SATA IV (12 GBit/s), please! ;-)
Btw, holy ****:
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2012/03/08/ssds-faster-sata-express/1
(2 GByte/s)
Btw, holy ****:
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2012/03/08/ssds-faster-sata-express/1
(2 GByte/s)
Restoring an entire user from an external drive when the internal HD fails.
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
I much prefer Thunderbolt. It has much lower CPU usage, and can be used to connect displays. That's not the case for USB.
Thunderbolt will at the very least remain popular in the professional world, just as FireWire did for a many years. It could even be a little more successful simply because it doubles as a video connector.
This new SuperSpeed USB 3 will likely win out and we'll see the slow death of Thunderbolt just like we saw the slow death of FireWire. A committed following sung the praises of FireWire to the bitter end and that will likely happen with Thunderbolt, as well.
I much prefer Thunderbolt. It has much lower CPU usage, and can be used to connect displays. That's not the case for USB.
Bad boy! ;-)But then again, those are just numbers, hell I do not even have a 2011 or 2012 Mac, so I am still using "old" technology.
If they start calling it "Superspeed USB" that will confuse me like crazy.
And speaking of that market, the USB folks have painted themselves into a bit of a corner as to how they're going to brand the new 10Gbps-and-over specification. When the first 1.5Mbps Universal Serial Bus spec was formally released in January 1996, it was called logically enough USB. When it bumped up to the 480Mbps version 2.0 in April of 2000, it was renamed Hi-Speed USB. Then the 5Gbps USB 3.0 arrived in November 2008, dubbed SuperSpeed.
When we asked Ravencraft and Saunders what this next amended version of USB 3.0 would be called, they demurred. "Developing the brand is something we have to do in parallel with developing the spec update," Saunders told us.
True, but if all I use the Thunderbolt port for is as an external display port (which is truly all I've ever used it for), how is that keeping Thunderbolt alive? It's supposed to be about so much more than video, after all.
I'd rather have the old Mini-Display Port back, lose the Thunderbolt port, and gain two USB 3.0 ports (instead of the two USB 2 ports I have now) on my 2011 MacBook Pro.
I use Macbook Retina, but I less prefer Thunderbolt. How can you accept interface system which cost you $59 only for a cable?
Yeah I don't get it either. Thunderbolt is on it's way to failing miserably so USB 3.0 would be fine at 5 Mbps.
I got a few 2 years ago. Wanna buy one?I still want a firewire thumb drive. There I said it.
I'll take USB 3 all the way. If you're going to live in the real world, rather than the fantasy world that is Apple, the smart connectivity solution is USB. Sure TB maybe a bit faster and less processor intensive yet USB is the world standard. I would not buy any computer or peripheral without USB3.