Light Peak Coming in Early 2011 With Apple at Forefront?

[Rodimus Prime]

I guessing you don't understand 1s and 0s are 1s and 0s....This is all digital data. There is no reason there can't be hubs with a LP port on the back and USB or FireWire on the front.

And I could say that you do not understand how data transfer protocalls work.

There is going to be a way to separated out the different files and from which device it comes from.
That means there will be a string of 1's and 0's to mark that and it will be based on the protocals on how that is done. Firewire, USB, light peak ect all have different protocals in separating out things. They use very different types of logic gates and flip-flops and so on.

 

[spazzcat]

Unfortunately it seems to be you who doesn't understand. All digital connections have to have a protocol to provide context to the 1s and 0s Therefore a physical cable converter has to manipulate the protocols to convert from one to the other. Otherwise the thing at the other end of the cable won't know what to do with the data.

The only other alternative to to tunnel one protocol within another, but that's an equally bad idea as it means that the individual devices need to support unwrapping the different protocols.

There will be software in the hubs to handle any convering of protocols.

 

[logandzwon]

As far as USB3, isn't USB simply provided by the chipset? Macs will have USB3 as soon as the chipset used by Apple include support for it.

As far as Light Peak, I can't wait!

 

[mytdave]

Compare this speculative CNET article with a detailed analysis in EETimes article.

Here are some quotes:

"PC makers are ramping up for a significant transition to the copper-based USB 3.0 that can deliver data at more than 3 Gbits/second. Most have no plans to use the 10 Gbits/second Light Peak, said a senior engineer at one top-tier PC maker who asked not to be named."

But "there's nothing compelling about Light Peak" in its initial implementation, said the PC engineer.
USB 3.0 provides ten times the bandwidth of the existing 480 Mbits/second USB 2.0 spec it replaces. By contrast, Light Peak's promise to double USB 3.0 data rates to nearly 10 Gbits/s "won't be that significant for a lot of apps," said the engineer.
"You will need higher data rates than 10Gbits/s to make differences in apps like video something end users can really see," he said.
By contrast, an estimated $5-10 cost increase for Light Peak chips, optical modules and cables is unacceptable, he added. "Twice the data rate for that cost just doesn’t make sense—it's taking profit margin away," said the engineer.

Unfortunately, this is probably true. And there is the rub. LightPeak is likely to be far superior, but if it costs more than USB-3 to implement, nobody will. The ENTIRE industry is littered with interfaces that are "good enough".

 

[dguisinger]

This.

There are three technologies on the verge of being able to be the "single" external connector for Video, Storage, and other gear:

* USB 3.0
* Light Peak
* PoE (Power over Ethernet)

All three of them are really close, but missing some key components. Power is a big part of the equation. It would be nice to have enough juice to power a high efficiency LED driven display without a separate power cord.

Uhh... where exactly do you come up with Power over Ethernet as being a technology that drives video, storage and other gear?

Ethernet is 1Gbps on most machines, 10Gbps is available but not in the hands of most people, and PoE is NOT standard in consumer apps. PoE has nothing to do with the applications mentioned and was meant for remote web cams and Voice over IP telecommunications. It does not supply enough power for most devices to operate.

USB 3.0 is not nearly fast enough to replace DisplayPort either. The 5Gbps data rate is slower than DisplayPort, you'd never get the same number of frames per second or pixels across USB 3 for display purposes. Sure, you could run most video cameras over USB 3; but thats a much more narrow target...

 

[Pachang]

While I do think that Apple pushes this as a replacement for USB/FireWire, I highly doubt that they use it for their display solutions.

It is interesting to note however that Apple removed the 30" ACD in the last revision and moved the largest display to 27". If my interpretation display data rates is correct, Lightpeak at 10Gbits would be able to run a 27" at 2560x1440@60hz but not a 30" running at 2560x1600@60hz.

 

[jeznav]

LP devices should have at least minimum of two LP ports so it can be daisy-chained without a hub. Just like how my mouse is connected to the keyboard which is connected to the iMac.

It is interesting to note however that Apple removed the 30" ACD in the last revision and moved the largest display to 27". If my interpretation display data rates is correct, Lightpeak at 10Gbits would be able to run a 27" at 2560x1440@60hz but not a 30" running at 2560x1600@60hz.

Don't forget LP can go up to 100Gbps using RGB light polarization/multplexer in one channel.

 

[HLdan]

Unfortunately, this is probably true. And there is the rub. LightPeak is likely to be far superior, but if it costs more than USB-3 to implement, nobody will. The ENTIRE industry is littered with interfaces that are "good enough".

See, that's just the shame. Technology can't move forward on just "Good Enough", and it's sad that people accept that. That's the problem with people that accept Windows, it's just "good enough", but nothing that will take them to the next level.

 

[KnightWRX]

See, that's just the shame. Technology can't move forward on just "Good Enough", and it's sad that people accept that. That's the problem with people that accept Windows, it's just "good enough", but nothing that will take them to the next level.

Kind of like iTunes streaming vs Blu-ray.

 

[xeex]

Unfortunately, this is probably true. And there is the rub. LightPeak is likely to be far superior, but if it costs more than USB-3 to implement, nobody will. The ENTIRE industry is littered with interfaces that are "good enough".

Aha, thats why when apple introduced FW400, PC industry was still using USB 1 and parallel ports, its the same thing with light peak all over again, PC and enterprise are dragging their feet because they are not technically savvy and could not care less about advantages of new technologies.

I have to say PC engineers, developers are the most narrow minded people in IT industry. if it wasnt Apple we would still be sitting behind CRT monitors and using PC/AT, PS/1 ports to connect keyboard and mouse and other devices.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

Finally someone who sees things clearly! Was starting to worry for a minute there.

They're not the only one. I wrote several comments on the USB 3.0 thread how come Apple will embrace Light Peak while still supporting all the other standards.

 

[Pachang]

LP devices should have at least minimum of two LP ports so it can be daisy-chained without a hub. Just like how my mouse is connected to the keyboard which is connected to the iMac.



Don't forget LP can go up to 100Gbps using RGB light polarization/multplexer in one channel.

Hmm I was wrong anyway. The 30" ACD is 24bit color so it would be ok even with 10Gbps/s.

I thought it wasn't going to be going at 100Gbps in the near future?

 

[Speedy2]

Hopefully Apple finds a way to sneak 'power over lightpeak' into the standard spec.

Otherwise it's nice, but won't replace USB3.

Exactly.
I believe it when I see it.
Lightpeak uses fibre optics cables that don't conduct eletricity. So you would need an additional copper wire in the cable, which would mean expensive cables and limited range.

Until then: nice technology, that won't take off just like Firewire. And it surely won't replace USB.

USB 3 WILL be the new standard. Scanners, hard drives, input devices, flash memory sticks WILL need powered ports, and only USB is providing that (Firewire is dead). As soon as it is in Intel's chipsets, every Mac will have it too and Steve will go 'Look at this great technology' and fanboys will go *swoon*.

 

[Nishi100]

One simple question, will / do you think / is it a possibility that, there be a HDMI to Light Peak cable (therefore allowing me to connect my PS3 to iMac)?

And, if Apple drops USB 2.0 support (which is very stupid and is unlikely to happen - until 2012 where the world either ends or Apple are forced to use USB 3.0); will / do you think / is it a possibility that, there will be a Light Peak to USB 2.0 or USB 3.0, because Light Peak can easily support to "super speeds" generated by USB 3.0?

 

[alent1234]

Aha, thats why when apple introduced FW400, PC industry was still using USB 1 and parallel ports, its the same thing with light peak all over again, PC and enterprise are dragging their feet because they are not technically savvy and could not care less about advantages of new technologies.

I have to say PC engineers, developers are the most narrow minded people in IT industry. if it wasnt Apple we would still be sitting behind CRT monitors and using PC/AT, PS/1 ports to connect keyboard and mouse and other devices.

what is the advantage of lightpeak? i'm going to have to buy an extra hub for a lot of money to connect everything into it.

so what if i save a few minutes in transferring 100GB of data which i rarely do? why am i going to pay a premium for a new mouse or trackpad just because it's lightpeak? not like it's going to point any faster

i remember the days of com and serial ports and USB was a HUGE improvement over them. USB is PnP and just works. i can plug a mouse in when the PC is on and it starts working. i can plug my iphones in at anytime and they are seen right away. my iphones charge over USB. i have one port for keyboards, mice, printers and everything else. everything plugs into the PC/Mac with no extra hug required and devices like keyboards can serve as hubs as well. what is lightpeak going to bring to make me switch?

 

[xeex]

Exactly.
I believe it when I see it.
Lightpeak uses fibre optics cables that don't conduct eletricity. So you would need an additional copper wire in the cable, which would mean expensive cables and limited range.

Until then: nice technology, that won't take off just like Firewire. And it surely won't replace USB.

USB 3 WILL be the new standard. Scanners, hard drives, input devices, flash memory sticks WILL need powered ports, and only USB is providing that (Firewire is dead). As soon as it is in Intel's chipsets, every Mac will have it too and Steve will go 'Look at this great technology' and fanboys will go *swoon*.

USB is driven by enterprise and big guns in PC like dell and ibm. for everyday "joe computer user" even usb 1 is good enough.

 

[MacNewsFix]

Say it ain't so! I like having an assortment of cables laying all over my desk and I love having my desk and wall cluttered with media like Blu Ray discs. I don't want life to become easier with one cable for everything and streaming video.

You're right! What am I going to do with all that extra time with less complexity in my life? Be more productive?

LOL.

 

[xeex]

what is the advantage of lightpeak? i'm going to have to buy an extra hub for a lot of money to connect everything into it.

so what if i save a few minutes in transferring 100GB of data which i rarely do? why am i going to pay a premium for a new mouse or trackpad just because it's lightpeak? not like it's going to point any faster

Like i stated in my previous message for average pc user that wont make any difference, for me it will as I transfer daily over 100GB of data and using usb just doesnt cut it for me, thats why FW800 at the mo its the most viable solution for me and im pretty sure there are lots more folks who would like to see faster data transfers and less cabling on their desktops.

 

[Lesser Evets]

Now might not be the best time to pick up an iMac then i guess

The next year is not a good time to pick up ANYTHING in computing. There are too many changes coming along that will make a 2010 Mac be a 2012 POS.

 

[dlewis23]

I definitely want a iMac with this in it.

 

[drewyboy]

I hate how people repost the same garbage over and over again, especially about the "f no lp won't have power so it sucks!". Intel has stated that all they need to do is wrap the fiber optics in copper, which they were already going to do for optical wire strength. So there are two issues done (Cable power & strength). Third, those who are like, "how the heck am I suppose to use my usb _xyz_?!" If I recall correctly, I'll try to find a link, Intel is having LP port the exact same as a usb so that you CAN plug in usb 2/1 (3?) right into it and it'll register. So all 3 main issues solved. The small one of speed, as stated numerous times before in this thread Intel will ramp up the speed to 100 w/ a year or two.

 

[HLdan]

Removed post.

 

[alent1234]

Like i stated in my previous message for average pc user that wont make any difference, for me it will as I transfer daily over 100GB of data and using usb just doesnt cut it for me, thats why FW800 at the mo its the most viable solution for me and im pretty sure there are lots more folks who would like to see faster data transfers and less cabling on their desktops.

you'll get more bang for your dollar having a machine with SATA2 that has a 6gbps I/O rate than buying a new port. lightpeak might be 10gbps but since the insides of computers are 6 you aren't going to get any speed increase.

i just explained the same thing to others about our 3 year old HP servers and going to 10gbps ethernet

 

[Azathoth]

Aha, thats why when apple introduced FW400, PC industry was still using USB 1 and parallel ports, its the same thing with light peak all over again, PC and enterprise are dragging their feet because they are not technically savvy and could not care less about advantages of new technologies.


I have to say PC engineers, developers are the most narrow minded people in IT industry. if it wasnt Apple we would still be sitting behind CRT monitors and using PC/AT, PS/1 ports to connect keyboard and mouse and other devices.

Right, yeah I forgot how Apple implements those new Intel processors real quick (cough, Mac Pro, cough), and until last week, it wasn't as if the MBA was horribly out of date?

Not to mention a slew of proprietary Apple ports: ADB, LocalTalk, even the iPhone connector.

Apple can't even decide whether they are supporting FW or not. Some Macs have it others don't. Surely if it was *the one true way* then all Mac (Books) would include FW ports?

I still need to use a serial port to USB adapter in order to get some expensive test equipment to work - so there are definitely uses for legacy ports (e.g. GPIB / IEE488 - or are you gonna spend 50 000 USD for a newer VNA?)

I personally like the Mini-Displayport technology, though it looks like horrible HDMI as won for most of the consumer market.

I'm sure that Lightpeak will come as an extra port in addition to USB / Displayport. I dislike the "one port for everything" concept that is bandied around so much - that type of solution tends to create poor products that perform no function particularly well and end up as a compatibility nightmare. Just consider the following specs that would need to be considered when designing a new interface (off the top of my head):

Latency?
Throughput?
DMA possible?
Security with DMA?
Galvanic isolation?
max. distance?
Power transfer?
Power use?
Multiple-access mechanisms?
Topology?
Symmetric Bidirectional?
Permissible Connector cost (high for a monitor / RAID array, low for a flash memory stick)?
Cable cost?
Ruggedness?

Anyone that thinks Lightpeak is a panacea for the next decade is kidding themselves - it will be good for some things and lousy for others.

I wonder what the royalty scheme on Lightpeak is...

 

[dba7dba]

Hopefully Apple finds a way to sneak 'power over lightpeak' into the standard spec.

Otherwise it's nice, but won't replace USB3.

LP better be able to power a portable HD, like the 320G portable HD I connect with 1 Firewire cable to my Macbook pro. If I have to use a separate cable to power a portable HD, than I will stick with my Firewire or USB 3.