ExtremeTech says Thunderbolt is Dead in the Water!

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by dfine1966, May 20, 2011.

  1. dfine1966 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    #1
    For all of us that just got a new iMac with Thunderbolt, some sights are already saying that Thunderbolt has no chance to make it because it is too expensive to make, which would make manufacturers not want to produce the product because of the costs.

    Here is the article:

    http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2385615,00.asp
     
  2. spcdust macrumors 6502a

    spcdust

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Location:
    London, UK
    #2
    Just read the article....nice to read an unbiased, non agenda peice of "journalism":rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
     
  3. bigjnyc macrumors 601

    bigjnyc

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    #3
    Doesn't all new technology start out being expensive? Look at SSD drives for example, I'm sure in a few years they will be as cheap as hard drives and found in every computer.
     
  4. stellardream macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Location:
    Baltimore MD
    #4
    "We've been told..." Yeah, well, wonderful, where did that $90 come from?

    The entire piece is written like if Apple kicked his puppy and that makes him mad. Meh... Only time will tell who's right, not some dude without a real job :p
     
  5. cruzerg macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2011
    #5
    Yeah and the ipad was suppose to be dead out of water too. No one knows for sure. Give it time and we shall see.
     
  6. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #6
    Thunderbolt is designed and made by Intel, the biggest x86 CPU manufacturer in the world. They pretty much have the power to decide what lives and what dies. While it may not achieve the popularness of USB, it doesn't mean that it will die.

    Like others have mentioned, nobody can predict the future.
     
  7. Badger^2 macrumors 68000

    Badger^2

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Location:
    Sacramento
    #7
  8. davidcmc macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #8
    Tell that to some religion leader called Steve Jobs.

    USB 2.0 was not so expensive when it was released.

    I believe that Thunderbolt will sell well, but the problem is on the Apple side: Mini Displayport.

    That thing has never got popular. Every damn LCD/LED and Plasma TV, computer monitors and other devices come with HDMI, but how many come with a Mini Displayport?

    I like Sony approach with Thunderbolt. They've already told they'll adopt it in their devices, but using the USB port, which is way more popular and has more chance to become popular.
     
  9. Jazwire macrumors 6502a

    Jazwire

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
  10. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #10
    (Mini) DisplayPort is superior compared to HDMI or any other video interface out there. +2560x1600? No problem. Daisy-chaining? Sure. Audio? Of course. If you look at current professional displays, pretty much all of them have DisplayPort. HDMI is aimed at consumers whereas DP is suitable for everything. It's also free while HDMI includes licensing fees and stuff.

    It can't be too much to pay 10 bucks for an mDP adapter. Thunderbolt is based on DP 1.1a so mDP connector makes sense.

    That Sony thing is just a rumor until something concreate has actually been released. Thunderbolt isn't "compatible" with USB 3.0 out of the box. It needs an adapter with its own controller chip. That makes me think that it won't be compatible with USB 3.0. It could use a similar connector but that would actually make it worse than mDP (adapter needed for everything).
     
  11. stellardream macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Location:
    Baltimore MD
    #11
    Uh, what? Link with the announcement please, not this "take a close look at this wonderful 3d rendered image that shows us nothing... really."
     
  12. QuantumLo0p macrumors 6502a

    QuantumLo0p

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    #12
    Funny article

    I read the article; a fairly funny read and the writer is obviously a shill. I did not bother digging deeper into their advertising revenue but it would be easy to see who is paying them to be so brazenly skewed. Thunderbolt is obviously a superior technology to USB3 in specs and actual performance. However, it sounds like its cost is similar situation to firewire; it does cost more to implement than USB. Everyone knows USB2 has inferior sustained transfer speed and power compared to firewire but firewire lost the public relations battle.

    IMO Hewlett Packard minimalized Thunderbolt because it would increase the machine cost slightly but I think also because the typical HP owner is not a "high end" user; most HP's are just not high end machines. Apple will roll it out and it will be good. Even if widespread adoption does not happen, Apple will still be in a great position image wise as well as still continuing to inch ahead of Microsoft.
     
  13. davidcmc macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #13
    Professionals, really?
    Basing a major market in professionals choice is wrong, you know that.

    Doesn't matter what professionals prefer, but what the market demands.
    HDMI is present in every TV and monitor out there, but Mini Displayport is not.

    I'm not even talking about USB...

    Mini Displayport doesn't seem to go anywhere, if not to continue on Macs and "professionals" choices.
     
  14. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #14
    Apple has always used their own connectors. Mini-DVI and Micro-DVI were similar to cases mDP. This time, mDP has actually some real use and it's not a limited one like mDVI which was single-link. Turning it into an HDMI port takes no effort at all.

    I would say it would be more ridiculous if Macs had HDMI as then you might not be able to run the 27" ACD at its native resolution (HDMI 1.4 supports its resolution but from what I have seen, most monitors and GPUs seem to have older HDMI).

    If you are complaining about 27" ACD and its uselessness, then I agree. It's much easier to convert mDP to HDMI but doing it vice versa requires a 200$ adapter. Newer GPUs seem to have adopted mDP more widely though (take a look at AMD 6000-series for instance). However, nobody is forcing you to buy the 27" ACD. Personally, I would never buy one due to its limitations. mDP is Macs is not a limitation at all. It actually opens more doors than any other interface, unless paying 10 bucks for an adapter is too much to ask.
     
  15. Transporteur macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #15
    Just take a look at what graphics cards vendors implement in their cards. There you have your answer.
    MiniDP is on almost EVERY card nowadays (in a higher quantity than HDMI and replacing every other port on the cards, including DVI or course and the standard DP).
    It took a while for PC graphics cards vendors to catch on, but the trend clearly shows that miniDP will sooner or later be the only port on all graphics cards.

    It's a simple question if target market. HDMI is targeted at the entertainment section (TVs), whereas (Mini) DP is targeted at computer displays.
    Sure, sooner or later one standard will dominate both markets, but as of today, there isn't really an indication as to which standard will take over.
    However, the capabilities of DP clearly speak for it.
     
  16. davidcmc macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #16
    LOL.
    This forum is full of jokes.
     
  17. Transporteur macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    Yes, apparently it is.
     
  18. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #18
    Or maybe you are just the ignorant one who does not know what he is talking about. Lets take a look at NewEgg's AMD 6000-series GPUs. They offer a total of 125 different GPUs and of which:

    30 have one DisplayPort
    2 have two DisplayPorts
    5 have four DisplayPorts
    1 has one Mini DisplayPort
    57 have two Mini DisplayPorts
    3 have four Mini DisplayPorts

    That means 97 of 125 GPUs have some form of DisplayPort. That is 78%.
     
  19. RoelJuun macrumors 6502

    RoelJuun

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Location:
    Netherlands
    #19
    Apple is thinking forward, don't forget that the MDP is very small compared to HDMI (apart from the bandwith difference/advantage), they want to fit it in every hand held device (at least that's what I'm thinking). Combine a very small port with support for every protocol and you've got something that is amazing.
     
  20. davidcmc, May 20, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: May 20, 2011

    davidcmc macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #20
  21. Transporteur macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #21
    Did I? I never even wrote "Apple"! I was talking about the trend of the graphics cards vendor's implementation of DP, which went from 0 two years ago, to somewhat higher than 50% (considering that Nvidia still focusses on DVI (well, lets see for how much longer), whereas HDMI is around for much longer now, yet there isn't a single graphics card that has more than one HDMI port. If you don't get that, I feel really sorry for you.

    Edit: And me calling a fanboy? Good one!
     
  22. nyukfui macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2011
    Location:
    Singapore
    #22
    A reason why Intel is pushing its light-peak other than USB3 is because of AMD.
    AMD already has its new platform out with USB3 but Intel is still struggling with its bug. If you know the history how Intel pushed Rambus other than DDR during its P4 times, then you will know Intel isn't always doing the right things on what the markets wanted.

    Hewlett Packard minimalized Thunderbolt because it doesn't want to minimize AMD. We need competition in the market not monopoly of Intel. But sadly, you don't see it happen in Apple as long as you don't see any AMD CPU on their Mac system.
     
  23. CHSeifert, May 20, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 24, 2011

    CHSeifert macrumors 6502

    CHSeifert

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark - Scandinavia
    #23
    Sorry, but that's rubbish !!

    I had to exchange my Gainward GTX 480 card and get a very expensive - but great - Sapphire Radeon 6970 card to get native minidisplay port.
    Only the expensive models come with native (mini) Display port.

    I would say less than 1/4 of all graphics card have native display or minidisplay port - so your statement is incorrect by quite a big margin !
     
  24. Hellhammer, May 20, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 24, 2011

    Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #24
    Take a look at what I posted above. 78% of AMD 6000-series GPUs feature DisplayPort. If you look at older GPUs, then the number is smaller but like Transporteur said, nearly every current GPU (forget ATI 4000 and stuff), especially from AMD, features DP.

    This is the cheapest AMD 6970 in NewEgg and it has two mDP ports.
     
  25. CHSeifert, May 20, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 24, 2011

    CHSeifert macrumors 6502

    CHSeifert

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark - Scandinavia
    #25
    Hellhammer - on this subject you're incorrect. AMD is known to support mini) displayport on many of their cards because of their relationship with Apple. Look at the Nvidia cards sold. Only the top models have the displayport. Some OEM' don't support it at all.

    And only topmodels from Gainward gas it. Sapphire supports it massively though but in Denmark maybe 1/5 or 1/4 cards sold has the (mini) Display port native.

    The cheaper cards sell 3-4 times better than the expensive top cards.
     

Share This Page