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

Intel to Speed Thunderbolt Deployment With Developer Kit Release This Quarter

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
68,540
39,384



093524-thunderbolt_logo.jpg


IDG News reports that Intel has announced that it will release developer kits for Thunderbolt, its new high-speed data connection standard, sometime this quarter, accelerating deployment of the standard that so far has been limited to Apple's new MacBook Pro and a small handful of peripherals companies.
Intel is already working with some partners to develop products as it tries to build out an ecosystem around the interconnect. LaCie and Western Digital have already demonstrated portable storage products, but are not yet selling devices. Companies including Canon have announced support for Thunderbolt, and products from AJA, BlackMagic, Matrox and Sonnet are being shown at the NAB trade show, which is going on in Las Vegas through April 14.
Click to expand...
According to the report, Sony is also firmly behind the standard but has yet to announce plans for bringing it to its products. Other computer manufacturers such as HP are continuing to evaluate Thunderbolt before committing to it.

High-speed data transfer protocols such as Thunderbolt are of course key for moving large files quickly, meaning that the standard will likely play an integral role as power users gear up with the latest hardware and look to deploy such cutting edge software as Apple's forthcoming Final Cut Pro X.

Article Link: Intel to Speed Thunderbolt Deployment With Developer Kits Set for Release This Quarter
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/13/intel-to-speed-thunderbolt-deployment-with-developer-kits-set-for-release-this-quarter/
I'd like to see Nikon to build that port in the upcoming D700 replacement (read D800)!

At these speed rate, card reader would be useless to save battery energy! I mean, the transfer would be so fast!
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

Will thunderbolt be the new connection for iOS devices... iPhone 5?
 
Gotta say I think Thunderbolt (and beyond that Lightpeak) has a real shot at becoming the next de facto standard for computer connectivity. It's got some big names behind it, USB 3.0 isn't really established yet (and isn't as fast or convenient) and some of the concepts at play here are very interesting. Certainly hope that the next Mac Mini refresh includes it as an external hard drive acting as a boot / system disk would make that a very attractive setup.
 
I'm waiting for NVIDIA and AMD (ATI) to release some external graphic cards utilising ThunderBolt.
 
A few years down the road I can see Thunderbolt being huge. The problem with FireWire was that while it was the faster option it wasn't interchangeable with USB. Now that we have a faster option that is able to use USB 1-3 devices via an adapter it's a win-win situation.
 
Sony might just cripple it by removing power, similar to what Sony does for firewire on its laptops.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

maybe people might think a bit more before saying things like "OMG no USB3, dealbreaker" when they don't even own any devices which implement it yet. Apple have their own plans to leap ahead usually.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6531.22.7)

smiddlehurst said:
Gotta say I think Thunderbolt (and beyond that Lightpeak) has a real shot at becoming the next de facto standard for computer connectivity. It's got some big names behind it, USB 3.0 isn't really established yet (and isn't as fast or convenient) and some of the concepts at play here are very interesting. Certainly hope that the next Mac Mini refresh includes it as an external hard drive acting as a boot / system disk would make that a very attractive setup.
Click to expand...

USB 3.0 isn't really established yet?!?
Except that it's backwards compatible with the last ten years of USB ports. It hit the market first and I already had a USB 2/3.0 external harddrive when they announce Thunderbolt. This isn't a VHS vs Beta, thunderbolt is basically the renamed version of the very unsupported FireWire. Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE for this to take off as I am always transfer huge files.... But it's not to beat USB3 sorry.
 
Ihatefall said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6531.22.7)



USB 3.0 isn't really established yet?!?
Except that it's backwards compatible with the last ten years of USB ports. It hit the market first and I already had a USB 2/3.0 external harddrive when they announce Thunderbolt. This isn't a VHS vs Beta, thunderbolt is basically the renamed version of the very unsupported FireWire. Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE for this to take off as I am always transfer huge files.... But it's not to beat USB3 sorry.
Click to expand...
I'm placing my bets 100% on Thunderbolt outlasting USB 3.0. Thunderbolt is backwards compatible with just about every IO you can think of(including USB 3.0). It's a whole different beast than FireWire.

USB 3.0 is pretty much DOA as far as I'm concerned.
 
I'm not sure I would call USB DOA

I've already got a laptop with it on, there are many others now coming out with it. I've got a USB3 key for copying around files.

One of the key things will be cost. Which costs more? USB3 port or Thunderbolt Port (including licensing etc)?
 
Isn’t TB supposed to be an intermediate step on the way to LP? If this is the case, won’t all of these ports and peripherals be superseded in a short time? Seems like a lot of work for something “temporary”.
 
RobQuads said:
I'm not sure I would call USB DOA

I've already got a laptop with it on, there are many others now coming out with it. I've got a USB3 key for copying around files.

One of the key things will be cost. Which costs more? USB3 port or Thunderbolt Port (including licensing etc)?
Click to expand...

See, the reason why USB 3.0 is DOA is because you don't need a USB 3.0 port to use those devices. You just need a Thunderbolt port. You have a Thunderbolt device, it doesn't work in the USB 3.0 port. You have a USB 3.0 device, it works in the Thunderbolt port with an adaptor. On that same ThunderBolt port you can also hook up a FireWire device, a display, etc. the list goes on as to what Thunderbolt can do that USB 3.0 can't.
 
Is that Thunderbolt icon an Apple creation? Some idea left over from the iTunes 10 icon debacle? If this is Apple design again, they really need a design intervention.
 
mcmlxix said:
Isn’t TB supposed to be an intermediate step on the way to LP? If this is the case, won’t all of these ports and peripherals be superseded in a short time? Seems like a lot of work for something “temporary”.
Click to expand...

ThunderBolt is just another name for LightPeak; the optical implementation will be backwards-compatible with the copper.
 
mcmlxix said:
Isn’t TB supposed to be an intermediate step on the way to LP? If this is the case, won’t all of these ports and peripherals be superseded in a short time? Seems like a lot of work for something “temporary”.
Click to expand...

Lightpeak was just the working name for the protocol that is now known as Thunderbolt. I think you're really referring to the fiber varient of Thunderbolt that's supposed to support (I believe) 100Gbit/s. From what they've told us so far all Thunderbolt ports will support both the copper and fiber versions of the cabling. The main difference between the two being that the copper version carries 10-watts of power and can be a significantly longer cable where the fiber has a limited length and no power. I'm not sure how they explained translating the fiber's optical signal into digital but they said the same TB port supports both for sure. I'd imagine the fiber cables are going to cost an arm and a leg.

Additionally I believe they said the fiber version should be available within the first year, but I may be wrong on this.
 
Last edited:
mcmlxix said:
Isn’t TB supposed to be an intermediate step on the way to LP? If this is the case, won’t all of these ports and peripherals be superseded in a short time? Seems like a lot of work for something “temporary”.
Click to expand...

I don't think this is the case, actually. I hope someone can help me back it up with evidence, but I remember hearing that once the faster-speed 'LightPeak' products/cables come out, they will work with the original implementation. Basically, the port is not the limiting factor at the moment - it's the cables. So, the current ThunderBolt ports will be compatible with ThunderBolt ports of the future. And, for the record, ThunderBolt IS LightPeak. It will not be replaced by it. LightPeak is the development name. All future (and faster) versions of the technology will be called ThunderBolt, not LightPeak.
 
I would love to have a thunderbolt external drive, but then I would have to upgrade my MBP. Maybe by the time I'm ready to upgrade, more thunderbolt stuff will be out.
 
Ok, the backwards compatibility helps in understanding. But let’s say you have a MBP that supports copper TB today, then it won’t support the fiber version when it comes out…right? So then one would need to get a new Mac that supports fiber.

I’m speaking purely theoretically here. I don’t see myself needing to move huge amounts of data, but some will. I guess the exciting thing when this becomes a reality is the ‘the one port fits all.’

Blipp said:
The main difference between the two being that the copper version carries 10-watts of power and can be a significantly longer cable where the fiber has a limited length and no power.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it be likely to include copper (for power) along with the fiber optic for data?
 
mcmlxix said:
Ok, the backwards compatibility helps in understanding. But let’s say you have a MBP that supports copper TB today, then it won’t support the fiber version when it comes out…right? So then one would need to get a new Mac that supports fiber.

I’m speaking purely theoretically here. I don’t see myself needing to move huge amounts of data, but some will. I guess the exciting thing when this becomes a reality is the ‘the one port fits all.’



Wouldn't it be likely to include copper (for power) along with the fiber optic for data?
Click to expand...
To your first question no, they have assured us that ALL Thunderbolt ports support both the copper and fiber versions out of the box and at full capacity. How exactly a digital port reads an optical signal I don't know but they said it works and so far that's all we have to go by.

For your second question I would have thought the same thing. Why not just include enough copper to support the same 10-watts and leave the rest fiber? Well I don't have an answer for you but I do remember Intel saying that the fiber cables do not carry power.
 
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