canada.

shervieux
Jun 28, 2011, 09:19 AM
all apple cables and adapters cost 50$... :/

but can't you connect 2 macbooks with the TB cable to transfer files? i mean with normal mode, not target disk mode!


SO SO SO cheap!! have you ever seen an external usb disk drive without the usb cable..?

Believe it or not....

Printers do not come with cables anymore....

I just bought a Nikon d3100 DSLR camera. That does not come with the USB cable to transfer your pictures. They expect you to remove the SD card every time. More and more, it seems that less and less devices are coming with needed cables. I know someone who just bought a DVD player and they needed to buy the RCA cables separately.

In this bad economy, it seems nickel and dime you is the new rule.

Stiksi
Jun 28, 2011, 09:24 AM
Ah, but you miss Steve's grand plan. With iOS dominance, censorship of adult content in the app store will mean everyone will be virgins, thus bringing the costs right down in the long run!

Phazer

Um, since when has watching (or "using") adult entertainment made anyone lose their virginity?

peskaa
Jun 28, 2011, 09:24 AM
Believe it or not....

Printers do not come with cables anymore....


That's because all decent printers are WiFi now ;) That said, I'm appalled Nikon don't supply a USB cable.

zync
Jun 28, 2011, 09:26 AM
I don't understand all the shock over the cable price. Since when have brand-new protocol cables sold from a major retailer ever been reasonably priced? They'll be on monoprice for $8 once a few more peripherals are released.

I was thinking the exact same thing while reading this thread. Thanks for being the voice of reason. I thought more people knew that this was the case. Apple branded cables are always $29+ while the same cables are like $3 on monoprice. My MDP to HDMI cable cost be $3.

All of the cables to route through my walls, my patch cables, my wall plates, and my TV mount cost less than $100. I bought 5 iPhone cables to split with a friend and it cost $10. That's including shipping which they don't gouge you on either. Monoprice is awesome.

stefmesman
Jun 28, 2011, 09:27 AM
We'll see about the scalability on existing HW - I've been in the game too long to trust those "future-proof" claims.

Moreover I was correcting a major error, presumably a typo, where the person wrote TB having 10GB/s signalling. It is 10Gb/s.
AFAIK 10GbE is 10Gbps bi-directional

The reason that 10GbE was brought up was to show that:
1. 10Gbps standards have existed for a while
2. the cabling for such standards is << less expensive than Apple's 50 buck "magic" Thunderbolt cable

it is bi-directional, just not at 10Gbps back and forth.

the cable, is complete nonsense when talking about price (as you stated). it of course is more advanced then a mini-display cable. since it has 10Gbps forth and 10Gbps back + a monitor video stream.
the only reason i see apple making it this expensive is the production. (not many TB cable makers at the moment, so they can charge this)

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 09:27 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Huge apple fail. I don't care how fast thunderbolt is. I can go to best buy and get a USB 3.0 hard drive for 100 bucks, cable included. Thanks apple for screwing us over again by being so stubbOrn!!! PleAse oh god please someone come out with a thunderbolt USB 3 hub or Adaptor! I'll pay 100 just for that!!!!!

because apple made the drives and set the prices :confused:

jclardy
Jun 28, 2011, 09:28 AM
Man, $50 and it isn't even gold plated.

I guess i'll wait till Monoprice is selling them. Or until I own two macs that have thunderbolt ports.

tinman0
Jun 28, 2011, 09:29 AM
All I want is a simple 2.5" HDD enclosure so I can finally add an SSD to my iMac without opening it

Then go buy one.

blackburn
Jun 28, 2011, 09:29 AM
Oh snap.
PCI wants to squash Thunderbolt @ SemiAccurate (http://semiaccurate.com/2011/06/23/pci-wants-to-squash-thunderbolt/)

KnightWRX
Jun 28, 2011, 09:30 AM
Thunderbolt is 10GB/s... I'm guessing would be quite a bit faster than 10Gb/s Ethernet.

Thanks for playing.

Look again, ThunderBolt is 10 Gbps, same as 10 GE. I would try to at least have accurate information before being cocky in my posts if I were you. ;)

benpatient
Jun 28, 2011, 09:31 AM
800. Freaking. Megabytes. Per second!

People are going to use this as something much more than just storage...

do you realize how fast internal SSDs in a RAID0 are already?

my MBP goes well over 500 MB/sec. I'm sure a Mac Pro with 4x SSD can easily match this speed, for much less money.

tigres
Jun 28, 2011, 09:31 AM
This is one game I won't be playing.

davidjearly
Jun 28, 2011, 09:31 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/9A5248d Safari/6533.18.5)

$50 just for the cable?! :eek:

all apple cables and adapters cost 50$... :/

but can't you connect 2 macbooks with the TB cable to transfer files? i mean with normal mode, not target disk mode!

Promise don't include a cable, seems pretty cheap of them.

Granted the cable is expensive but still.
SO SO SO cheap!! have you ever seen an external usb disk drive without the usb cable..?

Yes, almost every drive I've ever bought.

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 09:32 AM
A PCIe 2.0 breakout box needs to support PICe 2.0 bandwidth. What is PCIe 2.0 bandwidth?

Each PCIe 2.0 lane needs 500 MB/sec. That's bytes, not bits. A high end 16 lane graphics card needs to be fed at a rate of 8 GB/sec, so that's a bit rate of (at least) 64 Gb/sec. 100 Gbps fiber optic Light Peak can handle that, but Apple's 10 Gbps copper T-bolt can't. T-bolt can't even handle 16 lane PCIe 1.0 that is half the speed of PCIe 2.0.

If you can get by with cheap, low-demand video cards and single lane cards then maybe a T-bolt breakout box might work. Maybe.

Just wait for the fiber. You'll be glad you did.
Either you don't know how to read or your brain has a hard time functioning, so i'll try to help you AGAIN!

Light Peak is the same thing as thunderbolt, they are NOT different technologies. Light Peak was simply the codename for thunderbolt.

It is not Apple's TB, it belongs to INTEL.

Quit posting the same thing over and over when it's not even accurate information.

mustgroove
Jun 28, 2011, 09:33 AM
Would have been awesome if it also had ethernet so it could be networked... Thunderbolt for high-speed use, ethernet for network streaming

Chaos123x
Jun 28, 2011, 09:37 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Internal ssd's might be fast too, but they don't offer very much space like something like this would.

benpatient
Jun 28, 2011, 09:39 AM
Look again, ThunderBolt is 10 Gbps, same as 10 GE. I would try to at least have accurate information before being cocky in my posts if I were you. ;)

One of those is total theoretical bandwidth. Ask anyone you know about how fast 10 GE can actually go in the "real world."

The 10 gbps of a TB port is bi-directional, so it's more like 20gbps, and it's established already that it can move well over 800 MB/sec while concurrently transferring a display port signal at an obscene resolution.

Also, show me a 10GE switch that's less than $5,000 and I'll buy you a donut.

Samuriajackon
Jun 28, 2011, 09:39 AM
And they will personally bring it to you house:-)

"40GB? Why would I pay for that much space? You'll never use it"-My Dad, Circa 1997.

aardwolf
Jun 28, 2011, 09:41 AM
One of those is total theoretical bandwidth. Ask anyone you know about how fast 10 GE can actually go in the "real world."

The 10 gbps of a TB port is bi-directional, so it's more like 20gbps, and it's established already that it can move well over 800 MB/sec while concurrently transferring a display port signal at an obscene resolution.

Also, show me a 10GE switch that's less than $5,000 and I'll buy you a donut.

Can I have Krispy Kreme? :-P

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=10GE+switch&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=14185770148823945051&sa=X&ei=FugJToX9M8a4tge8vNGRAQ&ved=0CFkQ8wIwAg

tigres
Jun 28, 2011, 09:41 AM
Quick question btw.

Why did :apple: not incorporate the TB port in it's own time capsule, I can only guess that many have it plugged into ethernet at a desktop iMac for that speed etc.

I suppose it was too expensive for them to put the tech and intel chip into it without charging too much. IDK, just kind of strange they were not the first out of the gate incorporating their own tech with peripherals.

iawa
Jun 28, 2011, 09:43 AM
Thunderbolt currently runs with a top speed of 10Gbps. Since there are two wire pairs, and the system is bidirectional, a single cable can have up to 40Gbps coursing through it at its maximum theoretical capacity (20Gbps upstream and 20Gbps downstream).

So this is faster than 10GbE (bi-directional or not).

As per the optical vs. copper war, the conversion of electrical signal to optical will be embedded into the cable itself, allowing the current display port socket to be future compatible, but eventually Intel hopes for a purely optical transceiver assembly embedded in the PC. But this will be capable of providing up to 100Gbps.

And as the current fastest SATA connectors are rated to 6Gbps Thunderbolt connections won't be saturated by this, it only becomes an issue if you had maybe 4 striped controllers (not drives, controllers) attached somehow to an ultrafast backplane with the fastest SSD's availiable (currently you would not be able to saturate thunderbolt by any means as there is nothing this fast avaliable yet).

So by the time (even after a year or so) the prices come down and you start seeing 256GB thunderbolt external SSD drives for 150 ($220approx) it will still be a more than capable technology and would be worked on further to go to fibre (but using copper connectors as is now) which will mean it is very, very unlikely to be saturated by anything to come for at least 3-5 years min.

So, don't worry what some people are saying about waiting or that you might be buying a redundant technology, anyone who bought a PC with USB 3.0 did that, not us!

And just to be clear;
6Gbps = 0.75GBps (750MBps)
10Gbps = 1.25GBps (1250MBps)
20Gbps = 2.5GBps (2500MBps)
40Gbps = 5GBps (5000MBps)
100Gbps = 12.5GBps (12500MBps)

diamond.g
Jun 28, 2011, 09:43 AM
Does anyone know if these are optical cables as well? (Have the built in transceiver)

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 09:44 AM
Quick question btw.

Why did :apple: not incorporate the TB port in it's own time capsule, I can only guess that many have it plugged into ethernet at a desktop iMac for that speed etc.

I suppose it was too expensive for them to put the tech and intel chip into it without charging too much. IDK, just kind of strange they were not the first out of the gate incorporating their own tech with peripherals.
people don't plug time capsules into their macs to back them up, that's the whole point of a time capsule... wireless backup. A TB port on a time capsule would have been utterly useless.

benpatient
Jun 28, 2011, 09:44 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Internal ssd's might be fast too, but they don't offer very much space like something like this would.

You can fit 8 drives into a Mac Pro easily, and RAID them together. I had 6 in mine at my last job. 4 of them were RAID0, 500 GB, and then a couple of TB drives used as a backup. Not sure what that RAID configuration would be called, but it certainly was fast. I got the feeling that I was never going to have to wait for anything, especially with big files.

Now I'm just using the 1 super-fast SSD system drive, and a big fat FW800 external drive, and honestly, most of the time, it's faster. Maybe not when moving extra-large files, but I do that so rarely that it doesn't end up mattering. The near-zero random read times are really amazing. I guess ideally, I would have an SSD boot, and a RAID 0 working drive. But I like the mobility, and it's a fair trade-off.

Santabean2000
Jun 28, 2011, 09:44 AM
Either you don't know how to read or your brain has a hard time functioning, so i'll try to help you AGAIN!

Light Peak is the same thing as thunderbolt, they are NOT different technologies. Light Peak was simply the codename for thunderbolt.

It is not Apple's TB, it belongs to INTEL.

Quit posting the same thing over and over when it's not even accurate information.

TB is not exactly the same as LP. TB runs through copper and carries power. Just wait, soon enough we'll get Lightning Bolt too, the fibre version; faster, but no power.

numbsafari
Jun 28, 2011, 09:47 AM
Wish Apple would make a Mac the size of that RAID system.

Buy an mac mini.

theSeb
Jun 28, 2011, 09:48 AM
999$ for host based storage, and only 4 TB's worth ? :eek:

Talk about gouging. I'll stick to NAS boxes.

Let's hope Thunderbolt filters down to more consumer levels than this, otherwise, it's not going to last long.
A similar product from Promise without thunderbolt is around $999. I don't see the issue with the price to be honest, considering that it includes hardware RAID. Your cheap NAS boxes are not the same thing.

Here is another similar product from Gtech - no Thunderbolt

$1239

http://www.videoguys.com/Item/G-Tech+G-SPEED+Q+8TB+Protected,+Quad-Interface+Storage+Solutions/33937313037403.aspx

You're clearly not the target market.

iBug2
Jun 28, 2011, 09:49 AM
currently you would not be able to saturate thunderbolt by any means as there is nothing this fast avaliable yet


Well, you could saturate it.

http://barefeats.com/ssd6g05.html

3GB sequential read from 8 SSD's stripped. Which makes 24Gbit, which is faster than TB can handle. So if there was an external RAID adapter to control these SSD's, that would do it.

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 09:52 AM
TB is not exactly the same as LP. TB runs through copper and carries power. Just wait, soon enough we'll get Lightning Bolt too, the fibre version; faster, but no power.
it is the same thing.... intel just is using copper right now to cut some of the costs, they will have fiber in the future. Whether or not it will be known under a different name remains to be seen.

but no matter how you slice it LP=TB, light peak was just a code name. I don't know why you people can't understand that?

Kind of like how nintendo code named the gamecube "dolphin" dolphin is not a different product, it's just the code name used during development. Other examples of code names and actual products:

xenon - xbox 360
Argo - Zune
Purple 2 - iPhone

Realize that a code name does not always equate to the products release name and you will see what I'm talking about.

w3pt
Jun 28, 2011, 09:52 AM
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC913ZM/A?mco=Nzc1MjMwNg

Just released. Also firmware updates available.

Considering getting the 4tb version...

xlii
Jun 28, 2011, 09:53 AM
$50 just for the cable?! :eek:

In time Monoprice will sell these. Bet it's under 10 dollars when that happens.

smali
Jun 28, 2011, 09:54 AM
If tech with this kind of price seems expensive to you, sorry but its not meant for your consumer ass:D

Like people with 12 core macs for playing World of Warcraft and watching porn.

KnightWRX
Jun 28, 2011, 09:54 AM
One of those is total theoretical bandwidth. Ask anyone you know about how fast 10 GE can actually go in the "real world."

I was only correcting the guy on "ThunderBolt is 10 GB/s", no need to get defensive here. He was cocky with wrong information.

The 10 gbps of a TB port is bi-directional, so it's more like 20gbps, and it's established already that it can move well over 800 MB/sec while concurrently transferring a display port signal at an obscene resolution.

Thunderbolt is not 20 Gbps, you can't use both directions for the same transfer. ;)

Also, show me a 10GE switch that's less than $5,000 and I'll buy you a donut.

10 GE is also a networking standard made for systems interconnect. Thunderbolt is a host base PCIE extender. Not exactly the same purpose nor did I even suggest it as a replacement, since my first post about 10 GE was only to correct the guy who said Thunderbolt is 10 GB/s. No need to convince me that they don't serve the same purpose.

TheBMill
Jun 28, 2011, 09:54 AM
I just emailed monoprices.com to see if they'll be selling Thunderbolt cables soon...No way in hell I'd pay $50 for one of those...and knowing monoprices.com they'll easily beat that price and still make something of quality.

Torrijos
Jun 28, 2011, 09:55 AM
people don't plug time capsules into their macs to back them up, that's the whole point of a time capsule... wireless backup. A TB port on a time capsule would have been utterly useless.

Correct but it would be amazing to have an Airport Extreme with a TB port so you could use proper drives to backup your data with RAID 5, ensuring you could maintain your backup system yourself.
Plus allowing access through the ethernet (1Gb/s still theoretically faster than USB2 or even FW800) for others machines.

Sure the max throughput of the TB technology would never be reached but it would at least allow maximum use of all the ports of the Airport Extreme without problems.

mrm3
Jun 28, 2011, 09:55 AM
I am only buying this cable if it is long enough to plug into iCloud.


Seriously though not sure where to keep my data nowadays.
Current NAS is too slow.
Thunderbolt RAID system is fast but too constrained.
iCloud too slow and limited but brilliantly connected.

Really want iCloud for all files types at thunderbolt speeds.

akdj
Jun 28, 2011, 09:56 AM
all apple cables and adapters cost 50$... :/

but can't you connect 2 macbooks with the TB cable to transfer files? i mean with normal mode, not target disk mode!


SO SO SO cheap!! have you ever seen an external usb disk drive without the usb cable..?

Actually, one of the new functionalities of FCPx is the ability to tie your Macs together to create your own "Rendering farm". Not sure if their vision is tying together with TB/FW or Ethernet...but I can't imagine the new release of Lion won't allow SOME type of connection between machines...especially for this type of functionality. Pretty exciting stuff, especially for independent companies with low or non-existant production budgets.

nice. 50 dollar cables is just what I wanted.

This has been addressed. Are you new to Apple? Go check out most ALL cords from Apple...whether it's a display cord...MDP to VGA/DVI/HDMI, et al. Or the iPad connections...HDMI/Camera Connect, etc. The list goes on. Someone mentioned it earlier. Keep your eyes on monoprice.com (I do NOT have any affiliation with them...but those buying cables will truly benefit by bookmarking their site:)) Prices from other companies once released (Griffin, etc.) will bring the price down a bit soon enough

Look at all the kids here getting upset that they can't afford this with their pocket money. Go back to playing with your iToys, you don't need Thunderbolt.

$50 for a cable is nothing compared to some of the fibre and scsi cables running around work. But the iKids think this is a new shiny toy for them to take to show & tell at school.

AMEN!!! LOL....Most folks the NEED this type of speed will make that money back on a project in 15 minutes. Easily...not to mention, write off it's price on next year's IRS term paper:) F/W 800 cables initially were at LEAST this much! I had to find a USB to serial adaptor for a piece of audio gear (Sound processor from BBE) to be able to link to computer for R/T sound EQ'ing last week. YEP! $49...for about as "Legacy" a cable as you can get, no matter how proprietary. Apple is the first to offer the cable. They're going to charge a premium for it. It's not a simple cord to produce...a bit more like ethernet, which isn't cheap itself.

At this price, most people will barely be able to afford the cable..
USB3 anyone???

Good Lord...seriously? USB3 is NOTHING in comparison Speed-Wise to T/B or Light Peak...or whatever Sony is calling it. Did you see the front page? What Sony is doing with their "Dock" with the Graphics processing increase, etc? USB 3.0, while nice and speedy does NOT compare to 10gb/sec BOTh ways! Again...if you have to question the pricing, you DON'T need the product! Stick with your legacy USB 2.0 and hang tight...my guess is OWC/MacSales will soon be releasing a PCI-Exp Card with USB 3.0 and/or a T/B to USB 3.0 adaptor. There will plenty of fun stuff on the horizon. Intel has now release T/B to the rest of the PC community...as well as the cottage industries for HDD and SSD storage and NAS solutions...as well as audio and video production companies for their peripherals...and I HONESTLY believe in this technology...I think it will be the NEW USB as we move in to this next decade. Fast as hell...decent power provided on board with the copper implementation, outboard video processing, ingestion, R/T audio EQ'ing and frequency analyzation....there are SOOOO many things I could use this for with band and comedian production...if we ever got to running ethernet and/or TB for control, my cord box would drop for well over 600 pounds on casters...to a manageable suitcase of 40lbs or less:) I know, I'm dreaming now...but this type of speed is unfathomable for those of you that haven't or aren't using RAID type storage, NAS systems or SSD these days. Truly...our bottleneck is (and hasn't been for sometime) NOT the CPU any longer...as proven by so many tasks on the Mac Book Air. So much of our daily tasks on computers can be made much faster by simply adding solid state storage. Not CPU increase, forget RAM...for MOST tasks (Not all, I realize transcoding video is a different animal), SSD is key. Taken a step forward, with limited internal storage options...the next best thing is external storage and backup. T/B not only provides these options at the fastest speeds EVER...it also opens the door for SOOO many excellent peripherals, no matter what your skill set is.

As Sony has jumped on board, I don't see this going the way of F/W. (Not that Sony wasn't one of the primary PC makers that ALSO included F/W, even to the bitter end)...>I think we'll see the same from Dell and HP soon. Mother board manufactures...the big ones, have now been blessed with T/B access. And keep in mind...Intel has YET to support on board USB 3.0 yet. It will come with the next round of Ivy Bridge processors...along with T/B. How sweet will that be? And certainly, IMVHO....well worth waiting on the next Mac Pro for. Ivy Bridge processing...BOTH T/B and USB 3.0 (native to the chipset)...as well as the internal capacity already alotted in the Mac Pro? Would be Very Very Sweet!

I think sometimes we tend to underestimate the thinking in Cupertino. Yes, other manufacturers are implementing USB 3.0...but still in a relatively low yield. Not all of them certainly...and if they do, only 1 or two ports, with the necessary internal "changes" necessary to take advantage of it's speed...IE, again, it has NOT been natively built in to the Intel Chipset...YET!!! It's coming. But if you take a look around....hardly anything, other than a few Western Digital harddrives that Do have USB2/3 capability. No real peripherals for professionals (Apogee, Matrox, Tascam, not even sure if M-Audio has support yet *Just a few I use in my studio) have support yet (I think they are waiting out the USB3/Thunder B shake out myself). I also use Motu gear as well as DBX Driveracks and processors from BBE. The only one I've spoken to (as I'm also trying to put a digital future field system together) that has mentioned one or the other is Motu...they will definitely be looking at the T/B implementation AND the addition or lack thereof on the PC side.

Some of you price complainers need to realize what you're bagging on. Not only the FIRST product to market with BRAND NEW technology...but also an implementation I believe that will initially be relegated to the professional (By pro, I mean people that are making their living on their workstations) market. Both for storage redundancy...ability to move projects around the studio, back up off site...as well as the peripheral market where "latency" is concerned.

That said...I also believe we will see T/B become cheaper and cheaper as the R&D costs are recovered and the licensing prices drop...as well as the pieces/parts to put them together. From there, the skies the limit...as is the market penetration.

How cool would it be if your iPad4 or iPhone 6 has the 30 pin to T/B option vs. USB? How many times have you had to hurry up and wait as your iPhone/iPad/Android had to sync itself? Course this could be a non issue as we are going to cloud sync/store etc.

I do like what Sony is doing with that Dock though...and as someone mentioned earlier....although T/B is a bit slower that direct PCI Express lanes, it's Not that much slower...and if there is the bandwidth to bring out board graphic power to a laptop...how cool would that be? An 11" MBA with the graphic power of a Mac Pro or top of the line PC's GPU....all by pluggin in to a 2 pound dock...when necessary. Otherwise, it's a 2 pound portable computer ready for everyday tasks without the dock

Sorry...I truly didn't mean to go on so long...but there are SO many possibilities with this new technology...it continues to boggle my mind that the first 30 or 40 posts are people (mainly) complaining about both the price of the cable and the storage system...where NEITHER is out of the realm of cost across the board for NAS storage systems for high end facilities. Hell...I work with a couple of post houses that would pay for that rig in less than 3 hours of work!!! And they've got 6 workstations going at any given time...10-12 hours a day!!! What I think some of you fail to realize is that people DO make money with computers...and TIME is MONEY!!! Speed creates Time which creates MORE MONEY!!! Bottom line. The initial investment is incredibly cheap if you've sped up your production, even by a meager 5-10%!!! Over time, this adds up to huge money!!!

Sorry...Rant over. I'll shut up now

J

Notaclone
Jun 28, 2011, 09:56 AM
I LIKE the separate cable.
I think it should be the norm to NEVER include cables of any kind.
After years of buying peripherals I have amassed dozens of extra USB, SCSI, FireWire, Video, and Power cables (and let's not even discuss old network and pre-usb i/o cables). Buy a Quad controller drive now, and you get three extra cables you will never use, at the least!
The wastefulness is appalling.

Airforce
Jun 28, 2011, 09:57 AM
Believe it or not....

Printers do not come with cables anymore....

I just bought a Nikon d3100 DSLR camera. That does not come with the USB cable to transfer your pictures. They expect you to remove the SD card every time.

Should have gone with Canon DSLR ;) Video and USB cables included! :p

KnightWRX
Jun 28, 2011, 09:57 AM
A similar product from Promise without thunderbolt is around $999. I don't see the issue with the price to be honest, considering that it includes hardware RAID. Your cheap NAS boxes are not the same thing.

Having dealt with hardware raid on Sun level hardware, I can tell you I much prefer the software solutions these days. Hardware raid is a pain to manage usually and is tied to a controller. Software raids are much more flexible solutions that are easier to migrate from system to system, especially if you're getting into parity based arrays like RAID5 or 6 or variations of these (RAID 50, 51, 60, 61).

Here is another similar product from Gtech - no Thunderbolt

$1239

http://www.videoguys.com/Item/G-Tech+G-SPEED+Q+8TB+Protected,+Quad-Interface+Storage+Solutions/33937313037403.aspx

You're clearly not the target market.

Nope, I either deal in my home network or big enterprise SAN solutions. Thunderbolt, as a "prosumer" or "SMB" solution is not in my markets at all indeed.

But that is the point of my post : pointing out that Thunderbolt, right now with the peripherals that are announced or out there is not consumer technology and frankly, I don't see it trickling down to that level anytime soon. I knew this just by looking at what was in the pipeline (and pointed this out in other Thunderbolt threads).

Anyone just expecting an "external hard drive with ThunderBolt" is in for either a long wait or an unpleasant surprise as far as price goes.

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 09:59 AM
Thunderbolt is not 20 Gbps, you can't use both directions for the same transfer. ;)

TB has two channels, each is bi-directional at 10Gbps, you can have 20Gbps upstream and downstream.

Correct but it would be amazing to have an Airport Extreme with a TB port so you could use proper drives to backup your data with RAID 5, ensuring you could maintain your backup system yourself.
Plus allowing access through the ethernet (1Gb/s still theoretically faster than USB2 or even FW800) for others machines.

Sure the max throughput of the TB technology would never be reached but it would at least allow maximum use of all the ports of the Airport Extreme without problems.
Why pay the premium for a TB drive or array when you would see no benefits vs a much cheaper usb drive?

iawa
Jun 28, 2011, 10:00 AM
Can I have Krispy Kreme? :-P

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=10GE+switch&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=14185770148823945051&sa=X&ei=FugJToX9M8a4tge8vNGRAQ&ved=0CFkQ8wIwAg

I think he meant new, not used.

840quadra
Jun 28, 2011, 10:02 AM
I just emailed monoprices.com to see if they'll be selling Thunderbolt cables soon...No way in hell I'd pay $50 for one of those...and knowing monoprices.com they'll easily beat that price and still make something of quality.

So when you get the cable, what are you going to connect it to? :confused: ;)

Unless you are buying this Promise RAID system that is. :)

KnightWRX
Jun 28, 2011, 10:02 AM
TB has two channels, each is bi-directional at 10Gbps, you can have 20Gbps upstream and downstream.

This goes contrary to statements made by previous articles on the subject :

http://www.macworld.com/article/158145/2011/02/thunderbolt_what_you_need_to_know.html

In theory, it’s blazing fast. A Thunderbolt channel can provide up to 10 Gigabits per second (Gbps) of data throughput—and each Thunderbolt port includes two channels. Thunderbolt is also bi-directional, meaning it can transmit and receive data at the same time. Even with estimated real-world performance of around 8Gbps, Thunderbolt is many times faster than FireWire 800 and USB 3.0. It’s also significantly faster than the eSATA connections available on many Windows PCs.

Why pay the premium for a TB drive or array when you would see no benefits vs a much cheaper usb drive?

Because some people don't understand bottlenecks.

iBug2
Jun 28, 2011, 10:02 AM
What annoys me the most is why these companies keep selling these external RAID boxes always filled with drives but never empty. I have my own drives I want to use and don't want to pay for 8TB of storage which costs a lot more than if you picked them out yourself. They seem to make most of their profit from those overpriced drives.

diamond.g
Jun 28, 2011, 10:02 AM
Having dealt with hardware raid on Sun level hardware, I can tell you I much prefer the software solutions these days. Hardware raid is a pain to manage usually and is tied to a controller. Software raids are much more flexible solutions that are easier to migrate from system to system, especially if you're getting into parity based arrays like RAID5 or 6 or variations of these (RAID 50, 51, 60, 61).



Nope, I either deal in my home network or big enterprise SAN solutions. Thunderbolt, as a "prosumer" or "SMB" solution is not in my markets at all indeed.

But that is the point of my post : pointing out that Thunderbolt, right now with the peripherals that are announced or out there is not consumer technology and frankly, I don't see it trickling down to that level anytime soon. I knew this just by looking at what was in the pipeline (and pointed this out in other Thunderbolt threads).

Anyone just expecting an "external hard drive with ThunderBolt" is in for either a long wait or an unpleasant surprise as far as price goes.

If Thunderbolt had a iSCSI implementation would it work better for you?

iawa
Jun 28, 2011, 10:02 AM
Well, you could saturate it.

http://barefeats.com/ssd6g05.html

3GB sequential read from 8 SSD's stripped. Which makes 24Gbit, which is faster than TB can handle. So if there was an external RAID adapter to control these SSD's, that would do it.

Please re-read post, I was quoting what was currently availaible, not vapourware - there are people testing GDDR6 for storage which runs at 10's of GBps but this is not currently availiable.

Bubba Satori
Jun 28, 2011, 10:03 AM
In time Monoprice will sell these. Bet it's under 10 dollars when that happens.

Will Apple sue them?

islanders
Jun 28, 2011, 10:04 AM
that will look good at the coffee shop with the new MBP enabled t-bolt

theSeb
Jun 28, 2011, 10:04 AM
Having dealt with hardware raid on Sun level hardware, I can tell you I much prefer the software solutions these days. Hardware raid is a pain to manage usually and is tied to a controller. Software raids are much more flexible solutions that are easier to migrate from system to system, especially if you're getting into parity based arrays like RAID5 or 6 or variations of these (RAID 50, 51, 60, 61).



Nope, I either deal in my home network or big enterprise SAN solutions. Thunderbolt, as a "prosumer" or "SMB" solution is not in my markets at all indeed.

But that is the point of my post : pointing out that Thunderbolt, right now with the peripherals that are announced or out there is not consumer technology and frankly, I don't see it trickling down to that level anytime soon. I knew this just by looking at what was in the pipeline (and pointed this out in other Thunderbolt threads).

Anyone just expecting an "external hard drive with ThunderBolt" is in for either a long wait or an unpleasant surprise as far as price goes.
I am expecting a TB to USB3 or eSATA connector. I hope this happens. Looking at the price, for my needs, this will do the job that I need it for. The 8TB price is about the same if I buy a similar product from the likes of GTech/Lacie etc that only has FW800 or eSATA.

Azathoth
Jun 28, 2011, 10:06 AM
it is bi-directional, just not at 10Gbps back and forth.


? I thought both TB and 10GbE were 10Gbps full-duplex (simultaneous)

ghostlyorb
Jun 28, 2011, 10:06 AM
all apple cables and adapters cost 50$... :/

but can't you connect 2 macbooks with the TB cable to transfer files? i mean with normal mode, not target disk mode!


SO SO SO cheap!! have you ever seen an external usb disk drive without the usb cable..?

how about every printer on the market... before we had networking printers...

KnightWRX
Jun 28, 2011, 10:07 AM
If Thunderbolt had a iSCSI implementation would it work better for you?

What good would it do ? Thunderbolt is not a network interconnect.

I am expecting a TB to USB3 or eSATA connector. I hope this happens. Looking at the price, for my needs, this will do the job that I need it for.

The problem is getting a Thunderbolt controller on a USB3 or eSATA adapter would result in insane prices. A USB3 add-in card is like 20$ and eSATA brackets can be had for 10s of $ if you can sacrifice an internal port.

The 8TB price is about the same if I buy a similar product from the likes of GTech/Lacie etc that only has FW800 or eSATA.

There's much cheaper eSATA RAID boxes out there. You're paying for hardware raid, which like I said, it pretty much a nice way to lock your data to a single vendor, at least for parity based arrays (Perc based RAID 5 ? Good luck migrating those disks to a machine without a Perc controller and keeping the data... Same for Promise/Adaptec etc...). I don't like it and computers have been quick enough for quite a few years where software based raids are a non-issue as far as performance goes.

Will Apple sue them?

They didn't for the MDP port, why would they for Thunderbolt, an Intel technology ?

iBug2
Jun 28, 2011, 10:07 AM
Please re-read post, the current throughput limit is 40Gbps.... it will move to 100Gbps in the future, on the same hardware.

You don't combine channels. TB has two channels, so one channel carries 10Gbps data, bidirectionally. But bidirectional does not mean 20Gbps.

So it's 10Gbps.

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 10:09 AM
This goes contrary to statements made by previous articles on the subject :

Thunderbolt is a combination of DisplayPort and a PCI Express x4 connection. Thunderbolt uses two 10-Gbps channels; each channel has two bidirectional lanes, for a total of 40 Gbps, according to Aviel Yogev, director of Thunderbolt engineering.

(When PCMag.com asked for more clarification, an Intel spokesman replied: "It's actually 2 channels, 10Gbps birectional. So in summation you have potential for up to 20Gbps upstream AND 20Gbps downstream, but any single device maxes out at 10Gbps (you don't "combine" the two channels)."

from http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380890,00.asp

so i guess we are both kind of right, total bandwidth is 20Gbps up AND down, but any single device can only use 10Gbps up AND down!


Because some people don't understand bottlenecks.
indeed :D

centauratlas
Jun 28, 2011, 10:09 AM
Ummm.... we knew these were going to be expensive from the start, why is everyone so shocked?


LOL. Exactly. I think the reason is that people expect everyone else to work for free while they get paid for their time. Just ask Doctors! (or ex-Doctors that we might know here).

The early adopters (of which I am often one and I'm sure many people here are) pay more and end up paying a lot of the development costs. ;-)

iBug2
Jun 28, 2011, 10:10 AM
Please re-read post, I was quoting what was currently availaible, not vapourware - there are people testing GDDR6 for storage which runs at 10's of GBps but this is not currently availiable.

Well, it's not available right now, but something among the lines of what I described being available isn't too far into the future either.

iBug2
Jun 28, 2011, 10:11 AM
Thunderbolt is a combination of DisplayPort and a PCI Express x4 connection. Thunderbolt uses two 10-Gbps channels; each channel has two bidirectional lanes, for a total of 40 Gbps, according to Aviel Yogev, director of Thunderbolt engineering.

from http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380890,00.asp



indeed :D

From that article:

Intel spokesman replied: "It's actually 2 channels, 10Gbps birectional. So in summation you have potential for up to 20Gbps upstream AND 20Gbps downstream, but any single device maxes out at 10Gbps (you don't "combine" the two channels)."

basesloaded190
Jun 28, 2011, 10:12 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

In time Monoprice will sell these. Bet it's under 10 dollars when that happens.

Will Apple sue them?

Sue them? For what?

KnightWRX
Jun 28, 2011, 10:13 AM
From that article:

Intel spokesman replied: "It's actually 2 channels, 10Gbps birectional. So in summation you have potential for up to 20Gbps upstream AND 20Gbps downstream, but any single device maxes out at 10Gbps (you don't "combine" the two channels)."

Thanks for the clarification, indeed that jives more with what I've read.

wovel
Jun 28, 2011, 10:13 AM
999$ for host based storage, and only 4 TB's worth ? :eek:

Talk about gouging. I'll stick to NAS boxes.

Let's hope Thunderbolt filters down to more consumer levels than this, otherwise, it's not going to last long.

Since NAS storage and high speed direct attach storage do not have the same use cases, you are probably making a wise decision.

Why are a bunch of hard drives so expensive? You can get them separately for the fraction of that price... It's like $100 for a 2TB drive, which would be $200 for 4TB, how the hell is $1000 justified for the same amount of storage?

You will notice the difference between the 4x1TB and the 4x2TB is about $500 or what you would expect the difference in price for 4 2TB drives.

I believe the 4TB is four 1 TB drives and they also have to include the raid controller, the tb interface to the raid controller, the hot swap containers and interface for each drive, etc...

diamond.g
Jun 28, 2011, 10:13 AM
What good would it do ? Thunderbolt is not a network interconnect.

I am more thinking about the multi-host multi-path capability. But I am not seeing any real easy way around the 6 devices per chain limitation. If you could get around that you could potentially make switches and have your storage connected just like you do for a SAN now (ie using a totally separate bus versus your production network, so really I am thinking about a FC replacement more so than an iSCSI replacement).

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 10:14 AM
From that article:

Intel spokesman replied: "It's actually 2 channels, 10Gbps birectional. So in summation you have potential for up to 20Gbps upstream AND 20Gbps downstream, but any single device maxes out at 10Gbps (you don't "combine" the two channels)."

Thanks for the clarification, indeed that jives more with what I've read.

I know sorry I forgot I didn't copy the whole quote and had to edit my original post, it's in there now.

Thunderbolt is a combination of DisplayPort and a PCI Express x4 connection. Thunderbolt uses two 10-Gbps channels; each channel has two bidirectional lanes, for a total of 40 Gbps, according to Aviel Yogev, director of Thunderbolt engineering.

(When PCMag.com asked for more clarification, an Intel spokesman replied: "It's actually 2 channels, 10Gbps birectional. So in summation you have potential for up to 20Gbps upstream AND 20Gbps downstream, but any single device maxes out at 10Gbps (you don't "combine" the two channels)."

from http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380890,00.asp

so i guess we are both kind of right, total bandwidth is 20Gbps up AND down, but any single device can only use 10Gbps up AND down!

KnightWRX
Jun 28, 2011, 10:14 AM
LOL. Exactly. I think the reason is that people expect everyone else to work for free while they get paid for their time. Just ask Doctors! (or ex-Doctors that we might know here).

The early adopters (of which I am often one and I'm sure many people here are) pay more and end up paying a lot of the development costs. ;-)

You seem to be under the impression this stuff will become cheap. The thing is, you're failing to realise that Thunderbolt is not a consumer interconnect, and the more and more is revealed about it, the less it seems it will ever become one.

USB3 will be what consumers will use.

I am more thinking about the multi-host multi-path capability. But I am not seeing any real easy way around the 6 devices per chain limitation. If you could get around that you could potentially make switches and have your storage connected just like you do for a SAN now (ie using a totally separate bus versus your production network, so really I am thinking about a FC replacement more so than an iSCSI replacement).

Or you can use a different NIC and isolate your iSCSI SAN from your LAN. ;) There's also FC external HBAs coming that someone else pointed out (since they're basically an external PCIE card). But why buy an external Thunderbolt FC HBA ? Unless it's to present LUNs from your SAN storage to a Macbook or Mac Mini... just go for the cheaper internal card.

But Thunderbolt is not made to network computers/storage. It's made to expand a host's PCIE bus. Round peg, meet square hole...

Giuly
Jun 28, 2011, 10:16 AM
Well, let's see what Sonnet charges for their Fusion E400TBR5 (http://www.sonnettech.com/news/nab2011/).

coolspot18
Jun 28, 2011, 10:22 AM
What a joke, this product won't sell. $1,000 for a 4 bay array is MUCH too expensive.

Even pros won't pay for this - they'll probably opt for a cheaper eSATA array at 1/4 the cost...



If you look at the good NASes out there, they only allow sharing over the network, you can't connect them to a PC and use them as a USB drive. You don't try connecting a PC to another PC via USB or Firewire or whatever for regular usage. They're not designed for that,

You can if the NAS supports iSCSI. The NAS will show up as a local disk drive and work just like a disk drive. No file sharing involved.

Azathoth
Jun 28, 2011, 10:23 AM
... [lots of semi-coherent ranting removed]
Sorry...Rant over. I'll shut up now

J

well allow me to retort.

Intel is not integrating TB on their chipsets right now (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4377/intel-integrates-usb-30-and-thunderbolt-into-ivy-bridge-platform). Their TB dev kit is not out yet (see the Intel Dev forum).

Integrating TB on a mobile chipset would require quite a lot of extra silicon, from what I can tell, not sure if the IP is up for grabs to integrate it onto custom chips. Without that there is no way that Apple or whoever will put it on a mobile device.

The digital audio developers by and large *suck* at making hardware (or drivers for that matter), so TB won't happen there except *maybe* at the super-high end. FW400 is more than enough for multi-multi-channel recording and even then most semi-pro companies (Focusrite, M-audio) etc. *mess it up* - looking at support forums every single one of the suppliers is reviled for terrible drivers.

Graphics card in docks is not going to happen. For technical reasons: 10Gbps is really not much. Then there is the cost: IBM has been making docks with PCI slots for their Thinkpads. They're expensive, niche products (one of our developers has one).

Thunderbolt is an interesting idea. Maybe it will catch on as:
1. Thunderbolt to xxx (USB3, FW800, 10GbE, eSata) bridge. Cost will eventually be about the same as PCMCIA cards now, and perform a similar function.

2. High speed disk interface for professional users.

iBug2
Jun 28, 2011, 10:23 AM
What a joke, this product won't sell. $1,000 for a 4 bay array is MUCH too expensive.

Even pros won't pay for this - they'll probably opt for a cheaper eSATA array at 1/4 the cost...

eSata is way too clunky. But they might go for USB 3.0 ones.

iawa
Jun 28, 2011, 10:23 AM
Well, it's not available right now, but something among the lines of what I described being available isn't too far into the future either.

Neither is the 100Gbps TB cables/units, as per previous 40Gbps post, I realised what I had said as soon as I posted, it would be a limit of 20Gbps, the 2 channels are not currently used together though so yes it would be 10Gbps (still beyond anything availible today and near future). However they are not specifically 1 for data and 1 for video.

mtbgtr
Jun 28, 2011, 10:24 AM
First to come up with a TB to USB3 adapter, if its even possible, will get my money before any of these overpriced options. IMHO then and only then will you get any significant use out TB ports.

Stiksi
Jun 28, 2011, 10:25 AM
people don't plug time capsules into their macs to back them up, that's the whole point of a time capsule... wireless backup. A TB port on a time capsule would have been utterly useless.

I see, you haven't used one, have you? The first backup of a decent sized HD takes days on wireless and it still takes hours on the network cable. Because it's not that uncommon that Time Machine corrupts its own backup, you need to do this every once in a while. TB would be a godsend if it even halved the time required for the initial backup.

KnightWRX
Jun 28, 2011, 10:28 AM
I see, you haven't used one, have you? The first backup of a decent sized HD takes days on wireless and it still takes hours on the network cable. Because it's not that uncommon that Time Machine corrupts its own backup, you need to do this every once in a while. TB would be a godsend if it even halved the time required for the initial backup.

But then you'd be limited to the wired switch on the Time Capsule. USB3 makes much more sense than Thunderbolt on something like that. ;)

Heck, the internal SATA interface is plenty to saturate the 1 Gbps switch ports.

coolspot18
Jun 28, 2011, 10:29 AM
eSata is way too clunky. But they might go for USB 3.0 ones.

eSata is here and now - and it's cheap. Just saying there are working, cheaper alternative than Thunderbolt or even USB 3.0.

theSeb
Jun 28, 2011, 10:31 AM
What a joke, this product won't sell. $1,000 for a 4 bay array is MUCH too expensive.

Even pros won't pay for this - they'll probably opt for a cheaper eSATA array at 1/4 the cost...

How can you speak for other people and assume what they will and won't pay?

Show me a similar product that is priced less.

subsonix
Jun 28, 2011, 10:31 AM
It's the first products to hit the market, and you pay premium for being an early adopter. How much did the worlds first USB cable cost? Economy of scale will make this stuff cheaper down the line, also although it is possible to find a cheaper 4 bay HD raid array, there are other models in the same price range.

sclawis300
Jun 28, 2011, 10:32 AM
Can't wait for Monoprice to come out with one of these cables.

840quadra
Jun 28, 2011, 10:36 AM
First to come up with a TB to USB3 adapter, if its even possible, will get my money before any of these overpriced options. IMHO then and only then will you get any significant use out TB ports.

I am sure something like that is in the works, likely are many other devices. I understand the cost to entry for manufacturers is higher than USB or even FireWire, but then again neither of those had 100s of devices waiting for them when first implemented.

There was a lot of naysaying USB when it first came out, thousands of Apple fans were quite annoyed when ADB was dropped in favor of this new standard.

min_t
Jun 28, 2011, 10:36 AM
Wish there was a TB card I can just plug into my windows servers and use these for data backups.

AaronEdwards
Jun 28, 2011, 10:43 AM
I know who would be interested, needing, and willing to pay for this.
Professional FCP users.
Oh, there's none left after FCP X?
..well, I doubt there are a lot of prosumers willing to pay for this...

mcmlxix
Jun 28, 2011, 10:44 AM
Wish Apple would make a Mac the size of that RAID system. It was called the Cube.

JhamCT
Jun 28, 2011, 10:53 AM
Promise don't include a cable, seems pretty cheap of them.

Granted the cable is expensive but still.

I would be willing to bet that was a matter of Promise not having cables on-hand to include, since they're so new. Adding in the cost of the cable and passing that on to the consumer doesn't seem like it would be a deal breaker for the folks willing to spend $1000 on 4 gigs of raid storage.

Don't forget the second cable to connect your display! Cha-ching!

Meever
Jun 28, 2011, 11:01 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8E200)

You're id you're even considering this.

Doesn't FireWire so 800mbps? And it doesn't even come with a cable.... And they're charging 50 bucks for it.

I would wait for monoprice cables and a raid that can really take advantage of the speed.

codymac
Jun 28, 2011, 11:02 AM
Graphics card in docks is not going to happen. For technical reasons: 10Gbps is really not much. Then there is the cost: IBM has been making docks with PCI slots for their Thinkpads. They're expensive, niche products (one of our developers has one).

http://www.sonnettech.com/product/thunderbolt/index.html

z4n3
Jun 28, 2011, 11:02 AM
people don't plug time capsules into their macs to back them up, that's the whole point of a time capsule... wireless backup. A TB port on a time capsule would have been utterly useless.

Apple actually states on the TC support page that for the initial back-up you connect the TC via cable! :D

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 11:02 AM
I see, you haven't used one, have you? The first backup of a decent sized HD takes days on wireless and it still takes hours on the network cable. Because it's not that uncommon that Time Machine corrupts its own backup, you need to do this every once in a while. TB would be a godsend if it even halved the time required for the initial backup.
I see that you missed the entire purpose of the product. If you want to spend more money for a TC, by all means go ahead, but the purpose of a TC is for WIRELESS BACKUPS... if you want a wired backup, save yourself some cash and buy an external hard drive. Of course it would be missing that nice :apple: logo, but if you aren't using the wireless backup feature of your TC, you wasted a lot of money.

Apple actually states on the TC support page that for the initial back-up you connect the TC via cable!
indeed, because of the time usually required for an initial backup of lots of data.

However, you want to pay a $100 premium for the TB controller so that you can save time on your initial backup???

winston1236
Jun 28, 2011, 11:08 AM
pricing not too bad for brand new tech

stefmesman
Jun 28, 2011, 11:18 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; nl-nl) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Firewire does 80Mbps this does 500 on the 4 bay. Quite a difference

olindacat
Jun 28, 2011, 11:25 AM
Stoked that one device has finally arrived. Wonder what HDD they are using and if you can swap out (later) 1TBs for 3TBs. The fact that you can now unleash all that speed with an iMac is a game-changer. I have been listening to the gospel about Mac Pros and am glad I don't have to get one. I have owned at least five Mac towers in the past and am not missing them one bit. I read the comments this morning on the news thread and mostly babies complaining about a $50 cable. Obviously they are not in any kind of big bandwidth scenarios or they'd be thrilled. Video editing at high speeds on an iMac = :)

RedTomato
Jun 28, 2011, 11:26 AM
OK, let's see how fast this system is to transfer a bunch of data.

Promise Pegasus R6 = 12TB of storage. (in RAID0 for our purposes)
Thunderbolt = 10Gb/s = 800MB/s (theoretical) of data transfer bandwidth.

12TB / 800MB/s = 12,000GB / 0.8GB/s = 15,000 seconds to transfer.

15,000 / 3600 = 4 hours 10 minutes to transfer a full load.

:eek: Shows you just how much data a full set of drives are, and what a pain it is to work with.

Sonnet have an 8-drive Thunderbolt Raid storage box that holds 24TB

http://www.sonnettech.com/news/nab2011/

24TB would take over 8 hours to fill up if Thunderbolt was running at full speed. Even with next-generation Thunderbolt 100Gb/s, it would take an hour to transfer at theoretical max speeds. I won't even bother to work out how long it would take at USB2 or USB3 speeds.

Oh, OK I will.

USB2. 40MB/s. 24TB would take 6.9 days or an entire week to transfer. Bearable as a one-off if you have no urgent need for the data, but not if you have same-day need for the data.

manu chao
Jun 28, 2011, 11:28 AM
I just don't get the attraction to having to daisy chain everything - that's a terrible idea.
By all means give us 5 Thunderbolt connections on a Mac that allow us to connect a HD or display or interface or whatever we like, that'd be great, but having to daisy chain stuff from just 1 port like on the MacBook Pro is Archaic and will massively hinder its adoption

So, which ports on the MBP should have been replaced with additional TB ports? One of the USB ports to end up with only one USB port?

Once TB->FW bridges become available (and cheap enough), a second TB will likely replace the existing FW port on MBPs.

And the fact that FW can daisy chain has not stopped Apple in putting (I think) five FW ports on their Mac Pro.

Richdmoore
Jun 28, 2011, 11:31 AM
Now that an interface is finally out, the question can finally be answered: Can we use a thunderbolt drive as a boot drive?

AaronEdwards
Jun 28, 2011, 11:32 AM
OK, let's see how fast this system is to transfer a bunch of data.

Promise Pegasus R6 = 12TB.
Thunderbolt = 10Gb/s = 800MB/s (theoretical)

12TB / 800MB/s = 12,000GB / 0.8GB/s = 15,000 seconds to transfer.

15,000 / 3600 = 4 hours 10 minutes to transfer a full load. :eek: Shows you just how much data a full set of drives are, and what a pain it is to work with.

Sonnet have an 8-drive Thunderbolt Raid storage box that holds 24TB

http://www.sonnettech.com/news/nab2011/

24GB would take over 8 hours to fill up if Thunderbolt was running at full speed. Even with next-generation Thunderbolt 100Gb/s, it would take an hour to transfer at theoretical max speeds. I won't even bother to work out how long it would take at USB2 or USB3 speeds.

Oh, OK I will. USB2. 40MB/s. 24TB would take 6.9 days or an entire week to transfer. Bearable as a one-off if you have no urgent need for the data, but not if you have same-day need for the data.

One slight issue with your calculations. The 12TB RAID system won't hold 12TB of data, since, you know, it's a RAID system.

JayMBP
Jun 28, 2011, 11:36 AM
Still waiting for driveless unit to show up.

mattraehl
Jun 28, 2011, 11:38 AM
$50 for a cable, really? And I thought the premium for FireWire gear was bad.

Meanwhile, USB3 is already being included in commodity-priced consumer portable hard drives including the cable, and USB3 and eSATA 2.5" enclosures can be had for less than $20. I didn't mind paying a premium for FW when it was the king of the hill, but I'm feeling kind of grumpy about my USB3-less, eSATA-less iMac at the moment.

nunes013
Jun 28, 2011, 11:38 AM
Erm... what does this photo mean? :D

Image (http://storeimages.apple.com/5493/as-images.apple.com/is/image/AppleInc/H5184_AV6)

Pegasus R4 only has TB port... and there's no Mac Pro with TB port yet!!!???

http://store.apple.com/us/product/H5184VC/A?fnode=MTY1NDA0Nw&mco=MjMwMzE1NTU

oops, steve is not going to happy :p maybe that is the new mac pro but the new server edition will be redesigned to be rack mountable. either way, it looks like a release may be in our very near future

EDIT: also see a cinema display. maybe a simultaneous release

Richdmoore
Jun 28, 2011, 11:38 AM
So, has anyone run a test yet to find out for sure if we can use Thunderbolt drives as a boot drive. (I want to upgrade to a SSD once they get cheaper, but not deal with opening my iMac.)

KnightWRX
Jun 28, 2011, 11:40 AM
One slight issue with your calculations. The 12TB RAID system won't hold 12TB of data, since, you know, it's a RAID system.

RAID-0 (though highly fault prone that would be) says you're wrong. ;)

But then again I have been sold on the 12TB Promise ThunderBolt system, connected to a Mac Mini server as soon as Apple refreshes them, this will meet all my needs at home for at least 2 years or more!.

Overpay much ?

A 5 bay QNAP system would be cheaper and meet your needs much better.

simsaladimbamba
Jun 28, 2011, 11:47 AM
Doesn't FireWire so 800mbps?

I would wait for monoprice cables and a raid that can really take advantage of the speed.
Firewire 800 offers 800 Mb/s theoretically, but only offers 65 to 75 MB/s practically.
A RAID with 6 HDDs could offer up to 650MB/s, if one would use RAID 0.



Firewire does 80Mbps this does 500 on the 4 bay. Quite a difference

Mbps is the same as Mb/s, but it is not the same as MB/s. Eight Mb (Megabit) are the same as one MB (MegaByte), thus 80 Mbps is 10 MB/s.

What Is the Difference Between Mbps and MBps? (http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-mbps-and-mbps.htm)

subsonix
Jun 28, 2011, 11:51 AM
Overpay much ?

A 5 bay QNAP system would be cheaper and meet your needs much better.

I guess, the reason to get this would be a need for high speed transfers.

fishmoose
Jun 28, 2011, 11:54 AM
USB3 cables cost a fraction of that Thunderbolt cable (OK not 'quite' as good tech but its still a new technology)

USB has been around for a long time, although USB 3.0 is a rather new standard it is not a significant change in terms of engineering from USB 2.0. So the cost for making the cables should be about the same. And a lot of companies make USB cables, thus far only one company makes Thunderbolt cables.

mattraehl
Jun 28, 2011, 11:58 AM
Well, you could saturate it.

http://barefeats.com/ssd6g05.html

3GB sequential read from 8 SSD's stripped. Which makes 24Gbit, which is faster than TB can handle. So if there was an external RAID adapter to control these SSD's, that would do it.

Oh come on. That setup used 8 x $550 240 GB SSDs, 1x $480 SAS RAID card, 1x $650 8-bay SAS enclosure = $5,530 for 1.875 TB of available storage. Not to mention the price of the Mac Pro.

briloronmacrumo
Jun 28, 2011, 12:16 PM
I have takkes with representatives from LaCie about the LaCie littl big disk with dual ssd and thunderbolt, and they assured me it will be possible to boot from it.

This is good news but the little big disk is not quite big enough for my use. I would prefer a 1 or 2 TB external hard drive for use as a bootable clone backup. The 4/8 TB Promise TB system is overkill for my own personal needs.

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 12:17 PM
I would pay double that and possibly purchase another TC :D that could be used for the very reason I purchased the first one! and finally be able to have access to my huge Image and video bank on any equipment in my apartment without having to have copies eating disk space on every computer.

But then again I have been sold on the 12TB Promise ThunderBolt system, connected to a Mac Mini server as soon as Apple refreshes them, this will meet all my needs at home for at least 2 years or more!.

To be honest with you and do not get me wrong, TC is great for some people, but not for people like myself who deal with large amounts of data at any given time, I also tried to use it for something it was not made for I guess :o

Mine is sitting there with the occasional use as video server to view videos on my iPad from the sofa....:apple:what the hell do you use your TC for that you want to get another one? That makes no sense, i don't understand what feature would compel you to spend $500 for 3tb of storage if all you want to do is plug it in to your computer for your media files? Do you even know understand what a TC is for? Do us a favor and buy an external hard drive instead of a TC, or set up a NAS at home because buying multiple TC's is just plain dumb, idc if you have unlimited money in your bank account. :D

KnightWRX
Jun 28, 2011, 12:24 PM
what the hell do you use your TC for that you want to get another one? That makes no sense, i don't understand what feature would compel you to spend $500 for 3tb of storage if all you want to do is plug it in to your computer for your media files? Do you even know understand what a TC is for?

Airdisk acts as a sort of "NAS". A grossly overpriced and unflexible one, but one nonetheless.

The guy probably just doesn't know of the alternatives out there.

DarkKnightNine
Jun 28, 2011, 12:33 PM
While I can certainly appreciate the technology and applaud Promise for being one of the first to adopt it, they seriously need to hire better industrial designers. Most of their product line looks absolutely hideous! Perhaps Jony Ive could give them some design tips. Just sayin'

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 12:33 PM
Airdisk acts as a sort of "NAS". A grossly overpriced and unflexible one, but one nonetheless.

The guy probably just doesn't know of the alternatives out there.
I understand that, and that's my point, why would you want TWO TC's?

Just a pure waste of money, and not the right solution for what he is trying to do. And the addition of a TB port would provide no benefit other than if you are always plugging the computer directly into the TC, which then defeats the purpose of the TC...

scottsjack
Jun 28, 2011, 12:33 PM
[QUOTE=olindacat;12843544I have been listening to the gospel about Mac Pros and am glad I don't have to get one. [/QUOTE]

For the price of a good iMac and several TBs of TB storage you could have a Mac Pro filled with hard drives and a good monitor. And, you'd have a computer you can touch after heavy use without getting burned.

DarkKnightNine
Jun 28, 2011, 12:39 PM
This thing is fugly and they are so cheap that they don't even include the cables. I think I'll wait for G-technology to launch their Thunderbolt solutions. Better design, better service and they always include cables for every type of connector on the box.

dlimes13
Jun 28, 2011, 12:44 PM
Way to pricey for me. I'll stick to my 20TB storage server that gets around 125MB/s per drive (Gigabit Ethernet) for the price of one of their 4x1TB systems. Might have paid less than that.


But the big thing, $50 for the cable??? Okay, I could understand $30 if you needed ANOTHER ONE, but the drives don't come with one? CHEAP!

KnightWRX
Jun 28, 2011, 12:48 PM
And the addition of a TB port would provide no benefit other than if you are always plugging the computer directly into the TC, which then defeats the purpose of the TC...

A TC with Thunderbolt would have no benefit whatsoever. None. 0.

The TC's hardware must be connected through a SATA interface at 3 Gbps or at least 1.5 Gbps already, and the switch ports are 1 Gbps and only 3 can be connected on the LAN port that has access to the drive. Thunderbolt offers no advantage here.

CFoss
Jun 28, 2011, 12:50 PM
Give it a little time, and watch Monoprice.com release the same cable for $5.

maclaptop
Jun 28, 2011, 12:59 PM
$50 just for the cable?! :eek:

But it's a "Magical and Revolutionary Cable", unlike anything any computer manufacturer in the free world has ever offered.

It's got special connectors, a pearl white luxury color, comes packaged in a special plastic bag, and was inspected before being "blessed" as it left the factory.

Carefully and gently placed in a special shipping box, this one very unique and exclusive cable.

Oh... and by the Way?

It's Apple and we all know they are so graciously extending us the supreme privilege of spending obscene amounts of money for their Magical Technologies... :eek:

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 12:59 PM
A TC with Thunderbolt would have no benefit whatsoever. None. 0.


if you just wanted to use it as an external hdd it *would* be beneficial, or if you only used it as a plug in back up drive since the files would backup faster, but since that's not the purpose of a TC, I agree, TB would have NO benefit in a time capsule.

But it's a "Magical and Revolutionary Cable", unlike anything any computer manufacturer in the free world has ever offered.

It's got special connectors, a pearl white luxury color, comes packaged in a special plastic bag, and was inspected before being "blessed" as it left the factory.

Carefully and gently placed in a special shipping box, this one very unique and exclusive cable.

Oh... and by the Way?

It's Apple and we all know they are so graciously extending us the supreme privilege of spending obscene amounts of money for their Magical Technologies...
I mean, i know you personally love to hate on apple, but you realize that this RAID array isn't even made by apple right?

Also, I must have missed the keynote claiming a cable to be revolutionary and magical... it's one thing for apple to claim a new device like the iPad to be revolutionary (which is easy to make the argument it is) or magical (marketing term you haters love to use now) but I don't think apple has ever claimed simple things like cables to be magic in any way as far as i know

jonohayes
Jun 28, 2011, 01:01 PM
So does this mean i can now boot off a Hard Drive connected via Thunderbolt?

also Network Macs via TCP/IP?

cmaier
Jun 28, 2011, 01:07 PM
I guess, but would prefer something with OSX and in silver :D as always it is a question of personal taste and what would look better in a home environment.. but the QNAP looks good, not sure if they are available in Spain though.. but thanks for the info.

I'm a big fan of Readynas (formerly Infrant, now netgear). You may want to look into them as well.

Soliber
Jun 28, 2011, 01:08 PM
But it's a "Magical and Revolutionary Cable", unlike anything any computer manufacturer in the free world has ever offered.

It's got special connectors, a pearl white luxury color, comes packaged in a special plastic bag, and was inspected before being "blessed" as it left the factory.

Carefully and gently placed in a special shipping box, this one very unique and exclusive cable.

Oh... and by the Way?

It's Apple and we all know they are so graciously extending us the supreme privilege of spending obscene amounts of money for their Magical Technologies... :eek:
Considering that rant, I have but one question: what is wrong with you? :confused:
Did Apple barbecue your cat or something?

KnightWRX
Jun 28, 2011, 01:09 PM
if you just wanted to use it as an external hdd it *would* be beneficial

Wait, are we talking about replacing the USB port that can do an airdisk on the TC with a TB port, connecting a TB disk to the TC or are we talking about connecting to the TC with TB between the host and the TC itself ?

Because the former offers no benefit whatsoever and is what I'm talking about. The latter requires extensive modifications to the TC hardware so that it can function as both a network based piece of equipment and as a host based storage array.

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 01:28 PM
Wait, are we talking about replacing the USB port that can do an airdisk on the TC with a TB port, connecting a TB disk to the TC or are we talking about connecting to the TC with TB between the host and the TC itself ?

Because the former offers no benefit whatsoever and is what I'm talking about. The latter requires extensive modifications to the TC hardware so that it can function as both a network based piece of equipment and as a host based storage array.

Just to clear it up, I'm not the one suggesting to add a TB port, I agree with what you are saying and was just trying to tell the OP why there is no benefit to a TB port. We are discussing the second option though.

Connecting a TB drive to your TC to use as an airdisc or NAS type device wouldn't be beneficial because the network is still your bottleneck and your speeds aren't going to improve but you will have wasted a lot of money.

Where a TB port *could* be beneficial is in your initial backup of a machine that already has GB's of data on it, since it would create your initial backup in a fraction of the time, but since this is a one time use type deal, why would you want to add a $100 premium for the TB controller to your TC and then need to buy a TB cable to use it. Consensus, it would be a waste.

It *could* also be beneficial if you always plugged your mac into the TC to perform the backups, but what's the point of buying a TC then? You would be better off with an actual external HDD. TC isn't really meant to be plugged in every time you want to perform a backup, it's meant to do it every day over your network so that you can have hassle free backups. By plugging it in you are defeating the purpose and wasting money by using a TC instead of an actual HDD.

So again, no point in using TB on a TC, I'm agreeing 100% with you here, I was just saying that there are times where it would be beneficial to have TB, but those times are either in uses that go against the purpose of a TC in the first place, or a one time instance where the premium you would pay wouldn't make up for the one time you would use it.

AppliedMicro
Jun 28, 2011, 01:47 PM
A TC with Thunderbolt would have no benefit whatsoever. None. 0.
Wait, are we talking about replacing the USB port that can do an airdisk on the TC with a TB port, connecting a TB disk to the TC or (...)

Because the former offers no benefit whatsoever and is what I'm talking about
So again, no point in using TB on a TC
There certainly is a point in having a Thunderbolt Connection on a Time Capsule. Even ceteris paribus, i.e., if it replaces the USB port, while functionality isn't changed at all. And I don't the scenario is all too far-fetched.

You can backup the Time Capsule's built-in HD to an external drive connected to it's USB-port. Time Capsule can be used to store incremental backups, taking backups even from multiple computers and over Wi-Fi.

The entire Time Capsule can then be backed up on an external drive that can be stored off-site. Thunderbolt should easily be able to double, if not triple, the throughput, compared to the current USB implementation.

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 01:54 PM
There certainly is a point in having a Thunderbolt Connection on a Time Capsule. Even ceteris paribus, i.e., if it replaces the USB port, while functionality isn't changed at all. And I don't the scenario is all too far-fetched.

You can backup the Time Capsule's built-in HD to an external drive connected to it's USB-port. Time Capsule can be used to store incremental backups, taking backups even from multiple computers and over Wi-Fi.

The entire Time Capsule can then be backed up on an external drive that can be stored off-site. Thunderbolt should easily be able to double, if not triple, the throughput, compared to the current USB implementation.
It still wouldn't really be beneficial. If you are always backing up your TC drive to another external, you might as well just set up an external via usb and have it always clone the drive inside the TC. The backup to the TC still has to be done over your network, which is the real bottleneck. The TC isn't going to backup to an external drive with TB any faster.

AppliedMicro
Jun 28, 2011, 02:17 PM
If you are always backing up your TC drive to another external, you might as well just set up an external via usb and have it always clone the drive inside the TC
Is this possible with current Time Capsule firmware, i.e., can you set the external USB HD to "RAID-mirror" the internal, or make it do automatically?

As far as I remember (which isn't much in this case, as I personally don't own a TC) you have to trigger backups (from TC's built-in to USB-connected external drive) manually?

AidenShaw
Jun 28, 2011, 02:30 PM
Graphics card in docks is not going to happen. For technical reasons: 10Gbps is really not much.

Did you know that there are PCIe x1 graphics cards on the market?

See http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007709%20600007854&IsNodeId=1&name=PCI%20Express%20x1

If PCIe x1 is good enough for graphics, why not TBolt with its PCIe x4 equivalence? You could put 4 PCIe x1 graphics cards on a TBolt port without oversubscribing.

http://images17.newegg.com/is/image/newegg/14-131-432-Z01?$S300W$
Radeon HD 5450 512MB 64-bit DDR2 PCI Express x1 HDCP Low Profile Ready Video Card

Soliber
Jun 28, 2011, 02:34 PM
Did you know that there are PCIe x1 graphics cards on the market?

See http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007709%20600007854&IsNodeId=1&name=PCI%20Express%20x1

If PCIe x1 is good enough for graphics, why not TBolt with its PCIe x4 equivalence? You could put 4 PCIe x1 graphics cards on a TBolt port without oversubscribing.

Image (http://images17.newegg.com/is/image/newegg/14-131-432-Z01?$S300W$)
Radeon HD 5450 512MB 64-bit DDR2 PCI Express x1 HDCP Low Profile Ready Video Card
Yes, but what's the point? A graphics card dock suggests adding extra power to game or for heavy rendering. All these things are impossible on a x1 and x4 PCIe card, because of bottleneck issues. Almost all of the normal graphics card slots on computer motherboards are at least x8 and these days usually x16 if I'm not mistaken.
x1 and x4 are perfect for merely driving a display, but not for much more :)

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 02:42 PM
Is this possible with current Time Capsule firmware, i.e., can you set the external USB HD to "RAID-mirror" the internal, or make it do automatically?

As far as I remember (which isn't much in this case, as I personally don't own a TC) you have to trigger backups (from TC's built-in to USB-connected external drive) manually?

not really sure either since i don't own a TC, but since the option is there i don't see why you couldn't create an AppleScript that says every time I backup to time machine, tell it to trigger a "mirror" image of the TC drive onto the external drive.

Yes, but what's the point? A graphics card dock suggests adding extra power to game or for heavy rendering. All these things are impossible on a x1 and x4 PCIe card, because of bottleneck issues. Almost all of the normal graphics card slots on computer motherboards are at least x8 and these days usually x16 if I'm not mistaken.
x1 and x4 are perfect for merely driving a display, but not for much more :)
perhaps adding a dedicated GPU to machines like the Air or 13" mbp.... certainly an x1 or x4 PCIe care is better than the Intel HD3000. Not everyone needs to add a dual SLI top of the line setup, though it would be cool and may even be possible with future iterations of TB.

AidenShaw
Jun 28, 2011, 02:51 PM
Yes, but what's the point? A graphics card dock suggests adding extra power to game or for heavy rendering. All these things are impossible on a x1 and x4 PCIe card, because of bottleneck issues. Almost all of the normal graphics card slots on computer motherboards are at least x8 and these days usually x16 if I'm not mistaken.

x1 and x4 are perfect for merely driving a display, but not for much more :)

Funny, to me adding a graphics card suggests driving a display. ;)

x1 would be 250 MB/sec - or 36 seconds to transfer a full dual-layer DVD. x4 would be 1 GB/sec - or 9 secs for a DVD, less than a minute for a full dual-layer BD.

I'd think that you could do some useful encoding or GPGPU work with that kind of bandwidth. It might not be as fast as PCIe 2.0 x16, but it's a lot faster than nothing. And far, far faster than the Nvidia or Intel integrated graphics in many systems.

I agree that you wouldn't want to put a liquid-nitrogen cooled SLI gaming graphics system on TBolt, but I don't agree with simply dismissing the idea of putting graphics cards in a TBolt chassis.

SilianRail
Jun 28, 2011, 03:11 PM
This pricing is a joke. PCI Express 32 Gbps external cable coming in 2013 and using open standards will be cheap. Displayport 1.2 continues to provide over twice the display bandwidth as TBolt as well.

smeagol
Jun 28, 2011, 03:32 PM
This has got to be the ugliest looking hardware on planet earth. Talk about taking a few hundred steps back in industrial design.

weckart
Jun 28, 2011, 03:54 PM
It's not Apple's copper-based t-bolt, it's Intel's technology, and they are the ones who made it copper based for it's first implementation in order to cut costs associated with fiber, and they also need copper if they want to provide power to a device.

I don't believe this for a second. This is Apple we are talking about. If you have to ask how much it costs, then you are not in the market for Apple or relevant peripherals.

The problems, as I remember, are the difficulties in producing glass fibre that resists bending and twisting without shattering. As anyone with a TOSlink cable knows, handle with care.

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 04:00 PM
I don't believe this for a second. This is Apple we are talking about. If you have to ask how much it costs, then you are not in the market for Apple or relevant peripherals.

The problems, as I remember, are the difficulties in producing glass fibre that resists bending and twisting without shattering. As anyone with a TOSlink cable knows, handle with care.
Guess you skipped the first part of the post.

For the hundredth time, Thunderbolt is INTEL'S technology, not Apples. So this really isn't Apple we are talking about, it's Intel, and Intel's Thunderbolt technology.

Please, find me one article that reports Apple used copper to cut costs.

Torrijos
Jun 28, 2011, 04:05 PM
Wait, are we talking about replacing the USB port that can do an airdisk on the TC with a TB port, connecting a TB disk to the TC or are we talking about connecting to the TC with TB between the host and the TC itself ?

I think the point is having an Airport Extreme with a TB port instead of a Time Capsule.

Knowing that the drive inside TC is a WD Caviar Green (max burst data rate of 250 MB/s and with an average 98 MB/s), but also that any mechanical drive could face catastrophic failure, a single drive is not only a slow solution but also a dangerous one if you want to have a reliable system.

Sure right now the bottleneck would SEEM to be the ways to access your drive (theoretically 75MB/s max for WiFi n, and 3x125MB/s for the ethernet ports(which have a low overhead reaching 111MB/s in real life tests)).

But IF the device was able to concurrently respond to all the ports, the disk would be saturated (98 Vs. 450 total) even the USB 3.0 specification citing a realistic data rate of 400MB/s, just under the theoretical max demand that could be made to the Airport Extreme.

And this is now...
What then, when WiFi goes a lot faster in a couples of years?
Right now the 75MB/s are theoretical in a few year they might have become real use cases.
Somehow I believe the user might be OK with replacing a networking device every couple of years, not so with a functioning backup system.

So having a Airport Extreme with a TB port would cater to those how want to have a reliable RAID system, that would be future proof (rather have a system that ends up being a little under used than a system that become the bottleneck) if networking speeds improve.

P.S. one more case where it could prove usefull...
Your computer drive crashes, you change the drive and connect to the backup RAID directly benefiting from TB speeds for recovery. At current real world performance of 800MB/s against theoretical USB3 data rate of 625MB/s TB would still be 28% faster and against USB 3 specification 400MB/s you get 100% faster.

Of course there is also the fact that a number of people bought iMacs and MBPros that didn't came with USB 3 and it would be even more reason to want a AE with TB instead of USB, any USB.

koruki
Jun 28, 2011, 04:06 PM
You just spent $1999 on 8TB. Does $50 even matter at that point?

Same group of ppl who queue for $600 iPhone's (no carrier price) every launch date but take half a day to decide if the $1 app is worth downloading from the app store :D

As for the $50 cable, this was poorly executed. They really should of just included the cable and bumped the price up to balance it out. Its not really the money but the way its presented tot he customer. It's like a restaurant charging you $1 for a doggy bag, it's a tiny fraction of the meal cost but it sticks out like a thorn in the eyes of the customer.

dr Dunkel
Jun 28, 2011, 04:27 PM
For the hundredth time, Thunderbolt is INTEL'S technology, not Apples. So this really isn't Apple we are talking about, it's Intel, and Intel's Thunderbolt technology.


Yeah, but at this rate, the only computer company that will have shifted any models with Copperbolt will be Apple. Therefore, we can call this generation and implementation of LP, "Apple's Thunderbolt".

:D

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 04:33 PM
Yeah, but at this rate, the only computer company that will have shifted any models with Copperbolt will be Apple, therefore, we can call this generation and implementation of LP, "Apples Thunderbolt".

:D
yeah since nobody has put thunderbolt into their computers after 4 months, the technology surely belongs to whichever company was first to implement it. Even though thunderbolt is really owned, developed, marketed, and trademarked by Intel, it's Apple's Thunderbolt; oh and Al Gore invented the internets!! :eek:

dr Dunkel
Jun 28, 2011, 04:36 PM
yeah since nobody has put thunderbolt into their computers after 4 months, the technology surely belongs to whichever company was first to implement it. Even though thunderbolt is really owned, developed, marketed, and trademarked by Intel, it's Apple's Thunderbolt; oh and Al Gore invented the internets!! :eek:

Why so sensitive about it? TB is not owned by Apple, only associated with Apple. Lighten up a peak, it's just a technology :D

JAT
Jun 28, 2011, 04:57 PM
lol. Long live USB! I'm personally fine with waiting 2 minutes longer for my file transfer.
:eek: Now multiply by 1000. Still happy?
Even in China Virgins are not cheap to find and keep. :rolleyes:
Keep? Why would you?
do you realize how fast internal SSDs in a RAID0 are already?

my MBP goes well over 500 MB/sec. I'm sure a Mac Pro with 4x SSD can easily match this speed, for much less money.
So...in which world is 1TB of SSDs plus a Mac Pro less than $1000?
This pricing is a joke. PCI Express 32 Gbps external cable coming in 2013 and using open standards will be cheap. Displayport 1.2 continues to provide over twice the display bandwidth as TBolt as well.
So, you won't be using a computer for the next 2 years?

xxBURT0Nxx
Jun 28, 2011, 05:04 PM
Why so sensitive about it? TB is not owned by Apple, only associated with Apple. Lighten up a peak, it's just a technology :D
where did i say i was upset about it? that response was supposed to be taken as sarcastic...

anyways, just pointing it out because apparently a lot of people are under the impression that Apple made Thunderbolt and Intel made Light Peak.

tdar
Jun 28, 2011, 05:05 PM
What a joke, this product won't sell. $1,000 for a 4 bay array is MUCH too expensive.

Even pros won't pay for this - they'll probably opt for a cheaper eSATA array at 1/4 the cost...


Really look at this :
Drobo S 2nd Generation 10TB Bundle with 5 x 2TB Western Digital WD20EARS Hard Drives $ 1,799.00

Estimated Shipping Cost $21.95


Estimated Total $ 1,820.95

That is a screen grab from the Drobo store for a 10Gb Drobo S . For $178.05 more you get a 6th drive, real raid and a raid controller,and the speed of thunderbolt. Seems like a great deal to me. The 4 drive unit is a bargin compared to the Drobo!