Apple to Introduce Light Peak (High Speed Connection Technology) Soon?

[X38]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148a Safari/6533.18.5)

Light Peak is probably going to be introduced as something that makes more since to call "Copper Peak", because, well it will have nothing to do with light, as it won't be using fiber optics. The fiber optic technology just isn't there yet, and it's also quite expensive.

That isn't the worst thing though, as Intel has Light Peak using copper going at speeds of 10Gbs, or about 1.2 GB per second! Pretty fast! Still, it's no where near what they wanted to introduce a true Light Peak at: 50Gbs, 5 times faster, and later ramping up to 100GBs.

Still, at 10Gbs I'd be happy to upgrade You can fill up a Tera-byte HD in about 13 mins with that kind of power.

Supposedly USB3.0 should max out at 5 Gbs, or 640 MB/s, but we aren't seeing anything near that yet.

So, this "Copper Peak" we are bout to witness is theoretically twice as fast as USB3.0 but.. once it makes the jump to true fiber optics it would blow USB3.0 out of the water, of course by then I'm sure we'd see USB4.0.

Everything that I've read says that copper peak will only be marginally faster than USB 3. Copper peak also appears to be an 'appetizer' for the light peak to be coming around the corner... Going to it won't make much sense in the short or long term...

Not clear yet. What is clear though is that USB 3.0 still has the hugely overloaded packet switching overhead of USB so that the real data speeds seen by the consumer are much lower than the quoted speeds as compared to other technologies.

 

[DisMyMac]

USB 3.0 does not yet have significant adoption.

A NewEgg search for "USB 3" yields 92 manufacturers selling 598 items. So there.

 

[FroColin]

Psh, the next version of the macbook pro? No one cares about that, seriously, that technology is already old. Lets talk about the one after that! I hear that it will have double the transfer speed!

 

[aloshka]

100 posts in this thread, and no one has brought up the patent that was the headline just a few days ago.

If Apple was to name the port something other than "Light Peak", why would it look like what is pictured in the first post? A USB-like connecter is something Apple would have considered no later than 2005. It's 2011. Apple's next connector will be magnetic based.

Awesome! I'm tired of USB, something new sounds good.

 

[Bregalad]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148a Safari/6533.18.5)



You are mistaken.
Intel has said from the beginning that Light Peak will supply power.
USB 3.0 is not backward compatible, is not fine, and while maybe fast enough for yesterday, it is definitely not fast enough for tomorrow.

More importantly, USB 3 has not yet taken hold and now is the time to switch the market to a new standard with real potential for the future, not a mediocre half effort like USB 3 that will be obsolete by the time it is adopted.
Hopefully Apple will do Light Peak right and rev all their products (from iPod shuffles to Mac Pro's) to Light Peak in one step instead of dribbling it out for years like FireWire, FW800, & the still missing FW3200. If they do, USB 3 will be instantly irrelevant and consumers will win.

While I agree that USB 3.0 doesn't seem to have made a broad entry to the market, there are good reasons why. Most peripherals don't need USB 2.0 speeds so there's no reason to spend a few cents more to go super speed. However, the external drive market has completely embraced USB 3.0 and has done so with minimal price increases over USB 2.0. In fact I recently purchased a 4 bay external hard drive enclosure with USB 3.0 for LESS than the USB 2.0 model.

Apple can't go half way and offer both LightPeak and USB because the connectors are too similar. That's something Apple takes pride in.

I'm hoping we see LightPeak on the next revision of all Macs. Like you said, if LightPeak wins consumers win.

 

[Papajohn56]

People would buy a camera or video recorder for wireless transfers. Apple is a consumer company now, not for pro-end media.

yes, clearly the mac pro is a low-end consumer product. what?

 

[MattInOz]

that people speculate about what Apple is going to do with LightPeak in light of the fact that they have nothing to do with the development of this technology. Intel is developing LightPeak. I would imagine that primary stakeholders here will be Intel (bus architecture, chip sets) and periphery device manufacturers. Apple does not contribute anything to this. Lately they were mostly concentrating on computer cases designs (could anyone name any piece of tech developed by Apple after FireWire?)

Umm... How about light peak?
It's already been acknowledged that Apple and Sony are both partners in LP.
Just like they were partners in IEEE 1394. Fun fact there is a d revision which is single mode fibre version of FireWire/iLink. Intels big contribution to this is the CMOS based laser tech, which they were keen to make money out of after they got sidelined from usb3 spec.

Still three very powerful players to have on the light peak team. Add lots of other component manufactures who'll be involved already and it's looking like a very positive thing.

I do find it odd suggestion apple will use another name. Light peak ports should be called just that. If anything the rumor name is only applying to the MagSafe upgrade. Not that it needs a name unless they plan license it to 3rd parties.

 

[e5volcano]

Do you guys think SSD will be standard now for MBP's (especially 13 inch?)
If not, what is a better combo to have a faster laptop

2.4 ghz CPU
SSD

or
2.6 ghz CPU
regular hard drive 5200 rpm

If I were to price the current MPB 13 inch, they would be about the same price^
But of course you only get 128GB worth of storage if you go SSD

 

[McGiord]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

What if your USB cable breaks?

If my USB cable breaks, I can still use my Mini-Display port cable, my Firewire cable, and my ethernet cable because they are not broken. Therefore, I am still able to use my external monitor, external hard drive(s), and internet connection.

So... if your computer's power cable breaks is the end of the game...

 

[fpnc]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148a Safari/6533.18.5)...Technology is no where close to the point at which all wired data connections can be replaced with wireless. In fact, there is no reason to assume that will ever be the case. Would it really make sense to have a set top box sitting on top of a TV in every room of every house wirelessly transmitting 2160p 120fps 3D TV and 5 channel surround sound to the TV 24 hours a day when a two foot cable would do the job just fine? There isn't that much bandwidth in the world...

It may be worth recognizing that in nature practically every piece of information that is transmitted between two energy sources or living organisms that are separated by either air or space is done so without the aid of wires. Thus, I hardly think that your statement about there not being "that much bandwidth in the world" is supported by the examples given by our universe.

Beside that, your "two foot cable" scenario ignores the more important fact that most "smart" devices in the future are going to have to interconnect with multiple devices (i.e. everything connected) which is a little difficult to do with just wires.

In any case, as I've said before, wires are not going away within the next decade, but their days are probably numbered.

 

[devilcm3]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)



So... if your computer's power cable breaks is the end of the game...

which is why apple wants you to buy another one , and charge you lots of $$$ for it

thinking of magpeak charger , or .. peaksafe charger...err.

 

[jjahshik32]

I wouldnt be surprised if Apple outfitted the new Macbook Pros with USB 3.0 AND light peak (replacing fw800).

 

[-=XX=-Nephilim]

Great news as long as we still have FireWire 800 and at least one USB port!

 

[McGiord]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

I don't know if the picture is real or not, but it appears that light peak is in the shape of a standard USB port. So eventually the USB ports on current models could be replaced with lightpeak ports that are backwards compatible with USB 3.0 & 2.0. I'm thinking it would kind of be like how the 1/8" headphone jack on current MBPs also supports optical output: you can use regular headphones or a mini-TOSlink cable in the same port. In a similar way, you could plug in lightpeak devices or USB devices into the same port. That way the consumer wouldn't ever have to think about it but would experience better performance.

What do you guys think?

For the time being it's the best solution so that the ridiculous amount of USB powered devices just continue to work. No way to just kick USB 2.0 out anytime soon.

In a perfect world, it'd be like what mjay2k stated a few posts above me. Make it backwards compatible while the bulk of devices are not run by LP. I feel like if they wanted to make the connector even smaller, however, that this wouldn't really work out. Making it backwards compatible in terms of the connector with USB would essentially lock in that design and it would never get thinner. That said, the USB port is really really thin. For smaller devices they could make it like USB and do like a Micro LP or something. All of our thoughts are just speculation anyway, let's wait and see what happens!

Apple has some patent for collapsable connectors so in that case they coul work something out, but it doesn't seem to be reliable iMHO.

 

[Ulf1103]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; nl-nl) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148a Safari/6533.18.5)

Just bring it on…

 

[Tonepoet]

If you guys are talking combo-connections, the leaked image looks a lot like a USB port. Apple would be wise not to try and directly compete with USB 3.0 so much as incorporate USB directly into the Lightpeak Connector's design.

Assuming it's legally possible, this would have a small number of advantages. It'd allow for a ready tested stable copper power connection, s and it'd encourage manufacturers to include lightpeak ports over USB 3.0 only ports on their computers for maximum connectivity in minimal space and draw in existing USB customer base.

If enough combo connectors are adopted into the marketplace when the consumer asks what the difference between a Lightpeak and a USB camera is, salesmen could answer "The lightpeak enabled one goes faster," thereby creating Lightpeak market saturation, which could be used to eliminate USB compatibility upon a subsequent Lightpeak release which is B/C with the LP 1.0 standard

It'd be a rather smooth, virtually transparent transition where everybody wins!

You are mistaken.
Intel has said from the beginning that Light Peak will supply power.
USB 3.0 is not backward compatible, is not fine, and while maybe fast enough for yesterday, it is definitely not fast enough for tomorrow.

Huh? I'm confused. Wasn't it supposed to be? Did something change since then? I don't see USB 3.0 having much merit if people can't use their already existent devices with it...

 

[McGiord]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

FireWire started with 400Mbps then moved to 800, and As I recall, when I was paying for cable TV that by law the boxes have to have a port, I used it a couple of times to record like in the VCR old days. It was great. What ever emerges from this would be more convenient, have a single type of connector that is backwards compatible is a nice move.
The wireless vs wired debate will always exist, and I do prefer everything wireless.
The issue is powering the devices, and then the same type of debate battery (mobile) vs power adapter (wired).
Who is right, only...time will tell.
If the new Macs will have it, nice, only supported with Lion anyway, or whatever next OS is out...backwards compatibility is something that some of us will want to have. Let's see how things turn out.
External BluRay drive connected by this tech will be killer!

 

[ozred]

Perhaps Apple will be the first to adopt a major “new” technology this time?

True, but let's not forget antennagate.

Then there's many of the other rather huge bugs that most Apple first gen products come with, at no extra charge.

If they incorporate light peak into the redesigned MBP, I'll pass & continue to enjoy my 2010 model. Second generation is the relatively bug free version of Apple products, so I will save myself the headaches.

It's so much easier to read about it, when it's happening to others.

 

[depulse]

iFire

 

[Thunderbird]

Apple likes to enclose itself within its own ecosystem (think minidisplayport) and not be compatible with anything else. That's why this LightPeak rumor makes at least some sense. It's quite possible Apple could switch out all ports on all devices (on each of their own next upgrade cycles) for LightPeak and have one connector to connect all its own devices. This would only take two years tops.

 

[flynz4]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

FireWire started with 400Mbps then moved to 800

It actually started at 100, 200, then 400.

/Jim

 

[koruki]

if they do I'll swap my less than a year old MBP instantly

 

[iEdd]

This could potentially be amazing, especially if it uses a USB 3.0 copper pinout with light TX/RX.

- Self-powered high-bandwidth devices, such as monitors just get connected with an LP-LP cable with fibre optic and no copper.

- iPads, iPhones, etc have the 5V rails with fibre optic for data.

- Flash drives and other short plug-in devices like card readers just use the copper connections as there would be no point converting to light for 10mm distance and back again.

- Anything USB 'just works'

- Initially, adaptors for FireWire, Ethernet, DisplayPort, mini DisplayPort, DVI, VGA, RGB, eSATA, etc, then eventually, every new device ever made uses the Light Peak standard. Think about it. No adaptors ever again, and no worrying about having the right cable - just keep a couple of spare Light Peak cables in the cupboard and you're good for almost anything.


Of course, this is a pipe dream. Apple will get us all excited, join a board of directors, then call Light Peak a bag of hurt and fail to adopt it 7+ years after release.

/cynical

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

LP is still in development. You can expect first LP-products in 2015. Intel plans to upgrade LP until 2020 to 100 GBit/s.

However, LP will be useless for all people who can not afford high speed, expensive external SSDs. Other uses of LP require a broad support, which is unlikely in the next few years. I think Apple will first integrate USB 3.0, then 2016 or 2017 LP.

 

[baryon]

Honestly, why even bother with wired technology at this point? Apple has already made their bed in the consumer arena, and the future of consumer electronics is wireless.

You can't power everything wirelessly. An external hard drive, a USB stick, an iPhone, a graphics tablet, all these have to be powered somehow. Adding batteries to everything is extremely annoying and not environmentally friendly. Then you have all sorts of power saving mechanisms that introduce new bugs and lags. Everything that can be wireless will be wireless, but many things will stay wired as long as there is no "wireless electricity".

I just wish light peak could deliver more than 5V and 500mA. That power is nothing, requiring many external devices to be self-powered and have an additional external power adapter. Why not boost it to 12V and as much mA as the computer can push through?