Hewlett Packard Not Convinced of the Value of Thunderbolt

[-hh]

Your argument would have more validity if HP had just announced a new series of $1000+ single and dual socket workstations without adding TBolt.

Actually, for HP to apply the same principle further upscale merely enforces what I'm saying.

Since they announced very low end systems - systems that will probably cost less than any TBolt peripheral - it doesn't have much to support it.

Correct! The performance parameters for a "low end" machine simply don't justify the additional expense of a high end interface. And we will see if Apple follows this same principle when they next update the MacBooks...will they have a TB port on them or not?

When the Intel chipset supports TBolt natively, then one could make valid criticisms if HP fails to simply put a port on the bulkhead.

Sure, except I'm not criticizing HP.

In any case, that's already the situation we see with PCs getting an eSATA port, which is similarly a "high performance" oriented feature. Of course, the reason why it has appeared is because the eSATA is effectively dirt cheap because there's a free SATA connection on the motherboard, and adding the cable to an external port helps that product compete more favorably on a geeky "Features List" comparison checklist.

And, by the way, where were you when Apple completely failed at "supplier push" with FW800?

Ummmm....was too busy in Apple HQ deleting all of the hate mail that you were sending Steve Jobs every day...?

Actually, the "supplier push" example of FW800 is a good example of why HP has the luxury to choose to sit back and wait. PC refresh cycles are frequent enough that a vendor isn't going to effectively incur any meaningful loss of product sales for failing to jump on the latest 'unobtanium' product right away - - particularly on their product lines' low end tier.


-hh

 

[AidenShaw]

Actually, for HP to apply the same principle further upscale merely enforces what I'm saying.

I'd phrase this as "Actually, if HP were to apply the same principle...".

HP has not announced any new designs of higher end systems without TBolt.

Correct! The performance parameters for a "low end" machine simply don't justify the additional expense of a high end interface. And we will see if Apple follows this same principle when they next update the MacBooks...will they have a TB port on them or not?

And this is how Apple killed FW800. You can't have a popular interface if it's only on the most expensive systems. (Key here is that the "high end interface" requires a fairly large additional chip - once TBolt is in Intel's chipset that changes the equation.)

Actually, the "supplier push" example of FW800 is a good example of why HP has the luxury to choose to sit back and wait. PC refresh cycles are frequent enough that a vendor isn't going to effectively incur any meaningful loss of product sales for failing to jump on the latest 'unobtanium' product right away - - particularly on their product lines' low end tier.

Agree completely - many people here are making a mountain out of a molehill. HP didn't add an extra TBolt controller to some very low end systems - they added a USB 3.0 controller.

Before too long, the Intel chipsets will support both USB 3.0 and TBolt, and HP can have USB 3.0 and TBolt on low end machines with very little expense.

 

[SilianRail]

I'd phrase this as "Actually, if HP were to apply the same principle...".

HP has not announced any new designs of higher end systems without TBolt.




And this is how Apple killed FW800. You can't have a popular interface if it's only on the most expensive systems. (Key here is that the "high end interface" requires a fairly large additional chip - once TBolt is in Intel's chipset that changes the equation.)




Agree completely - many people here are making a mountain out of a molehill. HP didn't add an extra TBolt controller to some very low end systems - they added a USB 3.0 controller.

Before too long, the Intel chipsets will support both USB 3.0 and TBolt, and HP can have USB 3.0 and TBolt on low end machines with very little expense.

If Intel can add TB to their chipset without much trouble then they must be really gouging on the licensing fees if it's a $299 premium for devices that connect to it.

 

[toke lahti]

No, but I'm realistic about the amount of work it takes to write good drivers, especially for something as functional as a high speed communication stack. No driver required = big win.

Yeah right, intel and apple just don't have enough resources to write good drivers...

Sure... but USB2 was fast enough for things like DV streams from camcorders, so an adapter could have been useful to some. No, I think USB2->Firewire was just too much trouble.

Usb2 was never time-sensitive enough for reliable capturing of streams.
This should been corrected in usb3.

Sonnet has announced Thunderbolt to GigE and Thunderbolt to FW800 adapters.

And if you know that sonnet's esata & usb3 express cards cost 10x than others, you know how price efficient these will be.
In high-end video production this of course doesn't matter, but they will newer be mainstream and in near future you'll have same dongles with usb3 with half the speed, but 1/10 of price.

If you want FC, Thunderbolt gives you the option of FC from an iMac, rather than from a MacPro. That's cheaper, right?

When FC infra costs way more than client computers, what does that matter?

 

[firestarter]

Yeah right, intel and apple just don't have enough resources to write good drivers...

Why on earth would Intel or Apple want to write USB3->FW drivers?

Apple looks like it's killing FW... Any USB3->FW drivers would have to be written and maintained by a third party.

And if you know that sonnet's esata & usb3 express cards cost 10x than others, you know how price efficient these will be.
In high-end video production this of course doesn't matter, but they will newer be mainstream and in near future you'll have same dongles with usb3 with half the speed, but 1/10 of price.

You said that there were no interfaces announced, and you were wrong. Sonnet are just one example... there will be others available. There's good money to be made by making 'docking stations' for laptops. Plug in Thunderbolt, and get a selection of USB, FW, eSATA and a MDP pass through.

When FC infra costs way more than client computers, what does that matter?

Businesses already have FC in place. Next machine upgrade they can go for iMacs on the desktop rather than MacPro. That's a big win.

 

[AidenShaw]

If Intel can add TB to their chipset without much trouble then they must be really gouging on the licensing fees if it's a $299 premium for devices that connect to it.

Or the companies that are making the first devices are really gouging the early adopters, as is typical.

(After all, any TBolt customer just bought a brand new Apple, so companies know that he and his money can be easily parted.)

 

[mjteix]

"And don't forget that no TBolt devices are shipping, and almost none of the pre-announced TBolt devices has disclosed their suggested retail prices. The only one that I know of that has shown a price has the TBolt model at $299 more than the the standard."

Or the companies that are making the first devices are really gouging the early adopters, as is typical.

(After all, any TBolt customer just bought a brand new Apple, so companies know that he and his money can be easily parted.)

What device is that?

In contrast, Blackmagic will be selling its Thunderbolt UltraStudio 3D at $995, exact same price as its PCIe equivalent the DeckLink HD Extreme 3D, while the USB3 UltraStudio Pro at $895 is missing some features (compared to the 3D models). So not all manufacturers will be "gouging the early adopters". As a matter of fact, Apple has not increased the price of their TBolt-equiped MBPs and iMacs because of Thunderbolt.

Let the products be released and priced and then we may be able to discuss their value.

 

[diamond.g]

What device is that?

In contrast, Blackmagic will be selling its Thunderbolt UltraStudio 3D at $995, exact same price as its PCIe equivalent the DeckLink HD Extreme 3D, while the USB3 UltraStudio Pro at $895 is missing some features (compared to the 3D models). So not all manufacturers will be "gouging the early adopters". As a matter of fact, Apple has not increased the price of their TBolt-equiped MBPs and iMacs because of Thunderbolt.

Let the products be released and priced and then we may be able to discuss their value.

Neat, it looks like the UltraStudio 3D is the Decklink HD Extreme 3D, just in a TB package. The UltraStudio Pro doesn't have nearly the same set of features (I think it is mainly due to the missing dual SDI inputs). Nice find!

 

[AidenShaw]

What device is that?

Matrox MXO2 - http://www.matrox.com/video/en/press/releases/Matrox_Thunderbolt/

In contrast, Blackmagic will be selling its Thunderbolt UltraStudio 3D at $995, exact same price as its PCIe equivalent the DeckLink HD Extreme 3D

That's an interesting data point - since the device is already an x4 PCIe card, just add a TBolt controller and a case.

(click to enlarge)​

Let the products be released and priced and then we may be able to discuss their value.

Yes, I've said several times how frustrating it is that prices and other information is lacking. The LaCie 1TB TBolt disk will be the most interesting, since one model will have a TBolt controller and the other has eSATA, 1394 and USB.

 

[toke lahti]

Why on earth would Intel or Apple want to write USB3->FW drivers?
Apple looks like it's killing FW... Any USB3->FW drivers would have to be written and maintained by a third party.

Intel or Apple would write drivers to please their customers or their customers.

Last time Apple tried to kill fw, they had to back down. Now they could offer dongle instead.

You were suggesting, that writing the drivers would matter, I'm arguing that it's so small drop in the ocean that decision is made because other things.

You said that there were no interfaces announced, and you were wrong. Sonnet are just one example... there will be others available. There's good money to be made by making 'docking stations' for laptops. Plug in Thunderbolt, and get a selection of USB, FW, eSATA and a MDP pass through.

Ok, I wasn't aware about Sonnet's boxes.
Anyway I can bet that they are exellent example about efficient pricing.
OWC's expresscard eSata is $20.
NewerTech's eSata->usb3 is $30.
Sonnet's expresscard usb3 is $50.
Lycom's expresscard GE is $20.

Let's see if TB will give you more bang for buck ($/Gbps).

 

[mBox]

Because Thunderbolt will go the way of firewire unless it becomes popular and is used in a majority of computers...

Hmmm not viable enough. Last I checked Apple didnt hurt itself with the FW400 to 800 debacle. Isnt it a little too early in the game for FUD?
P.s. experienced user here from all the Apple changes to PCI, nothing new here folks just move along

 

[AidenShaw]

Hmmm not viable enough. Last I checked Apple didnt hurt itself with the FW400 to 800 debacle. Isnt it a little too early in the game for FUD?

Apple, Inc. hasn't suffered, but Apple Computer, Inc. lost a bit of lustre with its hardcore professional base.

While there's a lot of uncertainty about the price, it's not uncertain that daisy-chaining is a pain in the butt compared to hub-based topologies. It's not uncertain that TBolt solves a problem that is already solved for most with USB 3.0 and eSATA. (That problem being reading/write external disk drives at the same speed as internal drives.)

 

[mBox]

Apple, Inc. hasn't suffered, but Apple Computer, Inc. lost a bit of lustre with its hardcore professional base.

For the last few years, the IT dept at my Corp has added more Macs in their Windows based world. My dept refreshes almost every year. Ten years ago we would have a 3 year cycle and IT had no intention of buying one. So not sure if we qualify as pro but we def didn't shy from Apples supposed failures

 

[AidenShaw]

For the last few years, the IT dept at my Corp has added more Macs in their Windows based world. My dept refreshes almost every year. Ten years ago we would have a 3 year cycle and IT had no intention of buying one. So not sure if we qualify as pro but we def didn't shy from Apples supposed failures

For what applications are the desktops used?

 

[fat jez]

For the last few years, the IT dept at my Corp has added more Macs in their Windows based world.

We're similar, although we've always been predominantly Linux rather than Windows. I'm the first in my office to have a Macbook Pro (mine was the oldest Dell Windows laptop), but a sizeable portion of the rest of the company has them. Mine is number 65 out of a company of 250.

We use them the same we as we would a Windows machine, with the advantage I can export Unix displays back to my MBP. I also have the advantage of running MS Office, something I wouldn't (easily) have on a Linux machine.

Basically, they play nicely with the open source based servers we have and don't need expensive Domain Controllers, etc.

 

[mBox]

For what applications are the desktops used?

My dept deals with Avid, FCP, AE and Maya (basically Digital Production). For IT, some deal with it for web others wont tell

Forgot to add that the upper foreheads (management) has been sneaking in their personal iPads for meetings. Now Im hearing that the IT dept has had numerous requests for bringing them into the fold.
Last year Dec we bought one and worded the purchase that it was to support our new RED camera Sometimes you have to get creative with these purchase req's