Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jul 6, 2012, 07:22 PM   #76
KdParker
macrumors 68030
 
KdParker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcolson4 View Post
Now all we need is some less expensive stuff to plug it in to...
right
__________________
16g iPhone5s Space Grey; 16g iPhone5 White;
15" retina - MBP 2.6 GHZ 16 RAM;
iPad4 retina
KdParker is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2012, 08:10 PM   #77
BiggAW
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Connecticut
I like my $2 USB cables, thank you very much.
__________________
MBP 15", 2,2 i7, 8GB ram, 10.7.x
500GB Samsung 840 in Optibay (Boot), 640GB HDD (storage)
Black iPhone 4S 64GB AT&T 7.0.4 JB'ed, 2GB Data Pro
SGS III, White VeriPad 3 32GB 7.0.4 JB'ed
BiggAW is offline   -2 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2012, 08:18 PM   #78
mentaluproar
macrumors 65816
 
mentaluproar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
I don't know how widely this will ever be used. Firewire was originally intended for high speed data transmission, and USB for standard one-connector-for-most-things. We all know how that went. USB got faster and cheaper, and eve though firewire 800 was faster, USB 2 was the go-to connector.

Unless thunderbolt turns into a one-cable-to-rule-them all (and aside from power it looks like it will get there) it's not going to take off the way USB did. It needs to be cheaper and easier to use. Thunderbolt only has one of those points covered.
__________________
Powered by OSX 10.9 Ocelot
Will someone please make a safari extension that gives us back the downvote button?
mentaluproar is offline   -2 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2012, 08:21 PM   #79
SDAVE
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Nowhere
Quote:
Originally Posted by mentaluproar View Post
I don't know how widely this will ever be used. Firewire was originally intended for high speed data transmission, and USB for standard one-connector-for-most-things. We all know how that went. USB got faster and cheaper, and eve though firewire 800 was faster, USB 2 was the go-to connector.

Unless thunderbolt turns into a one-cable-to-rule-them all (and aside from power it looks like it will get there) it's not going to take off the way USB did. It needs to be cheaper and easier to use. Thunderbolt only has one of those points covered.
Firewire was popular because of digital video (DV) devices like camcorders...This is the reason FW800 never took off, even though it's faster than USB 2.0. Nowadays digital video camcorders either record to SD cards or internal hard drives and the data is copied to the computer via USB2.0.

FW800 is dying, unfortunately. I'm glad some of my external FW800 also have a USB3.0 port
__________________
iPhone 5, MacBook Pro (2011), Mac Pro 2008, Apple Cinema Display 30" Aluminium
SDAVE is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2012, 08:58 PM   #80
AidenShaw
macrumors G5
 
AidenShaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Peninsula
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift View Post
The new Intel chip has embedded support for Thunderbolt, so Windows computers will be able to have these ports without spending so much on Thunderbolt.
The Ivy Bridge chipsets do not support T-Bolt - but they do support USB 3.0. Discrete T-Bolt controllers are still needed.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stridder44 View Post
On a somewhat unrelated note, I guess this would mean the death (or at least non-use) of Firewire 1600/3200? I remember seeing rumors of them in development, but it seems pointless what with USB3/TB.
Wouldn't 1394 at 1600/3200 have to have been born in order to die?

It was a vapor spec that never materialized, and now never will.
__________________
Edward Snowden - American Hero.
Daniel Ellsberg: "Edward Snowden: Saving Us from the United Stasi of America"
Marriage equality is unstoppable
AidenShaw is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2012, 09:15 PM   #81
bedifferent
macrumors Demi-God
 
bedifferent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NY
I know this is a silly point of contention, but I dislike the name "Thunderbolt". "Light Peak" seemed perfect, especially marketing; following "FireWire", "LightPeak" or "LP" devices.

Thank God Jobs never got his wish in naming the "iPhone" the "Magic Phone".
bedifferent is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2012, 09:17 PM   #82
MagnusVonMagnum
macrumors 68040
 
MagnusVonMagnum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by bungiefan89 View Post
Actually, given how strong Thunderbolt seems to be, I think it could easily be an industry standard if they could drop the price.
Picture this: in the year 2015, the ONLY ports on most computers are USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt. You no longer have a need for VGA, DVI, HDMI, FireWire, or even Ethernet. All of those could be run through Thunderbolt and suddenly it's much easier to connect devices to computers. Yes, it would certainly take a long time to adopt the technology like that, but it sounds like a convenient world once fully adopted, doesn't it?
Thunderbolt like FW is daisy-chained. All I can say is that daisy-chaining sucks big time for removable devices, especially if the "monitor" must be the last device on the chain. Want to unplug that hard drive? Time to play musical chairs with all your peripherals! People don't realize how MUCH it sucks until they're actually in a situation where they have to do it regularly. And just TRY to find a reasonably priced multi-port hub for Thunderbolt. Try to find a reasonable priced ANYTHING for Thunderbolt. The whole system is a major FAIL since inception for these very reasons and the sad thing is that it was SO EASY to see its failings from Day 1 because it's Firewire all over again. It was plain to see USB3 would be dirt cheap and used by default given its backward compatible nature with USB 2 and 1. In short, you'll NEED USB3 regardless so of course it'll get used. It's there. It's cheap. It's everywhere. The only way to dethrone an entrenched format like that is to be not only massively better (TB is 2x faster, but that's neither hear nor there when it's a BUS format and video sucks up that bandwidth very quickly), but it also has to be both more convenient (daisy-chaining kills that) and cheaper (NOTHING and I mean NOTHING is cheap about TB; you're paying $200+ premiums for the same hard drive just to use a TB connector (and then pay $50 for a cable on top of that, so that 3TB drive then costs you $350-450 that costs $100-150 for USB3 and the same speeds since the hard drive is the limiting factor). Good luck finding one at a brick and mortar store for that matter.

People keep making a big deal about this idea of using "less" connectors in the future, but it's not really true except for a docking connector. All those devices STILL have to be connected to the machine somehow (i.e. unless your hard drives are built into your monitor, you'll need a separate cable for them and for Network and everything else; the only connection that needs just one cable is the dock connector and there I'd agree it would take a few seconds less to dock your notebook than with 4 cables, but is it really worth that much more money to save a few seconds? The current all-in-one hubs cost a fortune and Apple's own built-in hub to their monitor is already outdated since it's only USB2 (and for no good reason either since USB3 was available when it came out and the cost would have been negligible but that would have meant OSX would have had to support it while Jobs was still alive and that wasn't going to happen. Steve was intelligent and creative on a lot of levels, but practicality wasn't always one of them.
__________________
Mac Mini Server 2012 (2.3GHz Quad i7, 8GB, 2x1TB RAID 0) ; External 12x Memorex Blu-Ray USB3, External WD 3x3TB,1x2TB HD USB3)
15" Matte MBP 2.4GHz, 4GB/500GB, NVidia 8600M GT; 3 ATV; 2 iPod Touch
MagnusVonMagnum is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2012, 09:26 PM   #83
repoman27
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by AidenShaw View Post
There are no optical T-Bolt cables at any speed. You are quoting roadmap and theoretical numbers. And "multi-path" is questionable - a T-Bolt chain is single-path.

Fail.

Are you talking about T-Bolt 2.0 or T-Bolt 3.0?

T-Bolt 1.0 does not support optical cables - but there are certain vaporware noises about connectors with Cu-Optical transceivers in the cable for longer cable runs at copper speeds - but each end is a copper connection.

This is a liability, not an asset. Daisy chains are pure suck - since you often have to shut the system down to remove or insert a device in the middle
As usual, you're wrong about everything, and have the audacity to proclaim "fail" about the statements of others.

Sumitomo makes optical Thunderbolt cables. They've been available for a while now. Sumitomo also manufactures several of the other Thunderbolt cables that have recently come to market (Elgato, Belkin), but they don't sell direct in the US. Yes the optical transceiver is housed in the cable connector, right where it should be for a consumer device. It keeps the price of everything lower for those that don't need the range of optical, it keeps a potentially dangerous laser device out of harm's way, and doesn't require any expensive, easily damaged or contaminated lenses in the connector.

The speed of Thunderbolt is entirely determined by the controller. Thus far all controllers on the market are 10 Gbps, full-duplex, per channel. All cables are dual channel, and thus multi-path.

The copper implementation of Thunderbolt is actually twice the bandwidth of the optical versions that were demoed as Light Peak. Those only offered a single 10 Gbps channel, rather than the two that are standard with Thunderbolt. Short of silicon photonics, there is always an electrical/optical boundary, and your semantical arguments about the significance of where this boundary lies are pointless. For now, economics and practicality will determine where they are.

Also, the requirement of Thunderbolt devices to be hot-pluggable means that daisy chaining isn't much of a liability, unless you are silly enough to boot off of a device that isn't at or near the beginning of the chain. But then again, you're welcome to voice your opinion that daisy chains suck. At least that isn't patently false, like most of the other troll-bait claims you make.
repoman27 is offline   12 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2012, 10:49 PM   #84
Lancer
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcolson4 View Post
Now all we need is some less expensive stuff to plug it in to...
1+

Why would the average Mac or PC user now looking at USB3 want to pay more for TB for storage?

OT - plugging a USB2 HDD into a USB3 computer will it be faster? I'm not talking about USB3 speed but will there be less of a bottleneck with the faster connecting if you have a number of HDDs running off the same bus or hub?
Lancer is offline   -2 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2012, 10:54 PM   #85
kiljoy616
macrumors 68000
 
kiljoy616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by trims View Post
Nope. Still a dinosaur.

Hands up how many of you own a Thunderbolt peripheral >2 years since launch?
Hand up how many of you own Ferrari after all they only been out 2 plus years.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by repoman27 View Post
As usual, you're wrong about everything, and have the audacity to proclaim "fail" about the statements of others.

Sumitomo makes optical Thunderbolt cables.
So well written and yet no one has given you a thumb up. d
__________________
AppleTV 2 + Ipad 2 64 GB (My jukebox) + iMac 27" i5 2.8Ghz 256GB SSD + 1TD HD + Macbook Air 2011 13" SSD 128GB iPhone 4S White
kiljoy616 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2012, 11:30 PM   #86
bigwig
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjy91 View Post
PC manufacters have been very slow to adopt, however perhaps it will gain traction. Although it's superior I can see it taking FireWires place as 2nd to USB3.
Certainly, seeing as FireWire is on its deathbed. Big electronics retailers like Best Buy and Fry's have for the most part ceased stocking FW external drives in their stores, and only feature USB3 drives.

As for TB, every delay and grossly-overpriced product on the TB side just further entrenches USB3. I predict TB won't get close to FW in market penetration.
bigwig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2012, 11:33 PM   #87
Schmitty11
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Thunderbolt cables June 2013:

Amazon: $0.01
Apple $48.95
Schmitty11 is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2012, 11:59 PM   #88
yg17
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: St. Louis, MO
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazz0 View Post
I've never seen a TB cable in the flesh, but in the pictures the connectors look huge. That strikes me as a potential problem - the further the hard section of the connector extends from the device the more easily knocked it is (and possibly damaged), the more that movement of the cable will result in movement of connected devices, and the bigger the gap you have to leave around devices. This, I imagine, will only get worse when the fibre is added. Anything that makes the connector smaller, therefore, must be a bonus, I'd have thought.

The pictures are very deceiving. Here's a pic of mine for scale, next to a USB connector, MagSafe 2 connector, headphone, and what for some reason is an unnecessarily large MDP->DVI cable. It's maybe about a centimeter longer than the USB connector, but not long enough to be a problem I don't think.

Thumb resize.
__________________
Barack Obama is not a foreign born, brown skinned, anti-war socialist who gives away healthcare. You're thinking of Jesus.
yg17 is online now   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2012, 01:08 AM   #89
btbeme
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
This isn't news. Simply stated, the prices HAVE to come down, because the could not be any friggin expensive to begin with.
btbeme is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2012, 02:59 AM   #90
MH01
macrumors 68030
 
MH01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
I did chuckle when the heading said "likely" to drop by 2013
MH01 is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2012, 03:26 AM   #91
mrbyu
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
I have a 2011 MBA 13" and actually the only thing which I really envy from the new Airs is the USB 3.0... I really don't think we're gonna see considerably cheap Thunderbolt devices in the near future (1-2 years)...

USB 3.0 is "only" 5 Gbit/s but it's s till way faster than Firewire, it's a whole another category.
mrbyu is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2012, 07:24 AM   #92
Josephiah
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by baryon View Post
I miss the days when a cable was literally a piece of wire, and cost the same as a piece of wire. I'll switch to Thunderbolt if and when the price of a cable will be the same as the price of a USB cable. Until then, I have no problems with USB whatsoever.
Is there a good reason for all those ICs to be built into the cable?* Surely it would have been more sensible to put all the processing hardware into the computer/peripheral at the socket, leaving the cable as just that - a cable.

(*unless, the conspiracy theorist might add, you're trying to make your laptop ultra-thin and create a nice money-making scheme into the bargain...)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post
Its not stupid telecoms have been using active cables for years, in order for thunderbolt to achieve the 10mb speed it needs those controllers to tune the cable to get the 10 mb through put and also to multiplex the data and video streams on the fly into one stream through the cable.
Apologies if I've missed something obvious, but I still don't see the (technical) reason why all that tuning/multiplexing hardware should be built into the cable, rather than into the ports at either end...?
Josephiah is offline   -2 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2012, 07:42 AM   #93
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Apple's biggest marketing blunder with Thunderbolt : making everyone think it was aimed at replacing USB. Whether intentional or not on their part, that is now what most in the Apple community think.

Thunderbolt is not a USB replacement. Never will be. It'll be a niche host based connectivity option for higher end machines and peripherals, mostly used in the prosumer world.

Enterprise is going network based connectivity (FC or IP SANs for storage, network based peripherals over GBE or 10GE), consumers are sticking with lower mass market priced peripherals (USB3).
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2012, 08:01 AM   #94
BiggAW
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Connecticut
Quote:
Originally Posted by yg17 View Post
The pictures are very deceiving. Here's a pic of mine for scale, next to a USB connector, MagSafe 2 connector, headphone, and what for some reason is an unnecessarily large MDP->DVI cable. It's maybe about a centimeter longer than the USB connector, but not long enough to be a problem I don't think.

Thumb resize.
What on earth is that Monoprice cable? Is that the adapter in a new Retina Pro? I have Monoprice adapters, and none are as hideously large as that thing...
__________________
MBP 15", 2,2 i7, 8GB ram, 10.7.x
500GB Samsung 840 in Optibay (Boot), 640GB HDD (storage)
Black iPhone 4S 64GB AT&T 7.0.4 JB'ed, 2GB Data Pro
SGS III, White VeriPad 3 32GB 7.0.4 JB'ed
BiggAW is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2012, 09:17 AM   #95
yg17
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: St. Louis, MO
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
What on earth is that Monoprice cable? Is that the adapter in a new Retina Pro? I have Monoprice adapters, and none are as hideously large as that thing...
Yeah, it's a Monoprice Mini DisplayPort to DVI cable. I have no idea why it's so freakin' huge either. And yes, it's a retina MBP.
__________________
Barack Obama is not a foreign born, brown skinned, anti-war socialist who gives away healthcare. You're thinking of Jesus.
yg17 is online now   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2012, 11:20 AM   #96
AidenShaw
macrumors G5
 
AidenShaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Peninsula
Quote:
Originally Posted by repoman27 View Post
As usual, you're wrong about everything, and have the audacity to proclaim "fail" about the statements of others.

Sumitomo makes optical Thunderbolt cables.
Thank you for the polite reply.

Any "optical" T-Bolt cable today is a hybrid Cu-optical cable - it has copper connectors, with the copper protocols (and speeds) bridged across an optical segment.

True optical does not exist.
__________________
Edward Snowden - American Hero.
Daniel Ellsberg: "Edward Snowden: Saving Us from the United Stasi of America"
Marriage equality is unstoppable
AidenShaw is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2012, 11:33 AM   #97
Fortimir
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Quote:
Originally Posted by yg17 View Post
Yeah, it's a Monoprice Mini DisplayPort to DVI cable. I have no idea why it's so freakin' huge either. And yes, it's a retina MBP.
Haha... I have one of them Monoprice big boys, but fortunately it connects a second display to my iMac, so it stays hidden from view.
__________________
Sean Molin Photography | Website | Facebook | Flickr | 500px
iMac 27", MacBook Pro Retina x2, iPad Mini Retina, Apple TV x3, iPhone 5s, iPod Touch, iPod Nano, iPod Classic
Fortimir is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2012, 11:42 AM   #98
dysamoria
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by bungiefan89 View Post
Actually, given how strong Thunderbolt seems to be, I think it could easily be an industry standard if they could drop the price.
Picture this: in the year 2015, the ONLY ports on most computers are USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt. You no longer have a need for VGA, DVI, HDMI, FireWire, or even Ethernet. All of those could be run through Thunderbolt and suddenly it's much easier to connect devices to computers. Yes, it would certainly take a long time to adopt the technology like that, but it sounds like a convenient world once fully adopted, doesn't it?
I remember when USB was announced and described nearly exactly the same way... One of these days I'd like to see the hype fulfilled on some magical new technology.
dysamoria is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2012, 12:56 PM   #99
WestonHarvey1
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by baryon View Post
So, the optical signal (the light pulses) won't be coming from the computer, but rather generated by the cable? So there will not only be 2 freaking microcomputers in each cable (one at each end), but also a whole light generating/receiving thingy?

Wouldn't it be easier to just put an LED in the computer (cheap as hell) that simply blinks the 1s and the 0s and a transparent cable relays them? I mean, I'm not an engineer, but this is how optical audio works today, it costs nothing and it's a working way to relay lots of information. Why can't Thunderbolt do this?
When optical TB becomes more prevalent, they'll probably move the hardware back into the port controller. Then there will be cheaper cables, but it will establish a fragmented legacy cable market. Perhaps we might also see a transducer dongle adapter.

All this putting chips in cables does sound perverse, but we live in an age where things have become so small and so cheap there's really no reason not to put intelligence inside the most mundane things.
WestonHarvey1 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2012, 01:21 PM   #100
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
 
Eidorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cuidad de México
Send a message via AIM to Eidorian
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysamoria View Post
I remember when USB was announced and described nearly exactly the same way... One of these days I'd like to see the hype fulfilled on some magical new technology.
Hot-swapping without a restart and a whopping 12 Mbit/s in the age of floppies and serial cables. I had few serial mice... You really needed USB 2.0 once flash drives over 256 MB rolled out.

Get back to me when I can get a Thunderbolt cable in a cereal box. Which you might be able to do with a USB cable, today.
__________________
Core i5 750 / 16 GB RAM / 500 GB SSD / HD 7950 / Windows 8.1
13" Retina MacBook Pro
Eidorian is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thunderbolt cables should have a lock connector like CAT5 cables Anim Mac Peripherals 14 Feb 7, 2014 01:15 PM
Thunderbolt Cables lugesm Mac Peripherals 5 Sep 15, 2012 02:35 PM
With SSD prices dropping, will rMBP prices drop? NovemberWhiskey MacBook Pro 5 Aug 17, 2012 07:09 PM
Optical Thunderbolt Cables?? tanker5 Mac Peripherals 1 Aug 16, 2012 02:10 AM
Thunderbolt optical cables tanker5 Mac Peripherals 1 Jul 8, 2012 01:24 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:19 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC