LaCie Hub Now Shipping, Connects eSATA Drives via Thunderbolt

[AidenShaw]

I doubt that there will ever be a native T-Bolt drive.

No. You can connect two eSATA drives. Something that can't be done with a laptop with a sole eSATA or a nonstandard single USB/eSATA combo port.

You can connect up to 10 drives via PM, or more via RAID-eSATA controllers (RAID devices that use eSATA to furnish the LUNs to the host).

we need real thunderbolt drives

Never. Going. To. Happen.

Unless you want to pay $450 for a 40 GB spinning HD.

All T-Bolt drives will be SAS or SATA drives with PCIe SAS/SATA controllers. The costs of implementing native T-Bolt support on the drive itself would be horrendous due to both the low sales volume and the hard limit of 6 drives per bus.

This LaCie unit probably has something like a SiI3132 (http://www.siliconimage.com/products/product.aspx?pid=32) controller - a PCIe x1 to dual SATA II ports with PM support. The SiI3132 is a very common PCIe card controller.

Note that since it's PCIe x1, it can't really maintain even SATA 3 Gbps speeds. It's still very useful, though, if you need TB rather than MB/sec.

 

[MacinDoc]

You can connect up to 10 drives via PM, or more via RAID-eSATA controllers (RAID devices that use eSATA to furnish the LUNs to the host).




Never. Going. To. Happen.

Unless you want to pay $450 for a 40 GB spinning HD.

The adoption rate of TB has been extremely disappointing to date, leading to exorbitant prices. One can only hope that things will improve with the coming crop of Intel products with built-in TB support. I suspect, however, that for the next few years, USB3 will be ubiquitous, while TB will end up much like FireWire.

 

[AidenShaw]

Quite apart from SCSI derived SAS drives, WD and Samsung bus powered external drives have no SATA connection on the drives whatsoever. The drive hardware goes directly into a USB interface with no SATA-USB translation. The bottleneck remains the spin/seek speeds of the actual hardware for USB 3.0 drives as that bus is not saturated. The pic below is of a WD Elements drive.

Do you have the WD part number for that drive? I can't find it described anywhere on WD's site.

Since it's an "Elements" drive, I suspect that it's simply a SATA drive with the USB-SATA interface integrated onto the drive's motherboard.

Which would make it really not much different from a drive with the USB-SATA interface on a tiny separate controller.

----------

The adoption rate of TB has been extremely disappointing to date, leading to exorbitant prices. One can only hope that things will improve with the coming crop of Intel products with built-in TB support.

Which products would those be? Ivy Bridge doesn't have integrated T-Bolt.

I suspect, however, that for the next few years, USB3 will be ubiquitous, while TB will end up much like FireWire.

In other words, dead.

That's nasty.

Personally, I think that T-Bolt will survive as a docking station connection for higher end laptops.

It has lots of possibilities there (things that the Apple T-Bolt Display utterly fails to realize).

 

[lssmit02]

External Windows drive?

Does this permit you to have an external Windows drive that is bootable, since the connection is esata (via Thunderbolt)?

 

[AidenShaw]

Does this permit you to have an external Windows drive that is bootable, since the connection is esata (via Thunderbolt)?

Depends on the BIOS/UEFI.... But not likely....

 

[ksgant]

This is wonderful! I go to Best Buy and see all those inexpensive 1 and 2 terabyte eSATA external HD's all over the place!

Wait...those are USB 3 HD's. Ah, okay. Instead of spending all your time and energy on THIS LaCie...why not put your resources into making a USB 3 to Thunderbolt hub?

Is ANYONE making a USB 3 to Thunderbolt connector? Is that impossible to do?

 

[Old Smuggler]

Its highly doubtfull
alot of electronics are capable of doing much more but are limited in so many ways

 

[Bubba Satori]

too expensive. usb 3.0 needs to die

Wow, just wow.

 

[voodoo1979]

I know it is off the topic but that is a pretty cool looking background on the lcd and the laptop. Any place that can be found?


update:

its a stock image from shutter stock.

 

[repoman27]

Not true. Not every drive has SATA onboard. Quite apart from SCSI derived SAS drives, WD and Samsung bus powered external drives have no SATA connection on the drives whatsoever. The drive hardware goes directly into a USB interface with no SATA-USB translation. The bottleneck remains the spin/seek speeds of the actual hardware for USB 3.0 drives as that bus is not saturated. The pic below is of a WD Elements drive.

Ha! I was going to post a link to a picture of that drive. It is actually just a normal SATA drive with a SATA to USB bridge chip right on the drive's controller board though.

Never. Going. To. Happen.

Unless you want to pay $450 for a 40 GB spinning HD.

All T-Bolt drives will be SAS or SATA drives with PCIe SAS/SATA controllers. The costs of implementing native T-Bolt support on the drive itself would be horrendous due to both the low sales volume and the hard limit of 6 drives per bus.

Already. Being. Developed.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5321/oczs-portable-thunderbolt-ssd-lightfoot

Yes Thunderbolt is just a meta-protocol which transports PCIe and DP packets, but SATA and SAS are starting to just get in the way for flash based devices. Native PCIe SSD controllers are where things are headed.

This LaCie unit probably has something like a SiI3132 (http://www.siliconimage.com/products/product.aspx?pid=32) controller - a PCIe x1 to dual SATA II ports with PM support. The SiI3132 is a very common PCIe card controller.

Note that since it's PCIe x1, it can't really maintain even SATA 3 Gbps speeds. It's still very useful, though, if you need TB rather than MB/sec.

It's much more likely that they used the same board as the Thunderbolt Little Big Disk, which uses a Marvell 88SE9182. It's a 2 port SATA 6Gb/s controller with connections for 2 lanes of PCIe 2.0. There's a bunch of pics and stuff in this thread: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1233086/

edit: The reason it's only 3Gb/s, (aside from the fact that Mac OS X only sees the Marvell chip as an Unknown AHCI controller and is only able to negotiate a 3Gb/s link rate despite the chip's capabilities) is that eSATA 6Gb/s wasn't finalized until the SATA-IO Revision 3.1 Specification which came out in July of 2011. There's not a lot of controllers certified for eSATA 6Gb/s yet, and I don't believe the Marvell 88SE9182 is among them.

In other words, dead.

Considering the relative ubiquity of IEEE 1394 (more than 2 billion ports shipped), it's interesting that so many people call it "dead".

 

[rboy505]

What's especially notable about this is that it means that there will be a huge backlog of returned LaCie hubs due to their famous cheap dead power supplies even before the next wave of Thunderbolt peripherals ship, so in reality there will still be no working T-Bolt hubs in the field in the foreseeable future.

 

[MacinDoc]

Which products would those be? Ivy Bridge doesn't have integrated T-Bolt.

I'm no expert on Intel's upcoming product plans, but according to one of the company's reps, support for both USB3 and TB should be coming in 2012.

 

[repoman27]

I'm no expert on Intel's upcoming product plans, but according to one of the company's reps, support for both USB3 and TB should be coming in 2012.

AidenShaw is right on this one. The final word from Intel was "featured, not integrated."

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4406/correction-ivy-bridge-and-thunderbolt-featured-not-integrated

 

[smetvid]

I snipped a lot of the above. I know there is a market and population, but it is rather small AND narrow. The latter group doesn't even have Thunderbolt yet, and splashing cash for a new laptop, then $200 for the hub, then $50 for the cable, just to use older technology is probably not attractive to the majority of the already narrow group.

I just think this is a strange decision for a clunky interface (eSATA). Part of the point of Thunderbolt is to reduce connections, but this does the opposite. There would be a much bigger market for Thunderbolt to USB 3, for example. I know part of the problem with that is on OS X's side (for now), but you would get nearly the same throughput and appeal to a much wider audience.

I still don't understand the SATA-II decision, though. Why not just go SATA-III? SSD prices are dropping like a rock.

But you can say this about just about every use of thunderbolt. Even a single 7200 RPM 3.5" drive will never saturate thunderbolt. Really the only people that have a need for thunderbolt in general are those with external raids or an external SSD which is a pretty big waste of money as well.

While some of us would like to see thunderbolt to USB3 there is only currently one external raid that uses USB3. So adapting thunderbolt to USB3 for single 5400 rpm or 7200 rpm drives is kind of silly. With many of these drives there is very little advantage over FW800. Most external raid systems currently on the market have ESATA as the fastest connection and for those who have these drives or would like to use an external raid for speed or for protection this really is currently the best option.

Also keep in mind if you are somebody that has $2,000.00 worth of external raid systems $200.00 is not a lot to spend to extend the life and the usefulness. Many companies that use Macs may have ESATA to use with their Mac Pros but would like to also transfer files to their laptops or iMacs. This finally offers a solution.

So the breakdown is that if you are somebody who wants to have multiple external raid systems you can either buy a thunderbolt raid or a ESATA raid. With the thunderbolt raid you have three options. Only one option is really good and all three are way over priced for what they are. Basically two of them don't transfer any faster then what ESATA can do. If you go the ESATA option you have an endless choice of external raids or even build your own. USB3 has one option. A 2 drive raid-0 is capable at best around 260MB/S. ESATA can reach about 240MB/S or pretty darn close to the max anyway. As you fill up the raid it will get slower. The only way you will ever get faster speeds out of USB3 or thunderbolt is with a 4 drive raid-0 box or really fast SSD.

The beauty of this device is that you can buy 4 ESATA raid systems and share them with one thunderbolt hub. Not really bad if you are a company or individual that needs fast cost effective storage right now and not theoretically two years from now. Right now we can buy ESATA raids without sticker shock.

 

[MacinDoc]

AidenShaw is right on this one. The final word from Intel was "featured, not integrated."

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4406/correction-ivy-bridge-and-thunderbolt-featured-not-integrated

And my initial statement referred to "TB support", not "TB integration". However, I agree that TB integration would be a much bigger step toward getting affordable TB peripherals.

Edit: just realized I did say "built-in support", so I accept Aiden's original criticism.

 

[bawbac]

Another overpriced Apple peripheral. People are actually surprised?

Btw, Seagate sells a Thunderbolt to SATA adapter for $100

 

[coolspot18]

Personally, I think that T-Bolt will survive as a docking station connection for higher end laptops.

Possibly, but not with it's current connector... A dock connector needs to be larger/stronger so that it's easy to connect with the station.


T-Bolt is head, Apple mis-read (or ignored) the market on this one. Should have included USB 3.0 instead.


Why doesn't someone build a T-Bolt hub... with USB 3.0, eSata, and other connectors. That device would sell like hot cakes. Basically no one wants T-bolt, just more connectors for other interfaces

 

[Apple Corps]

The adoption rate of TB has been extremely disappointing to date, leading to exorbitant prices. One can only hope that things will improve with the coming crop of Intel products with built-in TB support. I suspect, however, that for the next few years, USB3 will be ubiquitous, while TB will end up much like FireWire.

Ditto your opinion. My current MBP 17" had TB - wow, the latest and greatest. Now it over one year old, no TB use at all, and about to be surpassed with the Ivy Bridge release. TB was premature, a bunch of hype, poorly thought as to market release, and currently a joke.

 

[MacinDoc]

Another overpriced Apple peripheral. People are actually surprised?

Btw, Seagate sells a Thunderbolt to SATA adapter for $100

It's not an overpriced Apple peripheral, it's an overpriced LaCie peripheral.

It certainly wouldn't hurt TB's cause if Apple produced a bunch of TB peripherals to drive down the cost associated with the low adoption rate. It'll never happen, of course, but one can always dream of ways for Apple to spend a small part of its massive nest egg...

 

[coolspot18]

Considering the relative ubiquity of IEEE 1394 (more than 2 billion ports shipped), it's interesting that so many people call it "dead".

Billions of VGA, Serial, and Parallel ports have been shipped ... and those interfaces are pretty much dead these days.

Basically USB 2.0 / USB 3.0 have removed the need for FireWire; very few non-Mac PCs still come with Firewire ports these days.

 

[repoman27]

Possibly, but not with it's current connector... A dock connector needs to be larger/stronger so that it's easy to connect with the station.


T-Bolt is head, Apple mis-read (or ignored) the market on this one. Should have included USB 3.0 instead.


Why doesn't someone build a T-Bolt hub... with USB 3.0, eSata, and other connectors. That device would sell like hot cakes. Basically no one wants T-bolt, just more connectors for other interfaces

In order for devices to become smaller, connectors have to become smaller. Is mini-USB harder to connect than full size USB? Would you prefer your phone with a full size USB connector on it?

Apple didn't raise prices when they introduced Thunderbolt across the better part of their whole Mac line. Just ignore the Thunderbolt icon and that port will behave just like the mini DisplayPort that used to be there. If you have the need, it happens to be capable of delivering 10 Gbps of PCIe throughput as well though.

One could build the hub that you describe, but at the moment it would retail in the neighborhood of $450, and is unlikely to sell at all like hot cakes. (Don't forget the extra $49 for a Thunderbolt cable!) The big problem with a Thunderbolt to USB 3.0 device is that you would have to roll your own USB 3.0 driver for Mac OS X unless you just wait 3 more weeks for Apple to provide one gratis, and your only potential customers will be owners of 2011 Macs.

Basically nobody wants just PCIe either, just more connectors for other interfaces... But that's the whole point of PCIe, and by extension the PCIe component of Thunderbolt.

 

[wildgiles]

Not so fast everyone, it really is a $ deal.

If this is as fast as the Sonnet Pro Esata express card this really is worth the money. If I can get faster than 200 mega bytes per sec read/write this is fantastic for a macbook pro/ imac setup for RED cameras and video editing.

 

[philipma1957]

the t-bolt adapter that seagate sells is a far better option for a laptop then this is. read my thread on seagate t-bolt adapter.

 

[repoman27]

Billions of VGA, Serial, and Parallel ports have been shipped ... and those interfaces are pretty much dead these days.

Basically USB 2.0 / USB 3.0 have removed the need for FireWire; very few non-Mac PCs still come with Firewire ports these days.

IEEE 1394 is used in a lot of places, including some for which USB will never be a suitable replacement. Yes, its days are numbered as a PC interface, but it will probably endure as an industrial bus nonetheless.

And, for the record, I'm fairly certain more PC's shipped with FireWire than USB 3.0 last year.

 

[rboy505]

Another overpriced Apple peripheral. People are actually surprised?

LaCie is not Apple.

Btw, Seagate sells a Thunderbolt to SATA adapter for $100

Which similarly ridiculous Seagate Thunderbolt product are you referring to? The Go Flex adapter? Which allows you to connect only a separately purchased Go Flex drive via the not included $50 T-Bolt cable to attain speeds slightly better than FW800 (according to reviews)?

Had a very funny exchange with a salesperson at the Apple Store in Soho, NYC, when I was scanning the shelves for any new arriving Thunderbolt peripherals. I asked how many of those the whole store probably sold and he made a goose egg shape with his fingers, as in "zero".