Why not? USB 3.0 will be much more ubiquitous, and having more options is always a good thing. TB +USB 3.0 = Win
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Still Considering USB 3.0 in Addition to Thunderbolt?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For anyone who thinks Apple should ditch TB and go only with USB 3 since it's currently used by more devices, let me play devil's advocate for a second. Under that logic, Apple should ditch the Mac market & do only Windows since that's the more common OS. Just saying.
Agreed. Everyone in the US seems to want all the new infrastructure, but no one wants to pay for it. That's one thing I don't like about American culture. I understand the economy being horrible, but how much cost cutting can we make? Plus, isn't China building up its infrastructure and becoming a bigger & better economy fairly quickly?
Agreed. Everyone in the US seems to want all the new infrastructure, but no one wants to pay for it. That's one thing I don't like about American culture. I understand the economy being horrible, but how much cost cutting can we make? Plus, isn't China building up its infrastructure and becoming a bigger & better economy fairly quickly?
Last edited:
How can a computer with one TB/mDP + two USB 2 ports (existing 13 and 15" MBPs) serve more 'legacy' USB 2 devices than a computer with one TB/mDP port + two USB 3 ports?
A USB 3 port does not provide more 'legacy' support than a USB 2 port.
I think thats one thing we can all agree on here! TB & USB3 will be the best all round option for whatever your needs!
3.0 will be better than 2.0, and maybe Thunderbolt, as I have yet to see anything world shaking with regard to peripherials for TB
Yes 3.0 is better than 2.0, but it half the speed of thunderbolt. Any case to shut up the thunderbolt haters - just put a 3.0 instead of 2.0.
Thunderbolt will have devices one day - give it it time - why not TB -> USB 3.0 adapter - likely can run 2 USB 3.0 ports on single TB port.
They should have USB 3 support. It's no different, to me, than Apple having USB 2 and Firewire available on their computers. Thunderbolt would be for extreme speed and USB 3 for really fast speed. I always expected them to have it with Ivy Bridge. I've got a LaCie USB 3 ExpressCard right now and it's really fast having USB 3 compared to Firewire 800. TB isn't an option for a long time to come. So bring on USB 3.
I don't think anyone said you get 'more' legacy with usb3.
having a thunderbolt and two usb 3 ports instead of two usb2 ports means the user can use any thunderbolt device they buy, all their legacy usb devices and all/any new usb3 devices they buy.
I think it is perfectly logical that apple will replace all or any usb2 ports with usb3 at one stage most likely with ivy bridge, it's just common sense.
The other post said He wanted USB 3, which supported up to 8 devices. And you responded with this. Did you read closely
Attachments
It looks like we may have to wait a while for Thunderbolt peripherals to come down in price, while USB 3.0 peripherals are already pretty cheap. Plus, its a given that USB 2.0 would be upgraded with USB 3.0. Sounds like the Apple is making the right move for their computers
Here is one thing to think about - yes this would be 40.8G total - but what would be actually when combine.
The TB's should be find since they have dual controller - that why the new Air only has single one. But what about USB 3.0, my guess is that it can't handle 20G - in fact I believe it 5G is only theoretical
If you're referring to USB 3.0, Intel *is* shipping USB 3.0 ports on most of its Sandy Bridge motherboards. They're using the tiny NEC controller, like most USB 3.0 vendors.
What Intel didn't do was fit native USB 3.0 onto the Sandy Bridge support chipsets themselves. This was likely due to engineering scheduling concerns with adding an emerging new technology to a critical piece of the Sandy Bridge rollout - not due to "resisting advances".
For Ivy Bridge, USB 3.0 is a proven technology, and the schedule planned for it.
I think thats one thing we can all agree on here! TB & USB3 will be the best all round option for whatever your needs!
+1 TBolt and USB 3.0 are complementary, and should co-exist. Each has its set of advantages.
Many of us were responding to the "USB 3.0 haters", who were saying that Apple should stick with TBolt + USB 2.0.
One should be able to discuss the pros and cons of technology without being labeled "fan" or "hater".
Last edited:
The other post said He wanted USB 3, which supported up to 8 devices. And you responded with this. Did you read closely
Very interesting - especially that it states while handling maximum throughput.
And not only that! Road speeds are still the same too! And heck, 10 years ago I could eat, like, a whole pizza for lunch but now I still eat the same! How's that for a lack of progress??
But hey, at least our sense of entitlement keeps growing! ;P
Why stop at 500 MBps? We ALL should be able to transfer AT LEAST that, and of course simultaneously! And for free, too!
The other post said He wanted USB 3, which supported up to 8 devices. And you responded with this. Did you read closely
Actually, USB 3.0 supports 127 devices per port, just like USB 2.0.
Which means it can support 8, which TBolt cannot.
It is just frustrating that some are so naive about TB and trying to compare it to Firewire and Apple only product - when in fact it much more. All I am saying if Apple replaces the USB 2.0 ports with USB 3.0 - but still of course supporting TB and Firewire than its non issue anymore.
Keep in mind, including USB 3.0 is not defeated of TB. But Apple needs to encourage device makers - I don't believe this will be an issue once Intel starts supporting TB on its motherboards next year.
Which is tricky language - the "maximum throughput" is the throughput of the chain, not the maxium throughput of each TBolt device.
The picture as shown would seriously oversubscribe the bandwidth of TBolt, so that all the devices would not be able to simultaneously run at the maximum bandwidth of the device.
(Oversubscription per se is not a bad thing, unless you require every device to run at its maximum.)
Last edited:
I think Thunderbolt is more of a crapshoot technology than USB 3.0... not because USB 3.0 is better. Just because USB has established a firm hand in the market. Look at Firewire, Firewire was by most definitions superior technology to USB, but USB became the standard and Firewire has slowly but surely been phased out in most markets.
I've considered switching my Apogee Duet, to the new Apogee Duet 2... not because I need to upgrade, but because I'm worried about how much longer Firewire will be supported in the MacBook Pro lineup.
Thunderbolt seems like superior interface technology, but it's the market that has the final say.
I've considered switching my Apogee Duet, to the new Apogee Duet 2... not because I need to upgrade, but because I'm worried about how much longer Firewire will be supported in the MacBook Pro lineup.
Thunderbolt seems like superior interface technology, but it's the market that has the final say.
Well, they will run somewhat faster, but it won't be anything near 10x faster like USB3's bandwidth potential suggests: you're going to quickly become hardware-limited (bottlenecked) by the physical hard drive, as the typical consumer external hard drive's I/O performance is still pretty close to FW800's ~100MB/sec.
In simple/affordable terms, if one really needs performance that's materially faster than USB2, FW800 has been ~3x faster for the past 5-10 years, and even today is still roughly ~75% of a good 3.5" hard drive's hardware-limited I/O speeds. Sure, one can go higher, but you're now basically talking about the expense of 10K-15K rpm hard drives, SSDs, and/or RAID 0 level configurations in addition to making sure that you're using the appropriate communication protocol (eSATA, USB3 or TB).
And TB is exactly how old? Call it 6 months old (Feb 2011)? By comparison, USB3's standard was announced nearly 3 years ago (17 Nov 2008).
If we want to make a fair comparison, we should either wait another 2 years, or we can go back to see how few USB3 products existed in June 2009.
FYI Wiki states: "The first USB 3.0 consumer products were announced and shipped by Buffalo Technology in November 2009, while the first certified USB 3.0 consumer products were announced 5 January 2010..". So USB3's delay to the marketplace was 12+ months.
Now apply that history to reconcile what our USB3-comparative expectations should be when discussing the release of TB products: precisely when would be 12 months after the Feb 2011 release of TB?
Yes, I know that Apple should be perfect and far superior to everyone else. But unfortunately, TB is also Intel tech (who Apple doesn't own) and their promised release date for the TB Developer's Kit of June 2011 ... was missed. And (as best as I've been able to tell), it still hasn't shipped yet.
Ironically, I've been using a Windows PC with no USB for the past 2+ years, for anything other than keyboard/mouse, due to Enterprise IT's security policy. If a PC has Firewire, it isn't being disabled. Suffice to say that it has been a nuisance and revealing: no USB mass storage driver allowed to be installed also means no USB power to recharge an iPod, Blackberry, etc.
-hh
This whole conversation is stupid.
Of course Apple needs to go with USB3.
They HAVE to have a USB port on their machines. There's no way they can have TB only, because so many peripherals require USB.
Given that, it would be crazy to go with USB2.
The only counter-argument is that you could use a TB->USB3 adapter, but that just seems silly given the number of USB devices out today. (printers, thumbdrives, external hard drives, scanners, cameras, mp3 players, etc)
Of course Apple needs to go with USB3.
They HAVE to have a USB port on their machines. There's no way they can have TB only, because so many peripherals require USB.
Given that, it would be crazy to go with USB2.
The only counter-argument is that you could use a TB->USB3 adapter, but that just seems silly given the number of USB devices out today. (printers, thumbdrives, external hard drives, scanners, cameras, mp3 players, etc)
You think living in the US of A is the same thing as living in China? Over investment and trade debt issues?
That has to be the most asinine thing I've ever read on this board.
LOL! Do you know what "mainstream" means? I'm not talking about million dollar SSD's and arrays. And all the other crap you link to *still* isn't available. What does that tell you?
And nice touch... the verizon TB phone.
Why have blu ray?
If your really need one, just hook one up via USB2.
Optical media needs to die.
----------
Why does Apple have to have USB on their machines?
Wireless mouse/keyboard/printers/scanners.
You're using both advertised and real throughput, without mentioning when you use which.
If you mention these, you should also mention that USB 2.0 never gets further then 40 MB/s. USB 3.0 never reaches more then 190 MB/s (netto), thanks to it's enormous overhead. USB also puts a lot of stress on the cpu (if you don't use dedicated pci controllers), which TB or Firewire don't, because they have there own controller(s). So it's kinda great, for it's backward compatibility, but thanks to it's high latencies and it's rather limited throughput, it isn't useful for more then harddrive based storage (and the already existing peripherals for usb).
Actually, I think it's no use comparing TB and USB 3.0 just, based on raw throughput numbers. TB is used as a way to outsource internal peripherals that use a PCI-bus. TB has way more potential then usb, but for a price. Hell, TB even supports USB 3.0 controllers (look at the current TB ACD, an ethernet port, three usb ports, a firewire port, a display port connection, using just one cable! Don't say that isn't just awesome!).
The only reason why Firewire didn't become the "USB" standard was:
1) Apple wanted a 50 cent licensing fee
2) Intel didn't want to pay the fee and removed firewire from it reference BX chipset.
If Apple had gone royalty free and Intel had adopted it as standard we would have had firewire as standard instead of USB.
Thunderbold is license free. The only problem it that only intel manufactures it. USB is a really crappy standard. I wish that thunderbolt would take over.