Pro users handling hundreds of GB of data (audio, video, etc.) on a daily basis, for example.and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
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.
Because Ivy Bridge was the first Intel chip with native USB 3.0 support in their Hub.
Well Apple's cable was $49.99 in 2011, and it's still $49.99 now
That is a problem I agree, but as drivers improve that'll be mitigated to some extent. FW devices can write directly to memory locations, bypassing the CPU altogether. I presume that's the same case with TB. USB has to go through the CPU first.
As almost always is the case, software is cheaper than hardware. Which is really the main reason USB is cheaper than TB, the protocol is handled almost entirely by the CPU. Trouble is, USB works well enough for most, and as with Betamax and VHS, the cheapest product unfortunately always seems to "win".
Yep - It’s been ages now, and TB is simply not catching in any serious way.
You mean 10 Gb/s ("GB/s" means 10^9 bytes per second, whereas "Gb/s" means 10^9 bits per second).
And how is T-Bolt at 10 Gb/s "much faster" than the new 10 Gb/s USB proposal?
Yes, because Intel is still the sole manufacturer for the controllers and Apple's still the sole volume buyer of those cables.
It may be cheaper but it's not in the companies' interests to improve the drivers. It is extremely difficult to optimize drivers to speed it up more, companies rather throw more money into hardware to speed it up than to maintain a department of super-smart engineers slaving over the work that can take years to complete.
Hmmm. 2015. By then TB 2.0 fiber will be entrenched. Intel and Apple are both backing it and the other "standards" will be on the "many" PC's.
But even Intel was putting the NEC USB 3.0 chip in their systems/motherboards long before Ivy Bridge.
Apple fail. (Or Apple marketing decision to try to push some proprietary technology over something useful.)
That did used to be the point of using a version number. When you updated something, you changed it.Shouldn't this be USB 3.1?
Restoring an entire user from an external drive when the internal HD fails.
Pro users handling hundreds of GB of data (audio, video, etc.) on a daily basis, for example.
And VHS was more widely used than Betamax, but Betamax was the better technology.
Those who don't learn from history
And Blu-Ray both won the format war and was the superior technology.
And Blu-Ray both won the format war and was the superior technology.
Yep - Its been ages now, and TB is simply not catching in any serious way.
Reminiscent of USB2, which in all marketing material I've seen on the side of boxes quotes 480Mb/s, which in the Firewire 400 days was theoretically faster; at no time have I ever seen an asterisk stating * Actual transfer speeds may be less. USB and Firewire, and now its successor Thunderbolt, are different speeds incorporating their own dedicated controller speeds, which makes them more expensive but also more reliable with constant transfer speeds that doesn't tax the CPU. While USB2 could theoretically reach 480mb/s in bursts, actual speeds transferring any decent amount of data is closer to 280-300 Mb/s. This false marketing was effective though, USB is a 'known' quantity to most, something familiar with a similar plug. USB 3 has the advantage of its name and backwards compatibility. Presumably this new 'super-duper speed' or whatever they decide to call it will presumably feed off the same legacy. We won't hear about any backwards compatibility issues, whereas pros and industries which truly need fast cabling will do their own testing and will go for what suits their purpose as long as the peripherals are there, which likely will be Thunderbolt for a litany of reasons. But will the Pro market be enough to sustain Thunderbolt? It wasn't with Firewire. Apple is counting on Thunderbolt being their edge in the Pro market.In my experience, USB3 is not performing to its theoretical potential. For example, there are problems with driver performance where the device driver loads the CPU to an extent that if you try to perform multiple tasks on a computer while using the USB3 port, the overall performance can be less than USB2! (I have a documented case of this for a machine-vision camera application.)...
Buh-bye Thunderbolt. It was nice knowing you. Or not.
Actually, only a very tiny number of people got to know you. Oh well. Those folks can throw their Thunderbolt cables into the drawer beside the old FireWire cables.
Thunderbolt cables cost $49.00 each with free shipping.