Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Closer Look Photo of Thunderbolt (Light Peak) Port

camelsnot said:
which makes no sense as Apple resists for quite a while before accepting any new technology most other developers are using for at least a year. USB 3, eSATA and BluRay to name a small view. Oh wait.. they'll find some dongle for you to buy for $69.99 which will convert that useless port to a standard USB 2.0 port. Don't worry.. Apple has you covered as long as you buy more Apple-branded dohickeys from them :(
Click to expand...

http://www.monoprice.com
 
they should have called the new port Flashwire, then it would be trolololing on adobe.

Plus you could be like "whats that port?" "oh thats FLASH!!! AHHHAAAAAA savour of the data transfer!"
 
randfee2 said:
Guys, I don't get it at all!

Why on earth would they integrate that with the Display-Port connector? Doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

Apple has done it before:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Display_Connector

What they are doing is making it so that the display's peripheral connections connect to the Mac using one cable. instead of three headed hydra connector from Cinema displays would have two.


I was certain Intel had planned to introduce lightpeak with a USB-compatible connector?!
Click to expand...

Why so people can be confused when it doesn't fit ?

I'll be way harder to find devices with this connector then.
Click to expand...

like mini-display ports are plentiful. Again .... this is par-for-the-course with Apple. When have they been afraid of a non standard display connector in the last 10 years ?

In my eyes this proofs that Apple (and maybe even intel) is not planning to attack USB3 at all.
Click to expand...

LOL.... they never were.
 
camelsnot said:
which makes no sense as Apple resists for quite a while before accepting any new technology most other developers are using for at least a year. USB 3, eSATA and BluRay to name a small view. Oh wait.. they'll find some dongle for you to buy for $69.99 which will convert that useless port to a standard USB 2.0 port. Don't worry.. Apple has you covered as long as you buy more Apple-branded dohickeys from them :(
Click to expand...

There's a difference between choosing to not implement a standard and waiting for it to be established before implementing it.

USB3 and Blu-Ray are technologies that Apple has (for a number of reasons), chosen not to implement. I doubt you'll see either of them on an Apple product, ever.

For technology that they choose to embrace, Apple has been very proactive about pushing it to market. Sometimes they have hits (USB, Firewire, dropping floppy), sometimes they have misses (ADC, Mini DVI, Mini VGA), but they've always been willing to take chances.

And for people saying "there are no peripherals". Of course there aren't. Computers ALWAYS adopt new tech before peripherals. You can use a computer with LightPeak even if there's nothing to connect to the LightPeak jack. You can't use a LightPeak drive/camera/interface unless there's something to plug it into.
 
mozumder said:
Bandwidth for DisplayPort 1.2 goes up to 21.6Gbps.. that's double LightPeak's 10Gbps, and adds a 720Mbps communications channel.


Is this the same thing? Or possibly a slightly updated version of the spec? (maybe with communications channel in the 5-10Gbps range?)
Click to expand...

Yes, very likely. They could use it for 100 Hz/120 Hz high resolution displays. Would only make sense for HD content @ 25/50 FPS or 30/60 FPS.
 
azdude said:
Actually, this makes some sense.

....

Imagine future monitors, both Cinema Displays and industry-wide, beginning to implement MDP for video and Light Peak, with I/O hubs in the bezel. It's a one-cable video/I/O connection for both laptops & iPads, in a minimally small connector. Sound like Apple much?
Click to expand...

I'm with azdude. You won't need a hub to use TB/LP peripheral devices and your monitor. The monitor is the hub.

Also, consider this. The monitor will have the legacy device ports, USB, FW, etc, but will use TB/LP to connect these to the laptop.

Extending this. The monitor with TB/LP becomes a docking station. All your peripherals stay plugged into monitor when you unplug the laptop and go.

Apple will need to announce some new Cinema displays tomorrow for this to make sense.
 
I still don't understand what good this port this, or what "LightPeak" has anything to do with it. If you want to use a second monitor, then the port will be in use (not just physically, but also bandwidth-wise, with at least several Gbps required for video stream output), so it will add exactly nothing.

I really don't understand Intel's market strategy with LightPeak either. Years ago, it started out as an optical-based interlink with a novel type of connector that would be implemented for high-speed devices. But now, it has nothing to do with fiber-optics whatsoever and it has no specified type of physical connector or cable format. And furthermore, digital video ports like HDMI and Apple's annoying MiniDP already provide greater bandwidth. What is LightPeak supposed to add or do, then?
 
kiwidesign said:
If that's not the case (a new MiniDP specification around the corner), the MiniDP shaped connector may still mean that a firmware update could bring LightPeak support to older Macs (without the lightning fast speed, though).
Click to expand...
I have the same thought that it might be pure software solution. Moreover the Display Port spec says that its bandwidth is up to 17.28 Gbit/s so the solution can actually achieve Light Peak 10 Gbit/s on copper lines.
 
snberk103 said:
I'm with azdude. You won't need a hub to use TB/LP peripheral devices and your monitor. The monitor is the hub.

Also, consider this. The monitor will have the legacy device ports, USB, FW, etc, but will use TB/LP to connect these to the laptop.

Extending this. The monitor with TB/LP becomes a docking station. All your peripherals stay plugged into monitor when you unplug the laptop and go.

Apple will need to announce some new Cinema displays tomorrow for this to make sense.
Click to expand...
Will have only sense if it is software solution and 2010 MBP will support this too.
If in addition iPhone5 will have it (as data and video port) then Apple habitat will be light years ahead others.
iPhone is cool, but if you want to sync in secs then you need mac. :)
 
New rumour

I've heard that the new port will be called the GODZILLA port. Apple dictates that it be pronounced with a poor Japanese accent.

Also, if you look REALLY hard, you can see in the centre what appears to be a pig from Angry Birds. Sources close to Apple confide that the new GODZILLA port will be compatible with Angry Birds. Awesome! I know I've been wanting that for, like, 8 years.
 

Attachments

  • GODZILLA.png
    GODZILLA.png
    268.2 KB · Views: 75
Riemann Zeta said:
I still don't understand what good this port this, or what "LightPeak" has anything to do with it. If you want to use a second monitor, then the port will be in use (not just physically, but also bandwidth-wise, with at least several Gbps required for video stream output), so it will add exactly nothing.

I really don't understand Intel's market strategy with LightPeak either. Years ago, it started out as an optical-based interlink with a novel type of connector that would be implemented for high-speed devices. But now, it has nothing to do with fiber-optics whatsoever and it has no specified type of physical connector or cable format. And furthermore, digital video ports like HDMI and Apple's annoying MiniDP already provide greater bandwidth. What is LightPeak supposed to add or do, then?
Click to expand...

LP and mDP allow for chaining devices, you want two monitors, if the graphic card allow it you connect the first screen to the computer then the second screen to the first screen, switch the multiplication of ports to the screen manufacturer or to a hub manufacturer.

The again this is a 13" MBP who's to say 15" and 17" (or iMac, Mac minis) won't get two or more Thunderbolt port.
 
what about the form factor?

so besides this new port.. any changed to the actual form factor of the computer itself?

it seems like it is not changing based on those spy shots.. track pad is the same, thickness looks the same, etc.
 
baryon said:
Ohhh... Well that's one more reason to put it in a USB port!
Click to expand...
there is no reason why it should be in the USB port.

It's not a USB level connection technology. Would you put a PCI bus connection inside a USB Port?
 
Full of Win said:
Would not rely on them much as a source for new Apple standards in the future. Remember, Apple used their goons / muscle to FORCE them out of the dock connector cable business in July/August of last year.
Click to expand...

The mini DisplayPort connector is hardly proprietary, I don't know why people expect a this new one that's compatible with mini DisplayPort to be any different.

PS: Apple's allowed to enforce the licensing restrictions of their dock connector.
 
MacBoobsPro said:
I mean its two ports but if you use 'one' you lose one also so its a bit pointless. What if you want an extra monitor attached but also a lightpeak Hardrive? You cant.

Also ThunderBolt is very odd. Shouldnt it be Lightingbolt? Thunder is the sound, which as we all know is slower than light i.e. lightningbolt. Its wrong on so many levels and the icon is stupid too.

Apples losing it a bit.
Click to expand...

Agree. I totally was thinking how someone at Apple is letting it slip if this is for real.

The naming sounds wrong and the icon's proportion and entity is weak compared to USB/FW. Also the icon on the spy photo of the Macbook seems unproportional to the other icons. When i comes to graphics and placement, Apple is usually better than this time.

Therefore, i am betting on this as fake. If it turns out to be true, some design quality control process is getting overlooked.
 
Last edited:
Philoman said:
Agree. I totally was thinking how someone at Apple is letting it slip if this is for real.

The naming sounds wrong and the icon's proportion and entity is weak compared to USB/FW. Also the icon on the spy photo of the Macbook seems unproportional to the other icons. When i comes to graphics and placement, Apple is usually better than this time.

Therefore, i am betting on this as fake. If it turns out to be true, some design quality control process is getting overlooked.
Click to expand...

Umadbro?

attachment.php


via Foolsmaylaugh
-
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/11968911/
-
 
AndrewClarke said:
So wrong. I have an external FW800 drive for my MBP. It blows the doors off USB2. If you think USB2 is a sufficient replacement for FW800 (or even FW400 for that matter) then you either don't need even moderately fast external drives, or you just don't know a lot about FireWire.

The only reason I don't use FW800 for all my drives is because it's getting harder and harder to find peripherals that support it.

- Andrew.
Click to expand...

Agreed!
 
COOL! A new port supported by NOTHING and guaranteed to launch with Apple-only peripherals and adapter dongles that cost 2X as much as their USB 3.0 counterparts.

I got SO much value out of the $120 DVI-D dongle I had to buy with my original MacBook in 2008 - it works SO much better than a $4 HDMI or DVI-D cable!
 
Excellent idea combing two barely used ports with a universally known danger symbol.

I do hope it's not true. Plus, worst name ever for a port. "could you pass me the thunderbolt cable so I can plug my random device into the thunderbolt port" ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back