USB is a joke of a standard, while FW was great.
I really don't know how you can say something so ridiculous ...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Hewlett Packard Not Convinced of the Value of Thunderbolt
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
USB is a joke of a standard, while FW was great.
I really don't know how you can say something so ridiculous ...
There is a lot of replies to this thread ranging from missing the point to utterly retarded. I got bored reading them after a couple of pages so apologies if I am repeating anyone else's thoughts.
Thunderbolt if taken full advantage of will change mobile computing quite drastically. The next MacBook Air for example could have nothing but a TB port on it (It will probably have one USB and headphone jack just like the original for convenience, don't panic) and an external dock for everything else.
The dock could provide any or all of USB ports, firewire ports, DVI, VGA, ethernet, eSATA and most crucially PCI-E.
If no-one goes beyond external storage with TB, it will go the way of Firewire or SCSI (it seems like a combo of the two in some ways) but the second someone gets external PCI-E working, TB gets seriously useful. Your iMac, Mac Mini or MacBook/Air/Pro can now have access to a Radeon 5870 at full speed. If it works for the internal displays then these Macs can last considerably longer as gaming rigs or just generally. If we get really lucky, they will even run PC GPUs and autoswitch between them like the later MBPs.
Make no mistake, this is not VHS against Betamax or USB2 against Firewire all over again. Thunderbolt is genuinely a potential game changer.
As for HPs take on it, perhaps we should look at their track record:
"Personal computer? No, we don't see any potential for that."
Thunderbolt if taken full advantage of will change mobile computing quite drastically. The next MacBook Air for example could have nothing but a TB port on it (It will probably have one USB and headphone jack just like the original for convenience, don't panic) and an external dock for everything else.
The dock could provide any or all of USB ports, firewire ports, DVI, VGA, ethernet, eSATA and most crucially PCI-E.
If no-one goes beyond external storage with TB, it will go the way of Firewire or SCSI (it seems like a combo of the two in some ways) but the second someone gets external PCI-E working, TB gets seriously useful. Your iMac, Mac Mini or MacBook/Air/Pro can now have access to a Radeon 5870 at full speed. If it works for the internal displays then these Macs can last considerably longer as gaming rigs or just generally. If we get really lucky, they will even run PC GPUs and autoswitch between them like the later MBPs.
Make no mistake, this is not VHS against Betamax or USB2 against Firewire all over again. Thunderbolt is genuinely a potential game changer.
As for HPs take on it, perhaps we should look at their track record:
"Personal computer? No, we don't see any potential for that."
Which was stolen from Xerox
No, it was not. Apple licensed the GUI for $100 million in Apple stock.
If that would be true, then they would not sell as much hardware as they do.
Their hardware is very robust. They have also water cooled workstations.
Don't bother, half the people posting comments about HP in this thread have no clue what HP is or does.
Yawn. I'm about to buy a PC, for a grand, that has the power of a $2000 MacBook Pro. If it doesn't have thunderbolt and I need it one day, I'll buy a new one in 2 years with thunderbolt, and still be better off than I would have been if I bought a mac.
A lot of your fanbois forget that, because Apple caters to expensive machines that don't get replaces often, things like thunderbolt are important. When you can get a $400 computer and replace it every year or two, suddenly being an early adapter isn't quite as important. And if it helps keep the price down, HP would be insane TO include it.
A lot of your fanbois forget that, because Apple caters to expensive machines that don't get replaces often, things like thunderbolt are important. When you can get a $400 computer and replace it every year or two, suddenly being an early adapter isn't quite as important. And if it helps keep the price down, HP would be insane TO include it.
When this potential really turns to something real, things get interesting.
Now what does TB really give you?
Something that Apple took away 2009?
(=express card slot)
At least you wouldn't be this happy if Apple would have put eSata to its computers in 2004 when eSata was standardized.
So what's wrong with TB?
Nothing much, but it would be nice if
1) there really would be products for it
- oh well, yes they announced few nice toys at NAB, which will materialize in a future near you very soon now (well, decklink has had similiar products for usb3 very long time now...)
2) those adapters that enables you to connect everything-to-TB would really exist or even be announced.
3) where are the long cables and amazing speeds? It's not even sure if there ever will be profitable optical version. TB is today so much less than it was promised before and it's already too slow for the latest dp specs.
4)you wouldn't have to pay hundreds for cables and adapters if you would only need one usb3 port etc.
What's wrong with Macs?
It's nice that they have now TB, but
1) so far there's no use for it
2) TB broke dp input in iMacs
3) TB does not remove need for eSata, usb3 & blu-ray
(if mbp will be most sold computer on this planet in 2015 with only usb2 & dvd-drive, why develop any new tech anymore, when it seems that not enough people needs anything new anymore?)
4) How you people can cheer on Apple for not giving you faster port than fw800 for 7 years when this port (eSata) has been cheaply available and when Apple brings new fast port, there's zero devices available for it?
At the same time there were/are very few fw devices that are much more expensive than similiar products with other connection methods.
Now there's hunderds of fast & affordable usb3 devices on market, but Apple don't want you to use.
TB also broke DP output in Macs because the discrete graphics chips support DisplayPort 1.2, but TB does not.
Thunderbolt supports 2560x1600@60fps, how is that not enough? The high end iMac even has 2 Thunderbolt ports if you want multiple 30" monitors.
Ive heard folks mention that several times, and I dont understand it / havent learned the reasons why. How does it cripple Display Port?
Your ridiculous lol. HP is the number one PC vendor in the WORLD. To say they are not relevent is RIDICULOUS.
Sure they're relevant. As relevant as the #1 manufacturer of plastic, single-mold lawn-chairs.
There's a market for everything. HP is proof.
The discrete graphics chips in MBPs and iMacs support at least 4 (more often 6) displays with DisplayPort 1.2
DisplayPort 1.1a cannot support a 30" 3D monitor.
My IT department has been testing Thunder Bolt for network transfers of our huge video files. So far it doesn't play well with CISCO. I think it will be a while before anyone else adopts it as standard. And with Apples small market share 3rd party devices will be scarce.
I think Apple was premature on adding it
I think Apple was premature on adding it
The only thing I have read is that you can't use a 2011 iMac as a display for any displayport equipped Mac pre-2011. In other words, you can only use a 2011 iMac as a display for a Thunderbolt equipped Mac.
Bandwidth. DP 1.2 has more than Thunderbolt. TB is 10 Gbps per channel (downstream and upstream), DP 1.2 is 21 Gbps one way. TB thus cripples DP, not to mention robs you of some bandwidth if your display shares the port with other high bandwidth peripherals.
What does Thunderbolt have to do with network transfers ? It's not a SAN topology.
Just saying, thunder is only sound, not light. Why did Apple use that name?
Thunderbolt = lightning = electricity.
Electric pulses transmit along copper
Lightpeak will use fiber optics to transmit pulses of light across fiber.
Simple.
You're right. A 9" screen was too small in the SE30 and it's still too small for work at your desk. It's a perfect companion, though. We're going to be getting the new 27" iMacs and I'm pretty sure they'll serve our needs for quite a while into the Post PC Era.
Given HP's disappointing fiscal results and professed (by Apotheker himself) issues going forward, I think decision making by HP is not going to be future thinking. I'm not saying that TB is going to change the world and may in fact face the same fate that other failed, forward looking, technologies have faced, but at some point if companies like HP do not push new technologies that aren't "guaranteed to succeed" they will stop being successful altogether.
Apple at least is brave enough to take these types of chances and their marketing prowess can, and does with many products, drive success. For anyone that mentions blue-ray and why Apple didn't adopt this tech - I believe that between the licensing issues surrounding blue-ray and more importantly, the push to move from any type of removable media to flash storage made going this direction something akin to keeping floppy drives included in machines once they adopted cd burners. I hardly ever hear of blue-ray marketing anymore. Distribution of movies so rapidly changed from disc delivered to streaming, I don't think that anyone could have predicted the change. Apple either guessed right or got lucky or forced their way or some combination of all of the above.
I remember colleagues that laughed at me when I got an early Mac that was one of the first without a floppy drive - they asked how I was going to get programs loaded on it - how would I save my documents? They were buying their pc's, some even with the older 5.25" floppy drives still.
Others have made very valid analogies like the move from horse to car, train to plane, film to digital. Change happens whether you want it to or not and making products that address a need we (as general consumers) don't yet know we have is one of the smartest business practices any company can employ - if they want to be a leader. If just being a commodity seller of old-tech is their MO, then I suppose choosing new tech will never be part of their business plan.
Apple at least is brave enough to take these types of chances and their marketing prowess can, and does with many products, drive success. For anyone that mentions blue-ray and why Apple didn't adopt this tech - I believe that between the licensing issues surrounding blue-ray and more importantly, the push to move from any type of removable media to flash storage made going this direction something akin to keeping floppy drives included in machines once they adopted cd burners. I hardly ever hear of blue-ray marketing anymore. Distribution of movies so rapidly changed from disc delivered to streaming, I don't think that anyone could have predicted the change. Apple either guessed right or got lucky or forced their way or some combination of all of the above.
I remember colleagues that laughed at me when I got an early Mac that was one of the first without a floppy drive - they asked how I was going to get programs loaded on it - how would I save my documents? They were buying their pc's, some even with the older 5.25" floppy drives still.
Others have made very valid analogies like the move from horse to car, train to plane, film to digital. Change happens whether you want it to or not and making products that address a need we (as general consumers) don't yet know we have is one of the smartest business practices any company can employ - if they want to be a leader. If just being a commodity seller of old-tech is their MO, then I suppose choosing new tech will never be part of their business plan.
Great explanation...I didnt know DP had such a high bandwidth. It now makes me curious why many tout TB's 10Gbps as groundbreaking (granted, its two way as you mentioned).
Side note, I just read that DP 1.2 is actually 17.28 Gbps rather than the 21.
"DisplayPort version 1.2 was approved on December 22, 2009. Most significant improvement of the new version is the doubling of the effective bandwidth to 17.28 Gbit/s"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort#Version_1.2
Much thanks for the info friend. Stay well