Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Derpage

Suspended
Mar 7, 2012
451
194
Cant believe cloud options were just used in a conversation about saving time.

You see, with the cloud, you set it and forget it. I don't care about how fast my folder syncs while i'm driving home. Because some "Magic" happens and the folders are updated on my home drives. It's much faster than waiting for something to transfer, because there is nothing for me to transfer. It's automated, and happens faster than I can arrange. OMG IT IS THE FUTURE!!!!
 

bigcat318

macrumors 6502
Dec 25, 2007
377
138
You see, with the cloud, you set it and forget it. I don't care about how fast my folder syncs while i'm driving home. Because some "Magic" happens and the folders are updated on my home drives. It's much faster than waiting for something to transfer, because there is nothing for me to transfer. It's automated, and happens faster than I can arrange. OMG IT IS THE FUTURE!!!!

Still shocking you called that other poster a jerk with this crap you've posted in the past 20 minutes.
 

Navdakilla

macrumors 65816
Feb 3, 2011
1,100
13
Canada
Looks like we'll have to wait another year for prices to come down..
sigh

I'm a little angry at myself for buying a iMac with thunderbolt, when one without it and a better video card was for the same price, should have went with that one
 

daxomni

macrumors 6502
Jun 24, 2009
457
6
I think he has a valid point. If you are in any sort of professional environment time is money. In a hypothetical situation having to wait 4 hours vs having to wait 1 hour is a huge difference, and repeated frequently the time savings would easily pay for the added cost. So really your angry overreaction to his comment made you look like more of a jerk.
A valid point ceases to be relevant when the poster goes out of their way to make a personal attack on a complete stranger. To be perfectly frank, the proud snobbery on MR can get really hard to stomach over time. All this "my time is worth more than your time" crap gets mighty old mighty fast.
 

bigcat318

macrumors 6502
Dec 25, 2007
377
138
Still shocked your trying to talk to me about things you don't understand :D.

Wow really? You claimed no drive was worth over $100/TB regardless of how much time it saved you. I provided a logical case where saving time is of huge value. Where up front cost of a faster storage solution is easily offset. You proceeded to be a douchebag. Go try and impress someone else with your BS.
 

Derpage

Suspended
Mar 7, 2012
451
194
Wow really? You claimed no drive was worth over 100 TB regardless of how much time it saved you. I provided a logical case where saving time is of huge value. Where up front cost of a faster storage solution is easily offset.Y ou proceeded to be a douchebag. Go try and impress someone else with your BS.

You haven't presented a single case where this drive would be a value. As a matter of fact, you've done nothing but try and bat down my most learned advice with opinion and conjecture. It's like talking to a fanboy. Are you one?
 

MediaFrezy

macrumors newbie
Mar 20, 2012
3
0
Lost Faith In Western Digital

I have paid out over $800 in data recovery for two Western Digital drives with Firewire 800 that was less than two years old. Both drives were the MyBook Mac editions. Switched everything over to Seagate drives since that's what's inside my iMac. And Seagate's adapter bases allow me to switch over to Thunderbolt (once the adapter is available) without duplicating files over to a new drive. Sorry... WD. You've burned me two too many times now with a bad PCB!
 

LaWally

macrumors 6502a
Feb 24, 2012
530
1
If a drive (e.g., WDC Caviar Green 3 TB) has a maximum xfer rate of 6 Gbs (per the WDC site), does it really matter if I can throw 2 channels of data at it at 10 Gbps each using TB? The drive will be the bottleneck and the speed of any read/write will ultimately be limited by what the drive can handle, no?

Better to throw 5 Gbps at it using USB3?

Of course if USB3 is not there ...
 

Derpage

Suspended
Mar 7, 2012
451
194
if a drive (e.g., wdc caviar green 3 tb) has a maximum xfer rate of 6 gbs (per the wdc site), does it really matter if i can throw 2 channels of data at it at 10 gbps each using tb? The drive will be the bottleneck and the speed of any read/write will ultimately be limited by what the drive can handle, no?

Better to throw 5 gbps at it using usb3?

Of course if usb3 is not there ...

we have a winner
 

spacepower7

macrumors 68000
May 6, 2004
1,509
1
Price premium

Interesting, the blackmagic design Intensity Shuttle Thunderbolt version is only $40 more than the USB 3 version. Given that it only has 1 thunderbolt port instead of two, I'd think $80 for 2 thunderbolt ports would be fair.

WDC is pricing this like all their FireWire and Mac preformatted drives - ripoff Mac users.
 

RalfTheDog

macrumors 68020
Feb 23, 2010
2,115
1,869
Lagrange Point
A valid point ceases to be relevant when the poster goes out of their way to make a personal attack on a complete stranger. To be perfectly frank, the proud snobbery on MR can get really hard to stomach over time. All this "my time is worth more than your time" crap gets mighty old mighty fast.

It is not, "My time is worth more than your time". It is, "Your time is worth far more than you think."

I have paid out over $800 in data recovery for two Western Digital drives with Firewire 800 that was less than two years old. Both drives were the MyBook Mac editions. Switched everything over to Seagate drives since that's what's inside my iMac. And Seagate's adapter bases allow me to switch over to Thunderbolt (once the adapter is available) without duplicating files over to a new drive. Sorry... WD. You've burned me two too many times now with a bad PCB!

Time to start thinking about better backup options. Not that I have not had issues with my backups in the past.

If a drive (e.g., WDC Caviar Green 3 TB) has a maximum xfer rate of 6 Gbs (per the WDC site), does it really matter if I can throw 2 channels of data at it at 10 Gbps each using TB? The drive will be the bottleneck and the speed of any read/write will ultimately be limited by what the drive can handle, no?

Better to throw 5 Gbps at it using USB3?

Of course if USB3 is not there ...

The point is, you can put several of these devices on the same TB port and soft RAID them without saturating your connection.
 

spacepower7

macrumors 68000
May 6, 2004
1,509
1
If a drive (e.g., WDC Caviar Green 3 TB) has a maximum xfer rate of 6 Gbs (per the WDC site), does it really matter if I can throw 2 channels of data at it at 10 Gbps each using TB? The drive will be the bottleneck and the speed of any read/write will ultimately be limited by what the drive can handle, no?

Better to throw 5 Gbps at it using USB3?

Of course if USB3 is not there ...

6 Gbs is WDC marketing the maximum speed of the SATA interface, their drives would be lucky to get 1 Gbs, and the green versions even less likely.

USB 3, we have to wait for intel's ivy bridge to have native support, then Apple will include it.
 

iMikeT

macrumors 68020
Jul 8, 2006
2,304
1
California
What's with all the Thunderbolt hate?

Really people, Thunderbolt is an option, a very good one that needs more adoption and I'm sure that we'll see more adoption in the next year. With that said, it's not like Apple has completely abandoned older I/O's strictly in favor of Thunderbolt, Apple wouldn't be that stupid. With that said, what's with all the hate?

For example, this gem of a post...

I'm a little angry at myself for buying a iMac with thunderbolt, when one without it and a better video card was for the same price, should have went with that one

Question Navadakilla, which pre-Thunderbolt iMac had a better video card?
 

iamkarlp

macrumors regular
Oct 15, 2008
102
0
I think he has a valid point. If you are in any sort of professional environment time is money. In a hypothetical situation having to wait 4 hours vs having to wait 1 hour is a huge difference, and repeated frequently the time savings would easily pay for the added cost.

So really your angry overreaction to his comment made you look like more of a jerk.

In that type of scenario even waiting once should (more than) pay for the price of the unit.

Unfortunately the differences aren't that great, but they certainly are better than the status quo.

People have to remember, Thunderbolt is for the pro's ATM.

There is a certain segment of the market (larger than you may realize) that will pay well over 1$ per gigabyte for high speed, shared storage.

While this isn't storage on that quality level, or even shared for that matter, it's also no-where near 1$/GB either.

For these type of people, operating in a purely professional environment, Thunderbolt is changing the way they do business. For some it is/will be slower than others, but it is happening nonetheless.

Just recently I have seen macbook airs doing high channel count audio production using TB interfaces, I have seen QuadCore iMacs being used in a shared editing environment with a TB fiberchannel adapter, and even a mini injesting SDI video and doing quick edits while working off an SSD scratchdisk.

Thunderbolt is one of the biggest thing to happen for professional media types in the past decade. It finally begins to deliver, in a meaningful way, on the promise of doing serious work away from their suites; additionally it opens up a whole new world of lower-cost node options for the jobs that don't require a 10'000$ tower.

The prices are fair at the moment for what is still a very young interconnect, and it delivers very good value with relatively few teething problems. Will the prices come down in the future? Absolutely. Will it ever be a day-to-day consumer interconnect? ehh....... who knows.

I don't think any of us are ever expecting TB to replace USB though. Different horses for different courses and all that.

Karl P
 

GuitarDTO

macrumors 6502a
Feb 16, 2011
687
110
Sigh. All I want is a 500GB-1TB for a DECENT price ($150 ish?). Thunderbolt port still unused on my 2011 Macbook pro
 

doctor-don

macrumors 68000
Dec 26, 2008
1,604
336
Georgia USA
I just want a 1 terabyte thunderbolt backup drive, nothing else. Like one of those passport ones from Western Digital. If a non-thunderbolt costs about $120, I don't see why a thunderbolt one would cost too much more.

My Passport USB3 1 TB drive cost about $90. I connect it to my Mac Pro using a USB2 cable on one end.
 

AppleDroid

macrumors 6502a
Apr 10, 2011
631
84
Illinois
Hopefully the team over at OWC (macsales) will start to implement TB into their drives. I've owned a WD, Seagate and a DIY external drive kit and all died after a year but my OWC drives just keep going.

----------

My Passport USB3 1 TB drive cost about $90. I connect it to my Mac Pro using a USB2 cable on one end.

So you bought a drive with a faster port... to connect it using the older port?
 

HalfBlazed

macrumors newbie
Aug 17, 2011
22
0
Bring down the price.

If Intel and Apple ever expect Thunderbolt to get a foothold in the market they need to figure out some way to get these obnoxious prices down. There is only a very, very small number of people who will be able to justify spending that amount money on a storage option when USB is so cheap and available.

I am all for using Thunderbolt. From what I have read, it seems to be an extremely versatile means of connectivity but until they can get a product within the 100-200 dollar range I'll just be sticking with USB for now.

If anything, they should just put something out that they might lose a little money on just to get people using it and get the ball rolling. I'm sure they could release a 1 or 2TB My Book for a reasonable price.

(early) 2011 15in MacBook Pro 2.2GHZ i7 16GB :apple: (mid) 2011 27in iMac 3.4GHz i7 16GB 256GB SSD + 1TB :apple: 16GB iPhone 4 :apple: 3rd Gen "New" iPad 32GB :apple: Original iPad 64GB :apple: 3TB Time Capsule
 

fa8362

macrumors 68000
Jul 7, 2008
1,571
497
Hopefully the team over at OWC (macsales) will start to implement TB into their drives. I've owned a WD, Seagate and a DIY external drive kit and all died after a year but my OWC drives just keep going.

OWC doesn't make drives. They just buy them.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.