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
Forgot about that... Xerox needed better security guards. Still doesn't defeat the fact that Microsoft stole it even if Apple stole it too
Not to mention the fact that there is more reason for developers to try and make the hardware faster when the connection will actually use the extra speed.
Last edited by a moderator:
Who can take it seriously now, when it is supposed to be replaced by what it was supposed to be ?
The optical for thunderbolt will be fully embeded in the cable itself. Which drops off the most of the cost by not needing to make an optical to optical connection. Seeing we haven't seen any cables yet we don't know if the 10 to 100m cables which are the optical ones are coming at the same time as the pure copper shorter lengths.
Which only adds to the chicken and egg problem.
There is no optic transceiver in mini DisplayPort. Nor it is optimal for for DIY connectors. Which it will need to have available if it's gonna make it as ethernet replacement.
Apple Didn't Steal Squat
Apple licensed the Xerox GUI technology and expanded on it. Nothing was "stolen". If you pay for something - which Apple did - by definition you didn't steal it.
From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PARC_(company)
Forgot about that... Xerox needed better security guards. Still doesn't defeat the fact that Microsoft stole it even if Apple stole it too
Apple licensed the Xerox GUI technology and expanded on it. Nothing was "stolen". If you pay for something - which Apple did - by definition you didn't steal it.
From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PARC_(company)
While technically superior, I'm not so sure thunderbolt is going to succeed.
While not the same thing, but back in the day there was the sony betamax vs. vhs. betamax was better in its quality of video.
Thunderbolt is superior to usb3 but consumers don't care about the specifications. USB3 gives them all that they need and if vendors don't include thunderbolt into their computers it will whither and die.
The only thing thunderbolt has going for it, is the fact that this is intel's baby and they're not about to let this whither and die even at the expense of USB (which is another intel baby).
While not the same thing, but back in the day there was the sony betamax vs. vhs. betamax was better in its quality of video.
Thunderbolt is superior to usb3 but consumers don't care about the specifications. USB3 gives them all that they need and if vendors don't include thunderbolt into their computers it will whither and die.
The only thing thunderbolt has going for it, is the fact that this is intel's baby and they're not about to let this whither and die even at the expense of USB (which is another intel baby).
Ever time I use a xerox photocopier I'm convinced even more they just didn't have a clue what they had.
the problem is that there are also optic connectors in the system itself and not only between ports.
as they are now it doesn't matter how two ports are connected because they will be limited inside the computer.
there is no optical module in the current thunderbolt systems so yes thunderbolt as it is now will be useless in the future.
I think that price is going to have a big influence determining Thunderbolt's fate.
USB 3 products have come out at the same price as the USB 2 ones they have replaced. If Thunderbolt products are priced at a high premium (which is what happened with FireWire), it's not going to attract mainstream customers.
Intel needs to be aggressive with it's marketing and keep the licensing costs as low as possible if they want Thunderbolt to succeed.
I beg to differ! Exactly how do you figure it to be a fail?
You get a gazillion of gadgets offering that connector, car manufacturers are offering it in their products, you get 3rd party (e.g. Alpine, Kenwood) car audio with this port and even direct competitors in the music player market (such as Philips or Sony) are offering products (like radios, speaker boxes etc.) with this 30pin port!
This connector is one of the reasons why iOS became such a huge success - available addons with this port influence purchase decisions and with more devices having this port more add-ons will come to market which will trigger more purchases of IOS devices. No other manufacturer has been able to kickstart such a huge 3rd party market with their mobile devices or establish another connector with similar abilities.
I would even go so far as to say it isn't a proprietary connector anymore, but a de-facto standard!
More like the start of the end for HP.
Thunderbolt isn't just another FireWire--it's a single port that handles many protocols faster than USB 3.0. HP is being too cautious with this tech. With an adaptor, FW can handle USB-only devices or old FireWire, etc. Something has to come first, so Apple is out front with the connection on the computers while the hardware is coming soon. By 2012, TB will be rolling and if it is popular and adopted, by 2014 it will be everywhere, probably being the peripheral connection of the decade since it is so versatile... unlike HP.
The only reason that SSD's have the speeds they do is due to the expensive flash (i.e. not the type found in your phone or memory stick) combined with sophisticated controllers. None of which you will find in a mobile iDevice any time soon. Heck, Apple could double the speed at which devices sync right now and still be well within the bandwidth offered by USB2. The point at which TB would make a difference is many years down the road, at which point who knows what interfaces we will have. In any case, unless Apple suddenly want to lose a huge amount of sales, USB syncing on iDevices is not going anywhere.
I'm not saying that TB could not offer other advantages, you went on to mention a few of them in your post, but the uninformed view that it will magically make huge improvements to sync speeds is not one of them.
For a PC you throw away every 2 years I'd agree. Just buy a new PC when TB stuff is released. But for Macs, people tend to keep those for a long time. And Apple know this. That's why the TB ports are there. So I can upgrade now with the knowledge I will have a more future proofed machine.
Gee, Fanboy much???
5% of the world's cell phone's use the 30 pin connector!! This is HUGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That make's it the "de-facto standard"!!!!
I laugh at the other 90% of the world who has to use those crappy, clunky, and junky, USB ports!!!! And I, as an iPhone user get to pay twice as much for an "Apple Approved" cable to charge my elegant iPhone. How cool is that!!!!
Think a little harder...please!
The 30-pin connector can only be used on devices Apple allow it to be used on. If for example Dell slapped a 30-pin connector on the side of their desktops, Apple would be down on them like a ton of Apples!
Its not a de-facto standard, its a proprietary connector exclusive to Apple, hence a fail as a usable port for a multitude of devices. You can only use it to connect to/from iPods/Pads/Phones.
Think of it this way. Take a wireless Xbox controller. It uses a proprietary connection to charge its battery pack. That connector can only be used on Xbox controllers. The same can be applied to the 'Wii Nunchuk'.
Thunderbolt is an additional connector on the Apple mini displayport connector is my understanding.
If mini displayport connectors die then so does Apples implementation of Intel's technology. Sure, if the industry went with Apple's implementation, they'd have a smaller, dual purpose connector, but herding the industry is a huge job. Apple convincing the rest of the industry to follow it would amount to them wagging the dog.
Doesn't mean it can't/won't happen. I just will be surprised if they can actually do it. Memories of the slot connectors on the Mac IIcx/i come to mind. Wasn't Apple pushing that as 'the new computer slot'? I've still got a Cabletron NuBus card around someplace...
I agree here. HP didn't rule it out. They said they didn't see the value proposition for it, yet. Right now it involves adding another chip. Next year it won't. That said, Apple and Intel need to get manufacturers on board. At least get some hubs/adapters out so that people can start using the port for existing devices.
And remember, the NuBus cards used in NeXt computers were a proprietary version of NuBus. It was, a proprietary version of a proprietary "standard"...
Not much has changed in the world of Jobs.
It's one of the reasons why i'm not buying any new mac. Lack of USB 3.0. I know the advantages of thunderbolt are clear, but USB is the standard. If you're including USB, does it not make more sense to include 3.0 since it's backwards compatible. USB is not going away anyway. I'm currently using 2 1TB USB 3.0 hard drives with my mac for timemachine and it takes a long time. I think that in the long run had apple added the technology, it would have made a substantial difference. Or is it not possible implementing both side by side?
Why is this even worth a discussion?
Thunderbolt will be in all Apple machines from now on.
Doesn't cost anything extra, so if you don't use it use the other ports.
Average Apple users most likely upgrade/switch to the latest less often than PC users, as their machines just keep on working.
My 1994 G4DP still does everything I need it to do and then some.
In time there will be plenty of peripherals or not.
If not the port will disappear. Not likely, but if so we'll go on to the next thing!
Thunderbolt will be in all Apple machines from now on.
Doesn't cost anything extra, so if you don't use it use the other ports.
Average Apple users most likely upgrade/switch to the latest less often than PC users, as their machines just keep on working.
My 1994 G4DP still does everything I need it to do and then some.
In time there will be plenty of peripherals or not.
If not the port will disappear. Not likely, but if so we'll go on to the next thing!
LOL, HP is going no where. Its a smart business decision, why incur the cost of a port that is in its infancy. There's no economic justification especially when USB will satisfy the consumers needs.
Do we need to read ignorance like this every time another vendor doesn't 100% side with Apple immediately on something ?
1- HP didn't say they weren't ever going to implement TB, just that they didn't see the value (ie, cost vs revenu potential) in it right now.
2- HP is in a lot more fields than you probably are aware of, and their desktop/laptop line-up is hardly their only revenue source.
So let's cut the "HP is baaaaaaaaaaaad!" crap. Thunderbolt is a non-value today. It will be for at least the next year. No peripherals, no backward compatibility. It requires a huge external controller on the motherboard, space that could have been better used by Apple for a discrete GPU in the 13" MBP or for an actual useful controller in the form of USB3.
It's funny. When a vendor follows Apple, they are "copycats, also-rans, etc..". When they go against Apple, they are "doomed!". Face it guys, Apple is a niche. They could disappear tomorrow and the industry would still go on their merry little way.
The last time I check, HP made printers
, but hey I can see how HP is doomed by excluding a brand new untested port that has no peripherals or nearly no peripherals.USB 3.0 might be with us when Apple (or rather, Intel) implements Ivy Bridge. Currently, other manufacturers have implemented USB 3.0 using technologies from Renesas or Fresco Logic so it could be Apple being tight fist or its a political thing with Intel that it hasn't been implemented thus far. Just my take.