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.
Intel to Support Both USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt in 2012 'Ivy Bridge' Platform
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is most unfortunate. Now that TB is a reality, it would be far better if Intel just kills USB 3.0 completely as fast as possible. There is absolutely no advantage whatsoever in having USB survive past 2.0 at this point. With 3.0 barely entering the market, there is no value in letting it get a foothold. It is pathetically obsolete compared to TB.
What is with the comments about wanting USB 3.0 on Macs? What a huge waste of time and money - you should be wanting TB on more peripherals. Even if Intel is going to be dumb enough to keep USB 3.0 around, hopefully Apple will hold the line and refuse to put it in Macs. With Apple's resurgent strength in the computer market while everyone else is tanking, that would be enough incentive to get the peripheral makers to adopt TB.
What is with the comments about wanting USB 3.0 on Macs? What a huge waste of time and money - you should be wanting TB on more peripherals. Even if Intel is going to be dumb enough to keep USB 3.0 around, hopefully Apple will hold the line and refuse to put it in Macs. With Apple's resurgent strength in the computer market while everyone else is tanking, that would be enough incentive to get the peripheral makers to adopt TB.
So you want Firewire thing all over again? Apple is too small to push and make hardware standards thats the bottom line, sure they can just ignore it but cripple their users.
Now here is a kicker, what portable hardware can utilize the speed of TB to its advantage? HDD cant they are limited to their RPMS anyway, audio interfaces are fine with USB2 or FW400/800 and soon they will be switching to USB3. So that leaves you with video I/O devices that could benefit from TB. Niche market that is.
Until SSDs becomes portable reality we will not see wide spread of TB. And only then it will be up to Apple to support advanced SSDs.
USB is way too widespread to be ignored and belive me TB will always be secondary to USB kind of like FW is today. I dont agree with it but thats how it will go down probably.
What are you talking about? Practically all SB motherboards for PC's support USB 3.0. I'm enjoying USB 3.0 speeds on my new PC, plus the ports are backwards compatible with USB 2.0.
Don't get me wrong, I can see what TB offers & I like what I see, but USB 3.0 is here to stay. Intel's support just emphasises how important a standard USB 3.0 is.
LOL, and yet you still haven't given any examples.
Right, and no where was this specified at this point in the conversation. You are simply fitting it in for your argument. FireWire was not mentioned in the original post.
I knew what article I posted and I knew what it contained and it served its purpose perfectly fine. I don't need to show you who's going to use it because it's going to be native in Ivy Bridge ALONGSIDE USB 3 as the title would suggest. There's no reason NOT to use it as the superior IO and it's already there. This isn't rocket science.
Wow, what a surprise. The OP decided to choose the route that served him better for the discussion.
I explained why ThunderBolt wouldn't be another FireWire. You weren't having it and decided to pull strawman attacks.
Pointing out spelling errors and telling someone that they belong on the short bus are two different things.Sounds like you have some self-esteem issues if you feel the need to tell someone they're mentally retarded over an IO discussion.
Dude, take a chill pill. Your arrogance is making you seem like a 12 year old throwing a temper tantrum.
I see Thunderbolt starting off strong, but USB 3 taking over and likely showing up on more devices than TB. USB 3 will likely become more popular, but TB is always going to be there as an option. I do not see it being built in to every PC on the market though like USB 3 will.
I hope that doesn't happen. I'd rather have PCI-E speeds than USB speeds.
Perhaps TB will go differently than FW did. Apple has a more significant market share now than they did when FW was introduced. Plus, they're being smart by letting Intel take the lead in promoting TB.
What will make or break TB is peripheral support, and real world performance. Can USB3 keep up with a current SSD, even? If performance is notably degraded with USB3 and the ports both exist on the computer, and the peripherals are the same cost ... TB should do fine.
Personally I'd like to see USB stop at v2. Keep it for a while like we did PS/2 ports for keyboards & mice, but let's roll out modern technology when we can. USB3 hasn't gotten much of a foothold in the two years since it was released, so let's ditch it while we can and go with something much better.
It's be a good idea if Thunderbolt was capable of handling USB 3 as well, like the thunderbolt port in the MacBook Pro can also do mini display.
I guess that way it'd at least be used more, but also nobody would be uncertain about getting Thunderbolt because they know even if it is a flop the port is still useful...
I guess that way it'd at least be used more, but also nobody would be uncertain about getting Thunderbolt because they know even if it is a flop the port is still useful...
It can, of course.
Perhaps education is key. The fact that TB is a PCI-E orifice is a key difference from add-on technologies like USB3.
It is, provided the system supports USB 3.0 which the current macs do not (but IvyBridge ones will). The only reason people think it will flop is because they don't understand what it is (it's an extension of the PCIe bus, not a USB 3.0 replacement).
Sure there is. Higher speeds and backwards compatibility with older ports.
It's barely entered the market - on the mac. I'm rocking 6 usb 3 ports over here.
Sure there is. Higher speeds and backwards compatibility with older ports with no adapters.
Compared to devices which nobody has which are not compatible with anything else? Compared to a next gen connector that is on one line of apple only products?
Thunderbolt is sweet, but nobody is using it yet and it is a unique connector. I smell another expensive adapter market coming...
It's not expensive and whose time is it wasting? I mean other than people foaming at the mouth on forums.
Yes, I do. But in the mean time, my USB 3 ports are here, now, and work with any USB device on the market and for the foreseeable future.
Let's hope intel is dumb enough to keep thunderbolt around, too. Because who knows, Apple might drop thunderbolt two years from now because nobody is using it. I wonder if there was some example in the past of Apple doing that...
So Apple have just released MBPs with Sandy Bridge and will now be releasing Ivy Bridge MBPs in 2012? I was really planning on getting an MBP this summer...
You have to admit this thread is really funny.
How many times have we heard Apple lovers say it's not all about "specs" and the general public are not interested in "specs" and rubbish others when they say how much better spec their PC might be.
And yet, now that Apple has the high specs, all of a sudden THIS IS the most important thing.
No average consumer is ever going to notice the difference between USB3 and Thunderbolt, in fact USB3 will be better for the general user experience as it's backwards compatible.
But now, sod the typical consumer, the only thing that matters now is specs.
Oh, you have to laugh don't you
How many times have we heard Apple lovers say it's not all about "specs" and the general public are not interested in "specs" and rubbish others when they say how much better spec their PC might be.
And yet, now that Apple has the high specs, all of a sudden THIS IS the most important thing.
No average consumer is ever going to notice the difference between USB3 and Thunderbolt, in fact USB3 will be better for the general user experience as it's backwards compatible.
But now, sod the typical consumer, the only thing that matters now is specs.
Oh, you have to laugh don't you
And no BluRay.
Ah, remember, the general consumer is not interested in the specs of BluRay, a nice 720p is plenty good enough so we are told.
Only geeks worry about such specs.
It is par for course.You have to admit this thread is really funny.
How many times have we heard Apple lovers say it's not all about "specs" and the general public are not interested in "specs" and rubbish others when they say how much better spec their PC might be.
And yet, now that Apple has the high specs, all of a sudden THIS IS the most important thing.
No average consumer is ever going to notice the difference between USB3 and Thunderbolt, in fact USB3 will be better for the general user experience as it's backwards compatible.
But now, sod the typical consumer, the only thing that matters now is specs.
Oh, you have to laugh don't you
Just like we didn't need quad core cause it was too hot for no benefit. Or we didn't need 3G in the 2007 iPhone cause WiFi was good enough. Or that we don't need LTE cause HSDPA+ is fast enough.
Of course, what did you expect from an interface designed for keyboards, joysticks, and mice?
Even USB 2.0 has a pathetic 50% effective utilization rate, while Firewire is ~95%. USB 2.0 is 480 Mb/s, which equals 60 MB/s, yet in real world speeds, you're lucky if you see 30 MB/s - HALF it's rated bandwidth. USB is just plain horrible for bulk data transfer, and the new 3.0 iteration is no different. The protocol overhead is atrocious.
Of course USB also operates in slow horrible PIO mode, meaning it has to run everything through the host CPU. PATA, SATA, SCSI, Firewire, and Thunderbolt all operate in DMA mode, bypassing the host CPU for much much faster transfers.
PATA has PIO modes too... You just have to work (or use a poopy old HD) to get it to turn on.
You have to admit this thread is really funny.
How many times have we heard Apple lovers say it's not all about "specs" and the general public are not interested in "specs" and rubbish others when they say how much better spec their PC might be.
And yet, now that Apple has the high specs, all of a sudden THIS IS the most important thing.
No average consumer is ever going to notice the difference between USB3 and Thunderbolt, in fact USB3 will be better for the general user experience as it's backwards compatible.
But now, sod the typical consumer, the only thing that matters now is specs.
Oh, you have to laugh don't you
It all makes sense when you realize the user experience provided by TB will be amazing. If you think TB is about replacing USB you haven't actually figured out what TB is and what it's designed to do.
No different? What planet on you living on because it's not Earth.... The link quoted tested a slow 2.5" drive and still showed a 3.5x speed improvement. USB3 can only go as fast as the drive it's connected to. You're going to find that out with TB as well. You can't make gold out of dirt.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'.
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray....
Let's face it folks. The real success of USB 3.0 and/or Thunderbolt external connections will really depend on native support from Microsoft Windows, like it or not (Mac fans kind of ignore the fact that most new desktop/laptop computers still ship with Windows 7 installed). My guess is that we will see Window 7 Service Pack 2 (probably due early 2012) add full USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt support, while Windows 8--probably due fall 2012--will support both connections natively.
Or you could just buy a multi-port Thunderbolt adapter(that supports USB 3) for less than $10 when they are released making your half-baked scenario completely worthless.No different? What planet on you living on because it's not Earth.... The link quoted tested a slow 2.5" drive and still showed a 3.5x speed improvement. USB3 can only go as fast as the drive it's connected to. You're going to find that out with TB as well. You can't make gold out of dirt.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'.
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray....
Lol
Oh and why would someone pay extra money for a drive that can reach at the LOWEST twice the performance of USB 3? Gee, I wonder. I'd love to know where you got the sales figures from also.
Last edited by a moderator:
in all seriousness people, this thingis going to scare people off...
what is that. The usb 3.0 port on my PC looks nothing like that
Last edited by a moderator: