Why kind of wizardry is this?!
Why kind of wizardry is this?!
came here to post thisIf anyone sees me lining up paperclips like that, pls dial 911.
Yeah, I believe I did mention that, and/or the fact that there aren’t really any USB4 devices out. This Anker hub at least has more ports. With all the new stuff going USB-C type for connectivity, it’s a pain to find a hub with more than the host connection port being C-type or costing an arm and six legs.It's not even USB4 though. It's Thunderbolt 3 with support for USB3 Type-C hosts.
Well, right, there aren't any USB4 devices available yet, AFAIK. But we do have multiple hosts (Apple M1 Macs and Intel Tiger Lake systems), and I think it's an important distinction because there are a few actual Thunderbolt4/USB4 docks available as well (OWC Thunderbolt Hub & Thunderbolt Dock and Kensington SD5700T).Yeah, I believe I did mention that, and/or the fact that there aren’t really any USB4 devices out. This Anker hub at least has more ports. With all the new stuff going USB-C type for connectivity, it’s a pain to find a hub with more than the host connection port being C-type or costing an arm and six legs.
In the end, it will come down to the users needs and cash limits.
Question? Are there a lot of consumer goods that even use the top end 3.2gen USB protocols? I have a number of SSDs that I have picked up over the years and I don’t even think they are even capable of using the full bandwidth of 3.2. (Samsung T7 is my latest). I guess it will always be a race, were the connection type speeds out pace the consumer good adaptation rate (sometimes by generations).Well, right, there aren't any USB4 devices available yet, AFAIK. But we do have multiple hosts (Apple M1 Macs and Intel Tiger Lake systems), and I think it's an important distinction because there are a few actual Thunderbolt4/USB4 docks available as well (OWC Thunderbolt Hub & Thunderbolt Dock and Kensington SD5700T).
Question? Are there a lot of consumer goods that even use the top end 3.2gen USB protocols? I have a number of SSDs that I have picked up over the years and I don’t even think they are even capable of using the full bandwidth of 3.2. (Samsung T7 is my latest). I guess it will always be a race, were the connection type speeds out pace the consumer good adaptation rate (sometimes by generations).
And that would be the entirety of the thunderbolt connection, right there.Why one USB-C port only? That is not enough, four would be great.
Big Sur has an ethernet driver for the USB-C dock built in; there's no need for Caldigit's driver at all.Hard pass on Caldigit products. The haven't updated the Ethernet drivers for the "original" USB-C dock for Big Sur. I bought it a little over a year ago. It looks like they stop supporting "old" products once their shiny new one is released.
Your average cluebie doesn't know what DisplayPort is (ever seen a moron try to force a HDMI cable into a DP?) so some bright boy thinks everything should be HDMI, because after all, the cluebie can hook up their TV set.Yeah I don’t understand the obsession with hdmi on hubs/docks like this.
A cheap portable USB-c hub? Ok it’s a lowest common denominator thing. But these are not cheap.
USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 (a.k.a. SuperSpeed USB 20Gbps) is sort of an odd counterexample. ASMedia makes a USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 to PCIe NVMe bridge chip that has found its way into a bunch of external SSDs and enclosures such as the SanDisk Extreme PRO Portable SSD V2. However, PCs that support USB 3.2 dual-lane (Gen 2x2) operation are exceedingly rare, as each port currently requires a discrete host controller and USB Type-C port controller.Question? Are there a lot of consumer goods that even use the top end 3.2gen USB protocols? I have a number of SSDs that I have picked up over the years and I don’t even think they are even capable of using the full bandwidth of 3.2. (Samsung T7 is my latest). I guess it will always be a race, were the connection type speeds out pace the consumer good adaptation rate (sometimes by generations).
I don’t know what a cluebie is but as I said I understand the “lowest common denominator” approach for cheap USB-C hubs where it’s just as likely to be used on the go with projectors or tvs or whatver. $20+ type hubs.Your average cluebie
Aww. I though they looked cool lined up
Yes agreed. I'd rather use A->C adaptors for any older A-type cables and over time that need will die out.If I am dropping this much money, I plan on having it a long time. I think I'd rather see more USB-c than a. Not all, but maybe 3 C's and an A?
By the time USB4 devices are out, there will be newer docks.Yeah, I believe I did mention that, and/or the fact that there aren’t really any USB4 devices out. This Anker hub at least has more ports. With all the new stuff going USB-C type for connectivity, it’s a pain to find a hub with more than the host connection port being C-type or costing an arm and six legs.
In the end, it will come down to the users needs and cash limits.
It's funny cause my older CalDigit Pro dock has DP but not HDMI. "Ok fine, I'll just use a DP to HDMI adapter..." Nope, somehow that dock specifically doesn't work with those unless they're non-passive. IDK why it's so hard for a dock to just be cool and have both HDMI and DP.and no DP ?
I thought HDMI 2.1 was comparable to DP 1.4. The problem is this doesn't support HDMI 2.1, only 2.0.I don’t know what a cluebie is but as I said I understand the “lowest common denominator” approach for cheap USB-C hubs where it’s just as likely to be used on the go with projectors or tvs or whatver. $20+ type hubs.
this is not cheap, not portable and not aimed at joe sixpack computer users.
On a recent FCPXSummit conference this last November there was a panel with some people one of which was OWC’s head. He was explaining that Thunderbolt 4 is just a marketing thing and a “tightening” on the PC side of things because on that side of the computer industry they didn’t fully support all the thunderbolt tidbits consistently between manufacturers, some controllers had two-ways channels, others sometimes depending on what was connected, some had proper Daisy chaining, others didn’t, so on and so forth. He said that Apple pretty much support Thunderbolt 3 as it was intended as soon as it came out on the MacBook Pros of the day and from a user point of view, a MacBook TB3 has zero difference with a windows PC TB4.AFAIK, thunderbolt 3 is thunderbolt 4 and thunderbolt 4 is thunderbolt 3. no difference. It's just intel upgraded it's naming. Just like USB 3.0 is USB 3.1 and USB 3.1 is USB 3.2.
If that’s the case then this dock seems less and less appealing? On the Max Tech gt channel, they tried the OWC’s multi thunderbolt hub and they connect tons of stuff including XDR display.So it looks like this TB4 dock will not work with the XDR display since it is HDMI only and no TB connection outside of the Mac? The TB3 dock does work with XDR.
The new M1 Macs are TB3 & USB4. They are not TB4 ports as it might be a licensing issue with Intel and/or it could be something with the M1 chips and would be coming in a later chip, say M2 or something else.
Amazing, how do you do this? Is it Blender? C4D?