1995 called and wants you to time warp back to state of the art for the time.No VGA, no purchase.
1995 called and wants you to time warp back to state of the art for the time.No VGA, no purchase.
HDMI requires an LSPCON that not everyone wants to spend time engineering into their solution. Also, DisplayPort can be adapted to HDMI, not the other way around.The most ports on any Thunderbolt dock ever, maybe… but still no HDMI. Can someone explain to me why the makers of these things seem to have such an aversion to it? It seems silly that I can pay so much money for one of these things but still have to use a dongle to connect any monitor I own to it. Is it a licensing issue?
USB to parallel port cable and Bob’s Your Uncle.???I guess I'll have to retire my dot matrix printer. ??♂️
Simply get the 10GbE as a separate dongle. I know of only one TB3 dock that currently includes 10GbE out of the box and that’s the OWC Thunderbolt Pro Dock.Would have been an instant buy if the ethernet was 10G but 2.5 just doesn’t cut it in our setup unfortunately. It’s a shame because everything else is great.
I completely understand the difference between connectors and transfer protocols. My point is that the majority of "USB-C" peripherals still only use USB 2 or 3 protocols so there's no performance advantage whatsoever in changing the connector. Moreover there's a key bit of USB 2/3 functionality that simply doesn't seem to be available from USB-C: namely the affordable, multi-port USB 2/3 hub.A USB type-C doesn't have to be USB 4/Thunderbolt, it could also just do USB 2 or 3. What I'm talking about is the connector type, not the transfer protocol.
Work on condensing that for your tombstone. I’ll wait.Find me a type-C equivalent to my $30 7 port (+3 power) USB 3 A hub that doesn't entail paying 10x as much for something that will provide no performance improvement whatsoever when used with the collection of USB 3.0 and USB 2.0 devices that I still need to connect (some bought in the last year). Then I'll think about getting USB-C cables for all my USB A devices.
USB 4/Thunderbolt is great for high end devices, but for a vast swathe of current peripherals (like any mechanical hard drive, and most affordable SSDs - we're still a long way away from the day when even basic SSD is cheap enough for backups and archiving, let alone the sort of high-end NVME that can actually exceed USB 3.0 speeds) the only "benefit" of USB-C over A is the exciting opportunity to buy new cables or adapters for all your perfectly good USB-A devices.
No, while Thunderbolt 1/2 docks can be adapted to work with Thunderbolt 3, a Thunderbolt 3 dock is not going to work with Thunderbolt 1/2 hosts.Would this be compatible with my MBP 2015?
If you have to ask, you'll never know..Sarcasm, parody or the sad truth?
It’s a functional box with a bunch of ports on it, it’s never going to be elegant looking. 99% here only care if it’s reliable, does the job and stays cool with properly cooled insides.I wish for these premiumly priced products they improved the design. Not sure if just me but most thunderbolt socks are gastly looking things.
Sure on the cheaper ones I get crap design for something cheaper to make and functional.
By the way you describe it it appears that the CalDigit dock is incompatible with the
So why bring it up? Its sorta off topic...
- Mac
- macOS
- Mac app
- I/O
...but the reality is that even most new midrange audio interfaces that advertise USB-C are just using the same USB 3.1g1 protocol - if not plain old USB 2 - as you got with plain old USB 3 (3.1g1 is, for most purposes, the same as 3.0 and even the 10Gbps USB 3.1g2 version doesn't need USB-C - plenty of PCs support it over type A). Even with "Thunderbolt 3 compatible" devices you need to read the small print because sometimes it just means "works with USB 3 via a Thunderbolt port". Yes, there are some high-end devices that actually use Thunderbolt (to support lots of channels or maybe better latency) but those go for 'serious callers only' prices.
Plenty of brand new audio equipment, synths etc. still uses USB 2 or 3 - because it is good enough whereas Thunderbolt/USB 4 is more expensive to implement.
Bottom line: 96000k (samples/sec) mono audio at 24 bits = 2.304 Mbps, USB 2 speed = 480Mbps - so even USB 2 has more than enough bandwidth for a multi-channel audio interface, you're not even remotely close to 'maxxing it out' with audio interface (I'm happily running an 8-out, 4-in interface over USB 2). Firewire was a huge step forward when it was Firewire 400 up against 4.8 Mbps USB 1.0 but was already into diminishing returns when it was FW800 vs USB 2, and the CPU overhead may have been an issue when CPUs were a fraction of the power of modern ones...
Thing is, technology may have gotten better, but human hearing still tops out at about 20 kHz (= 40k sample rate).
The Apple Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 Adapter can be used to connect Thunderbolt 1/2 devices to Thunderbolt 3 hosts and it also works in the reverse direction to allow connecting Thunderbolt 3 devices to Thunderbolt 1/2 hosts.No, while Thunderbolt 1/2 docks can be adapted to work with Thunderbolt 3, a Thunderbolt 3 dock is not going to work with Thunderbolt 1/2 hosts.
Reply at https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/caldigit-ts4-dock.2333931/post-30842234It's a claim that CalDigit themselves are making on the product page. Also very curious about that, because as I understand it, Thunderbolt 4 don't have the bandwidth to allow two 6K60 displays over a single Thunderbolt port
View attachment 1956087
The most interesting thing I’m finding in the comments is the, “Where are all the ports?” and for me, someone who is running an M1 Pro, using USB-C for pretty much, everything is saying, “What year is all your gear from?” And that’s the crux of technology and why I like Caldigit. Rather than build for today, they build for tomorrow. I don’t need another dock to support yesterday, because that isn’t the point. I’d like to be sure I’m buy a single type of cable and ensuring all my devices get the best performance. The ONLY devices using USB-A is my keyboard and my cable for my PS4; and even that I could just use Bluetooth for or just switch to my PS5 controller for USB-C.
CalDigit today introduced its new Thunderbolt Station 4 dock with 18 ports, which it claims is the most on any Thunderbolt dock ever.
![]()
The dock features three Thunderbolt 4 ports, with one of them providing up to 98W of pass-through charging to compatible Macs, including the latest 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro. The dock is also equipped with three USB-C ports (3.2 Gen 2), five USB-A ports (3.2 Gen 2), SD and microSD card slots (UHS-II), one DisplayPort 1.4 port, one 2.5 Gigabit Ethernet port, an audio in jack, an audio out jack, and a combo audio in/out jack.
The dock is also compatible with Macs and iPads featuring Thunderbolt 3 or USB-C ports, with some functionality limited depending on the device.
While the 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro brought back many ports, the dock can expand connectivity even further and serve as a hub for connecting external displays, microphones, headphones, speakers, and other equipment.
Priced at $359.95 in the United States, £324.99 in the United Kingdom, and €324.99 in the EU, the dock can be ordered through CalDigit's online store in those regions starting today. CalDigit said the dock will launch in other regions in mid-March.
Article Link: CalDigit's New Thunderbolt 4 Dock for MacBook Pro Features 18 Ports
No Centronics Parallel, or RS-232 Serial, either.No SCSI ports? Forget it.
To be clear, you're saying you have problems with other brands of docks, and no experience with CalDigit, yes? My impression is that CalDigit has a good reputation for actually making them work right.I have no experience with this brand. That said, we have tested quite a few at work with our new 14 and 16inch Macbooks and the results are less than good.
Hope they do so!The world seriously needs to start getting over USB type-A connectors.
It's been like 30 years. USB type-C is better in every way and not exactly brand new.
But will that adaptor work with my LapLink cables? I want to be able to use it to transfer files between computers.USB to parallel port cable and Bob’s Your Uncle.👍🏻🤣
Because Displayport is better and you can easily go from displayport to hdmiThe most ports on any Thunderbolt dock ever, maybe… but still no HDMI. Can someone explain to me why the makers of these things seem to have such an aversion to it? It seems silly that I can pay so much money for one of these things but still have to use a dongle to connect any monitor I own to it. Is it a licensing issue?