Hmm, my title may be a bit misleading. I do understand Thunderbolt (I/o, 10 Gb's per sec, etc). However, some people have noticed the Thunderbolt port is the EXACT same as the mini display port. Whaddup with that? Does that mean, my old iMac with a mini display port is different than the coming iMac with a mini-display-port-renamed-thunderbolt? The ports are the same, it looks like they just renamed it.
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.
I don't get this whole Thunderbolt thing... can someone clarify this?
- Thread starter Paradoxeon
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Thunderbolt is a mini-display-port with a few extra pins.
EDIT: I can't quickly find detailed information, but it may be simply MDP with a more complicated and adaptable controller. Either way, it's not just a re-name, it's a whole new technology that just uses an existing port as its interface.
EDIT: I can't quickly find detailed information, but it may be simply MDP with a more complicated and adaptable controller. Either way, it's not just a re-name, it's a whole new technology that just uses an existing port as its interface.
Last edited:
Do you remember USB 1.1? The USB 1.1 port and plug look like a USB 2.0 port and plug, but a USB 1.1 port/plug will not deliver USB 2.0 speeds when one connects a USB 2.0 device to a USB 1.1 interface.
The same goes for the MDP and TB interface.
While TB might look like MDP, they are not the same.
The same goes for the MDP and TB interface.
While TB might look like MDP, they are not the same.
Thanks, I thought it was something behind the scene going on. And just to clarify this point, can we still use it as a MDP? Or will Apple have to put out a separate port for those who want the MDP.
It is better than MDP, as it supports chaining of two external monitors from the one port, which MDP does not. Plus like a further 4 TB devices as well all in the chain.
I read this article http://circlesixmagazine.com/?p=4056 that basically said the same thing. Only, to clarify, it's not just 4 TB of devices more. I was under the impression that you could do up to 4 1080p monitors, with hard drives, or anything else, a digital mixer, a video capture card, etc.. The real question will be can you loop in more than 10TB worth of stuff and, so long as it's not monitors, have the use of them be determined by available bandwidth. What do you think?