Just look at the prices for T-Bolt !
That "one port" will be pretty expensive - look at T-Bolt peripheral prices
.
That "one port" will be pretty expensive - look at T-Bolt peripheral prices
.
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 Working on Standardized Thunderbolt Docking System for PCs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Cables and adapters have huge margins.
We're talking 300-400%.
How do you think the 1% get to be the 1%?
That wasn't precisely what he meant by that. Intel has invented a lot of great stuff. Problem is, the combination of Microsoft's clinging to backward compatibility, and OEM's lack of interest in putting new stuff on the computer when they lack vision and think that the current crop of peripherals is "good enough," leads us to a situation where a company like Apple has to take a chance and implement something before everyone else will do it. Look at USB, EFI, no floppy, etc. Hell, Microsoft was such a back of dicks that it REMOVED EFI compatibility from Windows Vista/7 in order to attempt to prevent Mac hardware from running Windows saddling consumers with the far inferior, not to mention decades old BIOS, for a further who knows how long. Of course, Apple just used EFI's much greater usefulness and implemented a sort of BIOS emulation.
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)
Every one is asking for one cable but thunderbolt will eventually be fibre optic so correct me if im wrong there is no way it will take power aswell
Every one is asking for one cable but thunderbolt will eventually be fibre optic so correct me if im wrong there is no way it will take power aswell
Correction
A cable could have both optical and copper conductors - optical for data, copper for power.
1394, USB and T-Bolt already have different conductors for data and power - just replace the data wires with data fibers.
That also provides the opportunity for someone to sell a "powerless dongle" - a short stub with optical only, no power connection. (And perhaps "powerless cables" for the truly paranoid.)
A cable could have both optical and copper conductors - optical for data, copper for power.
1394, USB and T-Bolt already have different conductors for data and power - just replace the data wires with data fibers.
That also provides the opportunity for someone to sell a "powerless dongle" - a short stub with optical only, no power connection. (And perhaps "powerless cables" for the truly paranoid.)
Did i get this straight: Microsoft is a "back of dicks" for doings things that makes it harder to run windows on Apple computers... and Apple are what exactly :roll eyes:
Without backwards compatibility we wouldn't have seen the same massive growth and progress in enterprise computing, and without that, god knows where consumer computing would have been at today...
p.s.
Intel is probably clinging more to backwards compatibility than Microsoft. X86 architecture is their main selling point. Ruin that, and all of a sudden competition skyrockets.
Okay. As far as I know, Vista/7 still have support for EFI. Also, why would MS do this? So you can't use Windows on a Mac? Why would they care? As far as MS is concerned, a Mac is just another computer. A computer that someone can buy a Windows license for. I seriously doubt they'd do anything to jeopardize someone giving them money.
And lastly, Windows 8 will require hardware manufacturers to use UEFI if they want to get their MS certified sticker. So it's looking like your "who knows how long" is gonna be next year sometime.
new definition of "lights out computing"
I'm sorry - I didn't follow the link (since you provided no reason to click - at least briefly describe the thing).
I wonder how bright that monitor is - since it's a 1/3 power version of another Asus LED LCD that's barely half as bright as the Apple display. The brightness was never mentioned....
I'm sorry - I didn't follow the link (since you provided no reason to click - at least briefly describe the thing).
I wonder how bright that monitor is - since it's a 1/3 power version of another Asus LED LCD that's barely half as bright as the Apple display. The brightness was never mentioned....
Um...every post is ridiculing people, not products?
One specialty prototype? Seriously, man. That has as much to do with the monitor industry as peanut butter.
Oh, the "silver" one.
As I said, in several hundred "laptop years" we haven't seen this or any other connector problems.
YMMV, of course.
I think it was partly a user issue but that was the only silver colored Dell notebook I had ever seen up to that point in time. As I remember, it was rather expensive too.
Yeah, it sure does vary.
After that experience, I have never run into another note book issue as no other clients use docks. Plenty of HP's have the connector on the bottom (and usually ship with no cover for them) but I've never been asked about a dock. I did get a client to switch to MacBook Pro's for their travel staff. So far, no issues... One guy is freaked out by the camera so I put some black tape over it. (Wonder what he does while he's using the computer I do not)
Having a slid-in dock for the MacBook Pro would seem to be easy, and would be a cool thing to have though. The thing is practically built for it. Although it would be more of a 'port replicator' rather than a true 'dock'...
Working in the IT industry wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for 'the users'...
i just want a display that'll allow me to use my 11" MBA more effectively as a desktop computer when I'm not traveling. The apple display is great in terms of its thunderbolt/ports/power functionality as a sort of dock, but not so much so in the 27" format.
Why doesn't apple sell a similarly-rigged monitor in the 19-21 inch range? It seems like there'd be plenty of apple faithful to utilize some a product. Are there competitive forces I don't understand that preclude the company from offering such a thing? I know apple keeps its offerings few and simple, but two displays would hardly be overkill.
Why doesn't apple sell a similarly-rigged monitor in the 19-21 inch range? It seems like there'd be plenty of apple faithful to utilize some a product. Are there competitive forces I don't understand that preclude the company from offering such a thing? I know apple keeps its offerings few and simple, but two displays would hardly be overkill.
Just imagine where Microsoft and the rest of the IT world would be if they pulled a System 7 and an OSX trick on all of their users. Forgive me if I have the version wrong, but Apple, admittedly for a damn good reason, cut off support for all of their prior OS users in one swell foop. *POOF* The old version won't work. They also did it when they dumped PowerPC for Intel, although it's not dead until now with Lion.
If Microsoft had completely rewritten Windows Vista to be true 64 bit and not compatible with prior Windows versions, or more acceptable, had dumped the old DOS memory structure and all the legacy crap when moving to Windows 2000, to set a time, they would have a much more stable OS and not a lot of the legacy BS issues they've had over time. However to just say that with this version, nothing you have used before will work with it (sounds like Windows Millennium Edition!?) would have probably resulted in many users defecting to Linux and the Mac which would have made things interesting for sure... Eventually Windows, and the Macintosh, have had to 'kill the father', and move on to stability and more powerful and capable systems.
And do you noticed how Apple is not in the enterprise world and doing a great job of getting it self complete kicked out of that world?
The legacy support is the reason why MS is so strong in Enterprise.
The impression Intel have given is the optical Cables will still use the same electrical connectors but will have a fibre internal to carry data. They'll look the same just longer and more expensive (well maybe not relative to other means of carrying data that far and fast). A cable like that could carry power up to a certain distance.
There could be a "LightPeak" cable in the future that is pure optical and might not carry power.
What would happen? **** would hit the fan, that is what would happen. Apple could do what they did because they were, and to this day remain, a marginal player in enterprise computing. Legacy is a bitch, and MSFT isn't carrying theirs for the fun of it. Heck, just look at Apples iOS legacy, that already is starting to become a burden. Now take that, multiply with a million and you have Microsofts situation.
And no, they wouldn't have gone to Apple or Linux. They would've... god knows... refused to move, and rely on the community to sort out the mess, making things even more messy. Just migrating from one windows platform to another is enough trouble as is.
That said, ARM-W8 creates a welcome opportunity to get rid of some of its legacy. Thank god for that. Now we'll also get rid of all the FUD about how crappy MSFT are, and how they can't write proper code etc. Silence, at last.
Cheers.
This remains to be seen!
The Metro UI reads as merely a new GUI shell over the existing Windows base with nearly all its existing problems. I fear you may be deluding yourself here.
Last edited:
Yes - there are rumours (no shipping products) about T-Bolt 1.0 cables that have Copper-Optical transducers in each end. They connect to the copper Mini-DisplayPort jacks, convert the copper signals to optical - and convert back on the other end.
Not faster than T-Bolt 1.0, the only advantages are longer distances and electrical isolation.
I think that's what's being discussed - T-Bolt 2.0 or T-Bolt 3.0 with data natively on optical. It could still carry power by including copper wires along with the optical data fibres.
Tosiba Dynadock
For my PC, I use a Toshiba Dynadock to connect my laptop to 22" LCD monitor, Logitech keyboard and mouse. It also connects the laser printer, old stereo system and iPhone.
Overall, it works really well. However, it uses USB 2 technology, not USB 3. The #1 problem comes via its reliance on DisplayLink which means that the mouse can bounce around a bit.
http://www.displaylink.com/
The laptop itself has an Intel Core i7, 4 GB RAM, and a nice NVIDIA video card. If Thunderbolt becomes the defacto standard for using a laptop as a desktop -- with zero latency -- I'm 100% for it!
For my PC, I use a Toshiba Dynadock to connect my laptop to 22" LCD monitor, Logitech keyboard and mouse. It also connects the laser printer, old stereo system and iPhone.
Overall, it works really well. However, it uses USB 2 technology, not USB 3. The #1 problem comes via its reliance on DisplayLink which means that the mouse can bounce around a bit.
http://www.displaylink.com/
The laptop itself has an Intel Core i7, 4 GB RAM, and a nice NVIDIA video card. If Thunderbolt becomes the defacto standard for using a laptop as a desktop -- with zero latency -- I'm 100% for it!
It literally takes 10 seconds top to find nullify your claim. UEFI is supported since Vista SP1 64-bit and Windows 7 64-bit. The reason why UEFI for 32-bit was not supported was because motherboard vendors were not interested in writing the 32-bit firmware and NOT because they wanted to prevent Windows from being installed on a Mac.
That claim is absurd considering that Microsoft sells software not hardware. If anything, Microsoft wants all of its Windows on a Mac if it can. Microsoft doesn't sell a PC; it sells licenses regardless of the computer or laptop maker. Any licenses it sells is revenue.
What existing problems? Further, we're talking about an OS with more than ten times the complexity of OS X, that yet manages to maintain an equivalent fingerprint (The ARM-version will have less complexity than x86-w8 and w7, but yet more complexity than the Apple equivalent).
And no, the Metro UI doesn't read as "merely a new GUI shell over the existing Windows base", especially not for ARM-W8 (but its just as wrong for x86 too).
I don't get it. You obviously know jack, so why spew?
Last edited:
Numerous videos show that running a non-Metro app, such as Windows Explorer, from Metro takes you to classic Windows. A swipe gesture takes you from Metro to classic Desktop. It's plainly [yet] another layer over the Windows 7 GUI, which itself is a layer over the classic Windows GUI.