Matrox Announces DS-1 Thunderbolt Docking Station for $249

[toke lahti]

I thought that over a year ago, and yet here we are- still wondering.

And will be for a long time.
Just wondering if Apple really even thought that tb would interest 3rd party?
Or was it just for marketing, selling new displays or just an old echo from times when pro market was important to Apple?
Tb peripherals show that even the biggest can't bully alone.
If Apple had wanted to get 3rd party accessories for tb-macs for the first few years, they'd had to release tb specs 1-2 years ahead and maybe should have done something to standardize it.
Now, 16 months after the launch of tb, we still can't be sure if it will even survive, let alone succesfully became mainstream.
If the the price/performance ratio does not get better, it will just be another infiniband...

 

[KnightWRX]

So your cultural orientation is the only one that could possibly provide the correct interpretation? Really?



Hardware is different from software. More importantly, addition of USB drivers is fundamentally different from completely dropping support for older keyboard tech. With the iMac, Apple completely dropped its proprietary keyboard/mouse connectors; users were required to use USB devices. This cutover on Windows machines would only be required when the hardware manufacturers dropped their keyboard/mouse ports.

The conversion from legacy ports was noted by this MacWorld article:

1998 was before I owned any Apple products, but I distinctly remember the buzz that this all-in-one machine caused. The commitment to USB was part of the buzz, and USB definitely rode the wave of that popularity to accelerate its acceptance on PCs.

And being a PC guy in those days, I can tell you that all the publications in the PC world were ablaze with USB already, with no mentions of Apple whatsoever. Apple simply rode in the wave of the USB buzz that was already around. Windows 98 was what brought the devices with the support. Without software, you can't have the hardware, you've said so yourself.

Incorrect. I provided far more than my opinion. I listed six facts with reasoning why TB is a good bet for Apple.

Your opinion doesn't count as fact. You listed 6 things that in your opinion with reasoning is why TB is a good bet for Apple. Again, those are your opinion, I don't find your arguments particularly convincing.

Yes, that is your opinion. The opinions of attendees and vendors at this year's NAB show was entirely different.

NAB ? The Pro show ? Seems to support my opinion quite well I'd say. Attendees and vendors at NAB are precisely the niche I'm saying TB is aimed at. Same niche that followed Firewire/IEEE 1394. So again, seems to me Apple is the only one pushing for it to be consumer tech, the industry is aligning it to be some kind of prosumer/pro niche like Firewire before it.

Again, not going to argue, we're both deep in the realm of opinion. The only thing I take exception to is that you seem to think your opinion is some kind of fact.

 

[toke lahti]

1998 was before I owned any Apple products, but I distinctly remember the buzz that this all-in-one machine caused. The commitment to USB was part of the buzz, and USB definitely rode the wave of that popularity to accelerate its acceptance on PCs.

What would you say, if you were told that 99% of USB ports shipped in 1998 were in windows pc's or their peripherals?

 

[MagicBoy]

We all understand there's a difference. Why do you think it's important? Does anyone really prefer these legacy proprietary manufacturer-specific docks?

It's incorrect terminology. There is no dock connector.

Large businesses prefer the "legacy proprietary manufacturer-specific" docks.

Incorrect. Apple's strategy is completely different. They provide a bus that allows third parties to get high-performance storage, video, and networking through thunderbolt. They don't sell any docks at all.

I don't agree. The 27" Cinema Display is a dock, and the bus was designed by Intel.

But they don't fit the Dells, or HPs, or Psystars. OTOH, if/when Lenovo starts providing Thunderbolt, they won't have any need for these proprietary docks.

They will. The more advanced docks support PCIe cards. The Advanced mini docks are less than 50% of the price of the Matrox dock. The Thunderbolt docks will never support power/charging.

 

[AidenShaw]

I recall those days of using proprietary Dell, Compaq, and VAIO docks during my Windows days in enterprise. They were flaky too as I would have to sometimes reboot the laptop (after initial startup in dock) to get the signal to the external display or shutdown laptop, then disconnect laptop from the dock, reconnect laptop to the dock, and then power up again, then repeat again if that still didn't work. That cycle of hassle would sometimes take 15 minutes. I definitely don't miss those days of using "third-rate" computer products.

Another anecdote, which may or may not have a slim basis in truth.

My anecdote is quite the opposite. I have a Dell E-series with a docking station (the one I pictured) at work and a second one at home.

The work one is mouse right with a 1600x1200 21" LCD to the right of the laptop. The home one is mouse left with a 1920x1200 24" LCD above the laptop.

The system recognizes each station, and does the correct graphics setup. The mouse flips sides. If I have open windows, they'll move to where they were previously (assuming that it's a sleep/wake cycle).

It just works, and does what you expect and want.

----------

Large businesses prefer the "legacy proprietary manufacturer-specific" docks.

+1

Large business IT departments hate diversity. Giving 30,000 employees two or three models of laptops from one manufacturer, with the manufacturer supported dock, is nirvana.

Two or three master images on the provisioning servers. No help desk calls due to "my HonHaii T-Bolt dock's eSATA isn't working".

 

[MagicBoy]

Another anecdote, which may or may not have a slim basis in truth.

My anecdote is quite the opposite. I have a Dell E-series with a docking station (the one I pictured) at work and a second one at home.

The work one is mouse right with a 1600x1200 21" LCD to the right of the laptop. The home one is mouse left with a 1920x1200 24" LCD above the laptop.

The system recognizes each station, and does the correct graphics setup. The mouse flips sides. If I have open windows, they'll move to where they were previously (assuming that it's a sleep/wake cycle).

It just works, and does what you expect and want.

Agreed. The Lenovo docks from the last couple of generations do this also.

 

[FloatingBones]

And being a PC guy in those days, I can tell you that all the publications in the PC world were ablaze with USB already, with no mentions of Apple whatsoever. Apple simply rode in the wave of the USB buzz that was already around.

Magazines are always ablaze about something. That's their job. As a practical matter, USB was optional for those early USB adopters on PCs. OTOH, USB was mandatory on the iMac. Those legacy keyboards and mice (and their legacy ports) were shipped for several more years on the vast majority of PCs; no PC manufacturer had the guts to cut the cord like Apple did. Providing TB on all Macs is a similar kind of gutsy decision, and there is value internally to Apple and to customers that comes from that ubiquitous TB availability on all current Macs.

In any case, you do agree that that first iMac (1998) was the beginning of the reversal of fortunes for Apple. In case your magazines failed to ever blaze about that, you can read the Wikipedia section here.

Your opinion doesn't count as fact. You listed 6 things that in your opinion with reasoning is why TB is a good bet for Apple. Again, those are your opinion, I don't find your arguments particularly convincing.

Here's the problem, KnightWRX: the reasoning and facts I provided in those 6 items were good. You have an opinion that they're not convincing, but we can't even tell if you read through those items. If you're going to render an opinion, please provide some facts and reasoning to back up that opinion. Opinions by themselves are essentially worthless, but the facts and reasoning that went into those opinions are quite valuable.

Now: do you have any specific comments about my 6 items?

NAB ? The Pro show ? Seems to support my opinion quite well I'd say.

Through the years, the name NAB has become one of the biggest misnomers for any show. The estimates I heard was that only about 20% of the attendees actually have anything at all to do with broadcast television or commercial movie production. NAB has expanded its role to video content creators of all type: corporate education training content, podcasts, etc.

Attendees and vendors at NAB are precisely the niche I'm saying TB is aimed at.

Maybe, and maybe not. Today's NAB show is not your father's "Pro show". Are you talking about the old traditional Pro Broadcasters show, or today's Video Content Creator show?

1K and 2K cameras are will start to become quite common in the marketplace. Increasing numbers of people will be creating content for non-traditional broadcast uses. TB is ideally suited for this fast-growing market.

Same niche that followed Firewire/IEEE 1394. So again, seems to me Apple is the only one pushing for it to be consumer tech, the industry is aligning it to be some kind of prosumer/pro niche like Firewire before it.

Note: Apple is not "aiming" at any particular niche. They only make one TB peripheral: the 27" display. They're allowing the third-party developers to create the peripherals and thunder-ports.

Go back and read my 6 points. There is huge value in providing exactly the same interface on the entire product line.

Again, not going to argue, we're both deep in the realm of opinion.

You still don't get it. When someone provides facts and reasoning, a summary judgment of, "That's your opinion" is a No Pass. We can't even tell if you read the message that you're opining about.

It's incorrect terminology. There is no dock connector.

Not exactly. It's uncharted territory; we've never been able to hang essentially any peripheral at the end of a cable. Anything that you can directly connect to a computer you can also connect to the end of a TB cable. That's most definitely a dock-like functionality, but it doesn't require the massive pinouts of the legacy proprietary manufacturer-specific docks.

I think the term thunder-dock works just fine, but you're welcome to disagree.

Large businesses prefer the "legacy proprietary manufacturer-specific" docks.

Certain large businesses like legacy docks: Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. They think it's a great idea.

Why in heaven's name do you think that large businesses prefer manufacturer-specific docks? Why would they want to be locked in to a particular manufacturer? What busess advantage does that give over a dock that can work with a broad range of

I don't agree. The 27" Cinema Display is a dock, and the bus was designed by Intel.

You're right. The display is the one exception. Apple has made one standalone display model for many years; it makes sense for them to make that one model. OTOH, I would be very surprised to see Apple make any thunder-docks or any external TB drives. They'll be happy to let the third-party vendors slug it out in those markets, and sell the best-of-breed online and in their retail stores.

Large business IT departments hate diversity. Giving 30,000 employees two or three models of laptops from one manufacturer, with the manufacturer supported dock, is nirvana.

Just because some IT departments want something doesn't mean that it's right. If the IT departments had their way, everybody in those large companies would still be using RIM phones, and nobody would have the option of using Android or iPhone phones.

Two or three master images on the provisioning servers. No help desk calls due to "my HonHaii T-Bolt dock's eSATA isn't working".

What about a Lenovo laptop with TB -- or are you still insisting that those announced TB notebooks are "vaporware"?

 

[AbSoluTc]

Just want to say as a PC power user - I have never used ESATA. Never. I have no plans on it either. Only USB2/3, Ethernet, Wifi, Firwire and Thunderbolt. ESATA is a niche product and it will never take off. It's dead.

 

[jcpb]

Just want to say as a PC power user - I have never used ESATA. Never. I have not plans on it either. Only USB2/3, Ethernet, Wifi, Firwire and Thunderbolt. ESATA is a niche product and it will never take off. It's dead.

This.

The motherboard on my current PC has both eSATA and FW400. The eSATA port I have used exactly ZERO times from day one. FW gets used at least once a month.

 

[FloatingBones]

The motherboard on my current PC has both eSATA and FW400. The eSATA port I have used exactly ZERO times from day one. FW gets used at least once a month.

One of the nifty little Thunder-ports is the Sonnet Tech ExpressCard/34 to Thunderbolt adapter. This device gives immediate leverage to a bunch of esoteric protocols (including eSATA) by simply inserting the right ExpressCard/34 into the slot. It's especially attractive for someone who had an older MBP or other laptop and has one or more ExpressCard/34 adapters they used with that old machine.

Welcome to MacRumors, jcpb.

 

[KnightWRX]

Magazines are always ablaze about something. That's their job. As a practical matter, USB was optional for those early USB adopters on PCs. OTOH, USB was mandatory on the iMac. Those legacy keyboards and mice (and their legacy ports) were shipped for several more years on the vast majority of PCs; no PC manufacturer had the guts to cut the cord like Apple did.

Don't mistake it for Apple basically putting USB on the map. Apple was irrelevant to USB's adoption. People adopted it because it made sense. My current AMD motherboard with DDR3 RAM slots, PCIE, etc.. still has legacy keyboard/mouse ports (PS/2 ports they're called).

Again, USB adoption came about when Microsoft introduced support in Windows 98 and through the sheer convenience of the technology, and it's flexibility (no more 3 dozen kinds of connectors needed, hot plug/unplug support, dynamic loading of drivers, etc.. Things the legacy ports could not do or were buggy while doing).

In any case, you do agree that that first iMac (1998) was the beginning of the reversal of fortunes for Apple. In case your magazines failed to ever blaze about that, you can read the Wikipedia section here.

Sure, but that has nothing to do with USB. It has to do with Apple being at their lowest point, and the iMac launch being at the beginning of Steve's new reign at the helm.

Here's the problem, KnightWRX: the reasoning and facts I provided in those 6 items were good. You have an opinion that they're not convincing,

They might have been good (to you), but they remain firmly in the realm of your opinion.

Again, you're entitled to your opinion, you're not entitled to your own facts. Call it what it is. I take issue that you dare call your opinion fact, while you call every other opinion that disagrees just an "opinion". You're on the same level playing field, your opinion is not worth more.

Until then, I think I've wasted enough time on you. Seems futile at this point.

 

[linux2mac]

Another anecdote, which may or may not have a slim basis in truth.

My anecdote is quite the opposite. I have a Dell E-series with a docking station (the one I pictured) at work and a second one at home.

The work one is mouse right with a 1600x1200 21" LCD to the right of the laptop. The home one is mouse left with a 1920x1200 24" LCD above the laptop.

The system recognizes each station, and does the correct graphics setup. The mouse flips sides. If I have open windows, they'll move to where they were previously (assuming that it's a sleep/wake cycle).

It just works, and does what you expect and want.

My anecdote is from dock usage in the early 2000's in enterprise. Not sure how much improvement has occurred but it sounds like you are doing fine.

Today with my 13" MBP, I cannot fathom the need for a dock. Would be like me wanting a floppy or ZIP drive in my Mac. Or better yet, a "bag of hurt" BD drive - LOL! (I guess SJ was right after all. Look at all the copy cats ditching optical drives. *cough* Samsung! *cough* HP!). When I work at my remote offices I simply plug my MBP into a external display (mini-display port is great!) and..... "BOOM! It just works." Airport Extreme (have them at my remote offices and home office) gives me solid Wi-Fi and no need for ethernet. Bluetooth magic mouse and keyboard are solid. No headaches like my days of POS proprietary dock usage in enterprise. With just two wires ( power cord and display cord) my remote setups look clean and elegant, and not "as clumsy or random as a blaster."

 

[FloatingBones]

Don't mistake it for Apple basically putting USB on the map. Apple was irrelevant to USB's adoption. People adopted it because it made sense. My current AMD motherboard with DDR3 RAM slots, PCIE, etc.. still has legacy keyboard/mouse ports (PS/2 ports they're called).

Oh, goodness. I had no idea that anyone still included those legacy keyboard/mouse ports on their machines. Apple cut out their kb/mouse legacy ports fourteen years ago (side note: that was in the last century). How many more years will it take for those legacy ports to disappear from PCs? Think they'll still be around after another 14 years? Is there any good reason to keep them? Do some IT departments still have some archaic rules about using PS/2 keyboards and mice with computers?

There's probably nothing that shows the difference between (the post-Scully) Apple and the PC world as clearly as this USB decision. Apple figured out that ditching that legacy tech would make it that much easier for their customers to install their machines. They don't have to scratch their heads over which device is plugged into the mouse-port and which into the keyboard-port. Check out this Jeff Goldblum commercial: they just connect their mouse to the USB port on the side -- either side -- of the keyboard. Simple. Elegant. Obvious.

Apple's use of USB on this device put them on the map in 1998. The PC industry's clinging to those archaic ports in 2012 puts them at an entirely different location on the map.

Again, USB adoption came about when Microsoft introduced support in Windows 98 and through the sheer convenience of the technology, and it's flexibility (no more 3 dozen kinds of connectors needed, hot plug/unplug support, dynamic loading of drivers, etc.. Things the legacy ports could not do or were buggy while doing).

By your admission, you have raised a most interesting question: why has the PC industry never fully committed to USB for keyboard and mouse ports?

Let me say it a different way to you that may help: it wasn't Apple's introduction of USB to that first iMac that made the ripples; it was the exclusion of the older tech that made waves. The 1998 iMac lit a fuse, the 1999 G3 iMacs (in 5 colors -- see image on this page) really took off. If you look at the historical notes, you'll see that a bunch third-party vendors started making USB cables that matched the colors of each of those iMacs. Pick your iMac's color, or pick a different color! Trade off colors to match your mood that day. Swap with your friends! The "interior decorator" motif is not really my cup of tea, but those color machines most definitely appealed to a brand-new demographic for Apple.

Imagine the horror of those IT staffers when those designer-color USB cables crept into the workplace!

Sure, but that has nothing to do with USB. It has to do with Apple being at their lowest point, and the iMac launch being at the beginning of Steve's new reign at the helm.

You think nothing? Absolutely nothing? Really?

The 1998 iMac sold over 1M units, and the 1999 iMacs -- in 5 colors -- did far better than that. A definite contributing factor was the ease of use to connect the USB keyboard, mouse, other devices.

The introduction of the iPod (2001) was the start of the steep curve for Apple's growth. But the iPod would have never gained traction without a significant installed base of iMacs for people to load tunes onto their iPods. It was almost a year later before a PC-compatible iPod (USB interface) came out.

Make no mistake: the ease of setting up and using these original iMacs was a crucial to their success, and the ditching of the proprietary mouse/keyboard ports was a critical component of that ease. Apple knew something that the PC industry has never quite figured out: pruning away the old clutter will help broaden the acceptance of new technology.

They might have been good (to you), but they remain firmly in the realm of your opinion.

And, once again, you still don't get it. Your only response to my facts and reasoning was an opinion. The tell-tale is that we can't even tell if you read what I wrote. Such an opinion contributes absolutely nothing to the discussion; it essentially winds up being an ad hominem attack: don't discuss the reasoning, but talk about the person.

Again, you're entitled to your opinion, you're not entitled to your own facts. Call it what it is.

I shall: you're responding to my facts and reasoning with innuendo and opinion. Those are fundamentally flawed techniques for participating in a discussion on MR.

I take issue that you dare call your opinion fact

The obvious way to "take issue" is to point out the flaws in what I said. But note: we still can't tell if you even read what I wrote. All we get is your summary opinion. Nobody learns anything at all from that.

You're on the same level playing field, your opinion is not worth more.

What you fail to realize is that you are also on the same level playing field. If you issue opinions with nothing to back them up, I will point that out. If you dismiss something with no evidence that you even read what you're responding to, that absurdity will get called out.

Airport Extreme (have them at my remote offices and home office) gives me solid Wi-Fi and no need for ethernet. Bluetooth magic mouse and keyboard are solid. No headaches like my days of POS proprietary dock usage in enterprise. With just two wires ( power cord and display cord) my remote setups look clean and elegant, and not "as clumsy or random as a blaster."

One of the intriguing options for ThunderBolt development is to add a TB port to a NAS device. You could connect to the NAS via WiFi or a remote connection to queue the download of a bunch of files, then connect with TB to blast all of the downloaded files to your MBP. Or go the other way: use the TB connection to put some massive files (e.g., video uploads) onto the NAS, and have that device upload the files overnight through its much-slower broadband connection. It's sort of a NASCAR metaphor: you use your radio connection to plan out your strategy with your pit crew, then you connect with TB to make the "pit stop" as fast as possible. I fondly hope that the NAS vendors are thinking this way.

 

[linux2mac]

Oh, goodness. I had no idea that anyone still included those legacy keyboard/mouse ports on their machines. Apple cut out their kb/mouse legacy ports fourteen years ago (side note: that was in the last century). How many more years will it take for those legacy ports to disappear from PCs? Think they'll still be around after another 14 years? Is there any good reason to keep them? Do some IT departments still have some archaic rules about using PS/2 keyboards and mice with computers?

There's probably nothing that shows the difference between (the post-Scully) Apple and the PC world as clearly as this USB decision. Apple figured out that ditching that legacy tech would make it that much easier for their customers to install their machines. They don't have to scratch their heads over which device is plugged into the mouse-port and which into the keyboard-port. Check out this Jeff Goldblum commercial: they just connect their mouse to the USB port on the side -- either side -- of the keyboard. Simple. Elegant. Obvious.

Apple's use of USB on this device put them on the map in 1998. The PC industry's clinging to those archaic ports in 2012 puts them at an entirely different location on the map.



By your admission, you have raised a most interesting question: why has the PC industry never fully committed to USB for keyboard and mouse ports?

Let me say it a different way to you that may help: it wasn't Apple's introduction of USB to that first iMac that made the ripples; it was the exclusion of the older tech that made waves. The 1998 iMac lit a fuse, the 1999 G3 iMacs (in 5 colors -- see image on this page) really took off. If you look at the historical notes, you'll see that a bunch third-party vendors started making USB cables that matched the colors of each of those iMacs. Pick your iMac's color, or pick a different color! Trade off colors to match your mood that day. Swap with your friends! The "interior decorator" motif is not really my cup of tea, but those color machines most definitely appealed to a brand-new demographic for Apple.

Imagine the horror of those IT staffers when those designer-color USB cables crept into the workplace!



You think nothing? Absolutely nothing? Really?

The 1998 iMac sold over 1M units, and the 1999 iMacs -- in 5 colors -- did far better than that. A definite contributing factor was the ease of use to connect the USB keyboard, mouse, other devices.

The introduction of the iPod (2001) was the start of the steep curve for Apple's growth. But the iPod would have never gained traction without a significant installed base of iMacs for people to load tunes onto their iPods. It was almost a year later before a PC-compatible iPod (USB interface) came out.

Make no mistake: the ease of setting up and using these original iMacs was a crucial to their success, and the ditching of the proprietary mouse/keyboard ports was a critical component of that ease. Apple knew something that the PC industry has never quite figured out: pruning away the old clutter will help broaden the acceptance of new technology.



And, once again, you still don't get it. Your only response to my facts and reasoning was an opinion. The tell-tale is that we can't even tell if you read what I wrote. Such an opinion contributes absolutely nothing to the discussion; it essentially winds up being an ad hominem attack: don't discuss the reasoning, but talk about the person.



I shall: you're responding to my facts and reasoning with innuendo and opinion. Those are fundamentally flawed techniques for participating in a discussion on MR.



The obvious way to "take issue" is to point out the flaws in what I said. But note: we still can't tell if you even read what I wrote. All we get is your summary opinion. Nobody learns anything at all from that.



What you fail to realize is that you are also on the same level playing field. If you issue opinions with nothing to back them up, I will point that out. If you dismiss something with no evidence that you even read what you're responding to, that absurdity will get called out.

Well said! Gave you plus one.

One of the intriguing options for ThunderBolt development is to add a TB port to a NAS device. You could connect to the NAS via WiFi or a remote connection to queue the download of a bunch of files, then connect with TB to blast all of the downloaded files to your MBP. Or go the other way: use the TB connection to put some massive files (e.g., video uploads) onto the NAS, and have that device upload the files overnight through its much-slower broadband connection. It's sort of a NASCAR metaphor: you use your radio connection to plan out your strategy with your pit crew, then you connect with TB to make the "pit stop" as fast as possible. I fondly hope that the NAS vendors are thinking this way.

I like the NASCAR analogy. I am looking forward to TB Macs in my next upgrade and the possibilities with TB in my ecosystem.

 

[FloatingBones]

An explanation of Apple's role in the adoption of USB

The paper Standards and specs: The ins and outs of USB published on the IBM DeveloperWorks website provides a detailed analysis into the adoption and usage of USB, and Apple's role in that acceptance. The pertinent section of that document:

The adoption problem

USB, even after support for it was available in Windows, faced an adoption problem. Standard adoption is largely driven by network effects; the utility of a standard-compatible device comes from its ability to interoperate with other things compatible with the same standard. A standard is only useful to you if there are compatible devices and if there are a lot of them.

This creates a Catch-22 situation for adoption. If users lack USB ports or drivers, those users cannot buy a USB device. For vendors, that limits the market for USB devices and makes it more reasonable to develop peripherals for other ports (such as the once-ubiquitous serial and parallel ports, or the SCSI port if you also wanted to tap the Mac market).

Even if users would prefer a USB device, they would still be more willing to accept a non-USB device since it can be connected to their computer. Even if USB is a better, more desirable piece of technology, it may not be more marketable than the alternatives! The number of people who would buy a USB Webcam might be smaller than the number who would buy a serial Webcam -- and almost all of them could be persuaded to buy a serial one instead.

Enter the iMac.

The original "bondi blue" iMac was the first computer to offer USB ports without offering "legacy" ports. That's right -- no serial ports, no ADB. This changes the network effects. Before the iMac showed up, there were many millions of PC users who had no USB ports and perhaps a couple of million who had a USB port and also legacy ports. The biggest market in 1998 was in serial and parallel ports (or joystick ports, PS/2 ports, and so on) -- there was no reason to target the USB market. That would just restrict your audience.

The iMac presented a ready-made market of users who chose the Mac line for its graphics capability. In turn, the iMac offered a captive audience of users who would buy a USB peripheral but would not buy any other kind of peripheral. These users provided a market for USB peripherals that wasn't facing competition from other port choices. The result was a flood of USB devices in white-and-blue plastic. This was a crucial turning point that created a reason (tied to a proven system choice) to prefer USB to non-USB ports.

Once adoption was foist onto this substantial segment of users, the technical merits of the technology won out easily. USB's technical superiority (for most peripherals) to the conglomeration of a half-dozen different port types was unambiguous.

I also liked Mr. Seebach's comment from his 1995 paper:

After adoption was a proven benefit, USB simply annihilated a lot of its competition. Joystick ports died. Serial and parallel ports suffered a loss of popularity, although the plain old 16550 UART and other RS-232 serial devices still enjoy substantial popularity as console ports for embedded systems and servers (see Resources). The PS/2 keyboard and mouse ports have survived unchanged for most PCs, although a few systems don't offer full support for them. My laptop has no PS/2 ports; its "port replicator" does.

I wonder what Seebach would say regarding the fact that PS/2 ports are still shipped on some PCs. By 1995, those PS/2 ports should have ben virtually extinct, but they're still on machines in 2012! I bet that SJ would chuckle. This one small feature shows rather dramatically what "Think Different" really means.

I'd also be interested in Seebach's commentary about Apple's usage of high-power current draws for charging the iPhone and iPad. The 5W and 10W usage is well beyond the USB power spec. The out-of-spec usage is not a hazard, but it does artificially penalize devices that are completely within the USB spec. If some compliant USB adapter won't charge your iPad, that's really the fault of Apple and not the manufacturer of that adapter.

What would you say, if you were told that 99% of USB ports shipped in 1998 were in windows pc's or their peripherals?

First, I'd be interested in where the 99% number came from. I'd like to know the methodology used to gather the number. If someone had a methodology for tracking such numbers, I'd like to see the year-to-year trend. OTOH, I suspect the number was pulled out of ... thin air.

Second, I'd ask if you were familiar with the dynamics and implications of the power law (colloquially called the 80/20 rule). As Peter Seebach eloquently notes, the interest in USB from Apple users is what made all the difference.

The adoption of TB will not take the same path as USB. The world is far more complicated today, and a corresponding "clean break" from existing technology is not feasible. It will be interesting to see how the adoption of TB plays out over time.

I like the NASCAR analogy. I am looking forward to TB Macs in my next upgrade and the possibilities with TB in my ecosystem.

Jordan got some flack for his front-page story about a NASCAR reporter a couple of weeks ago. I thought it would be fun to brainstorm inside of a NASCAR metaphor.

 

[mfuchs88]

Overpriced....

 

[therealseebs]

The paper Standards and specs: The ins and outs of USB published on the IBM DeveloperWorks website provides a detailed analysis into the adoption and usage of USB, and Apple's role in that acceptance. The pertinent section of that document:

Being picky, that's not a "paper", it's an "article". It's not a scholarly work, just an opinions piece.

I wonder what Seebach would say regarding the fact that PS/2 ports are still shipped on some PCs. By 1995, those PS/2 ports should have ben virtually extinct, but they're still on machines in 2012! I bet that SJ would chuckle. This one small feature shows rather dramatically what "Think Different" really means.

A lot of what it means is that people still have their old keyboards, and it costs roughly $0 not to include those ports. Specialty hardware still exists -- I don't know if they're around right now, but the DataHand keyboard I used for quite a while was PS/2 only. (And required a special "high power" PS/2 to USB adapter, no less. Ugh.)

I'd also be interested in Seebach's commentary about Apple's usage of high-power current draws for charging the iPhone and iPad. The 5W and 10W usage is well beyond the USB power spec. The out-of-spec usage is not a hazard, but it does artificially penalize devices that are completely within the USB spec. If some compliant USB adapter won't charge your iPad, that's really the fault of Apple and not the manufacturer of that adapter.

I am sorely torn on that. Moreso because other devices (ASUS transformer, B&N's Nook Color) also use those high power draws... but because it's a non-standard, you can't just swap parts. So I have a Nook Color, with a special Nook only 2.1A USB adapter, and get this, a special cable -- it won't charge off a regular USB cable, because their solution involved custom port construction in some way.

I really do think that lots of devices should be bus powered, but I can't see a sane way for developers to coerce everything into 2.5W. Honestly, I think the USB3 spec should have mandated a larger power capacity. (I mean, it did increase capacity some, but I really wish it had gone a bit further for applications like this.)

Second, I'd ask if you were familiar with the dynamics and implications of the power law (colloquially called the 80/20 rule). As Peter Seebach eloquently notes, the interest in USB from Apple users is what made all the difference.

While the plural of "anecdote" is not "data", I would observe that around the time the iMac came out, Intel had released a USB camera. I saw people returning it because they had no USB. I also had a pair of Toshiba PCs which used USB for special gizmos. (They had special monitors, and then they had special USB driven input devices which gave them a little LCD screen and some inputs like a volume knob and such.) These devices were for Windows 95-some-special-version, and it was basically impossible to make them work. You had to download many specialized drivers and patches and such, and it was a huge struggle with exact versions -- and the two of them I had were not interchangeable, each only working with one specific version of the special driver.

By the time of Windows 98, my NetBSD machines worked perfectly with USB mice, as did my Macs. Windows, plugging in a USB mouse would result in 5-10 seconds of input device lockup and driver loading and so on, after which it would probably work. NetBSD, if I plugged the mouse in, I literally could not move my hand back to it fast enough to touch it before it was responsive. The Mac was more comparable to NetBSD.

Some of this is still true now. I was already to be furious with APC for not including Mac support in their current UPS lines, but then I noticed that their offhand "use the native shutdown feature" corresponded to a multi-page PDF document explaining how. Turns out that if I plug a UPS in via USB, it just shows up perfectly configurable and very convenient in Energy Saver.

The adoption of TB will not take the same path as USB. The world is far more complicated today, and a corresponding "clean break" from existing technology is not feasible. It will be interesting to see how the adoption of TB plays out over time.

I am pretty curious about it myself. I'm still sad that not everything has Firewire, and that there's no easy way to get many more USB ports -- yes, I know about hubs, but some music gear tends to do Unexpected Things when connected via a hub. Latency sucks. I also dislike that my Air only has two ports. If I leave a Logitech receiver in one (I do like their keyboards and mice), that means I need either a hub or only one other device at a time. Frustrating.

It says a lot about the state of the world, and the durability of hardware specs, that the biggest problem I'm having right now is the lack of a way to get a Mac with a 50-pin SCSI connector. (And yes, I know about USB and FireWire adapters. Every one I know of got discontinued by the end of 2011.)

For what it's worth, I expect to get a couple of those Matrox docks.

----------

Today with my 13" MBP, I cannot fathom the need for a dock.

Huh. I find the lack painful.

With just two wires ( power cord and display cord) my remote setups look clean and elegant, and not "as clumsy or random as a blaster."

Macbook Air: Display cable, power cable, audio cable. If I'm at home, I am NOT using those tinny little speakers.

Macbook Pro: Display, power, audio, ethernet, firewire, and at least one USB cable. I have a Henge dock, love it to bits. But I still wish I had a "real" dock.

The thing is... I don't buy computers which have multiple ports because I want extra case ventillation. I buy them so I can hook the ports up to things. Docking stations are lovely, and one of the things I really miss about using PC laptops.

 

[FloatingBones]

A lot of what it means is that people still have their old keyboards, and it costs roughly $0 not to include those ports. Specialty hardware still exists -- I don't know if they're around right now, but the DataHand keyboard I used for quite a while was PS/2 only. (And required a special "high power" PS/2 to USB adapter, no less. Ugh.)

If "cost" is quantified as hardware cost, I wholly agree. But "cost" can also be quantified as the real estate on the side/back of a laptop. AFAIK, I believe the PS/2 connectors have virtually disappeared from laptops.

"Cost" can also be measured a third way: the degree of simplicity of the device for naive users to correctly use. I think it's safe to say that Apple pays far more attention to that "cost" than any of the PC manufacturers.

I am sorely torn on that. Moreso because other devices (ASUS transformer, B&N's Nook Color) also use those high power draws... but because it's a non-standard, you can't just swap parts. So I have a Nook Color, with a special Nook only 2.1A USB adapter, and get this, a special cable -- it won't charge off a regular USB cable, because their solution involved custom port construction in some way.

In other words, there was absolutely no standardization on ways to extend the USB spec to deal with high-power devices. Apple showed their classical disregard for the standards process. I wouldn't be surprised if companies filed patents for their mechanisms of drawing more power out of USB.

At least copper TB is spec'd to provide 10W of power.

By the time of Windows 98, my NetBSD machines worked perfectly with USB mice, as did my Macs. Windows, plugging in a USB mouse would result in 5-10 seconds of input device lockup and driver loading and so on, after which it would probably work. NetBSD, if I plugged the mouse in, I literally could not move my hand back to it fast enough to touch it before it was responsive. The Mac was more comparable to NetBSD.

This reminds me of a corollary of Clarke's famous comment: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. What most don't realize is that it takes a rather furious amount of scampering behind the scenes to make magic happen. Having the pointing cursor functional ASAP during the boot/wakeup process is crucial for the magic of a pointing device.

In 1985, the Santa Clara Vanguard, a Drum and Bugle Corps, did a "change the pants color" trick during their opening piece (Shostakovich's Festive Overture). You can see the illusion starting at 2:15 into this video. Having black pants with velcro is easy; having every single member smoothly enter and exit the tunnel for every single performance takes boatloads of hard work. I've never heard of any corps attempting to perform an illusion like that on the marching field. You can see a rehearsal and with commentary from some of the performing members on YouTube. I also recommend the remarkable movie "The Prestige" to get an amazing (and rather grisly) story about magic and magicians.

Thanks for your reply in this discussion, Peter. It's a real treat to find that you're also a participant in the MR forums.

 

[jcpb]

Today with my 13" MBP, I cannot fathom the need for a dock.

Having a dock seems like a hassle, but not having a dock makes you wish you still have one. Imagine how millions of MBA users would feel if Apple replaces SSDs with HDDs...

 

[toke lahti]

First, I'd be interested in where the 99% number came from. I'd like to know the methodology used to gather the number. If someone had a methodology for tracking such numbers, I'd like to see the year-to-year trend. OTOH, I suspect the number was pulled out of ... thin air.

Second, I'd ask if you were familiar with the dynamics and implications of the power law (colloquially called the 80/20 rule). As Peter Seebach eloquently notes, the interest in USB from Apple users is what made all the difference.

I don't believe Apple had anything to do with USB acceptance and I haven't seen any proof against it. AFAIK, windows pc's and macs had roughly all USB, so you could tell USB market share from pc market share. I did remember wrong Apple's global market share, which was 3% in 1998, but also only Mac that had USB then was iMac. So, I'll correct my self: 98% of USB ports sold in 1998 were in windows pc's.
And no, Pareto principle does not work with 3%...

 

[FloatingBones]

I don't believe Apple had anything to do with USB acceptance and I haven't seen any proof against it.

I understand you don't believe. Did you follow the link and read Peter Seebach's 1995 article about the dynamics of the USB standard in the marketplace. Did you read the section of the article "The adoption problem" that I included in this discussion yesterday? Do you have any specific commentary on what Seebach (MR user therealseebs) said in that paper -- especially the "Enter the iMac" section?

Do you remember how Apple used color at that point in history? Do you remember the distinctive color of that first iMac and the explosion of color in the next generation? Do you recall the meme of the matching colored USB cables first made by a variety of manufacturers in response to that 1999 iMac? I don't know how much of that you would have seen in Finland, but there was a point of time where those brightly-colored USB cables just exploded in the stores.

First, I'd be interested in where the 99% number came from. I'd like to know the methodology used to gather the number. If someone had a methodology for tracking such numbers, I'd like to see the year-to-year trend. OTOH, I suspect the number was pulled out of ... thin air.

Second, I'd ask if you were familiar with the dynamics and implications of the power law (colloquially called the 80/20 rule). As Peter Seebach eloquently notes, the interest in USB from Apple users is what made all the difference.

And no, Pareto principle does not work with 3%...

I asked where your 99% number came from. You changed the number, but didn't address my original question. What is the source for your number? What year does it apply to? Can you provide us with the year-to-year trend? Or were the numbers pulled out of ... thin air?

There are myriad systems that obey they power law -- in all sorts of ratios. How did you come with the claim that the power law "does not work with 3%"? What is the upper bounds that you think the power law applies, and what is your [formal] basis for that conclusion?

 

[talmy]

I live in the PC world at work, and prior to about 6 years ago at home as well.

I don't know about numbers but I do know this. In 2000 my PC had USB ports which I never used. I don't think USB was even supported in Windows NT 4.0, but in any case the "legacy" ports worked fine. Everyone I knew used the legacy ports as USB didn't seem to have any advantage. The first person I knew that had to use USB was in the early 00's and bought a printer with only a USB interface as consumer printers by then had gone to only USB interfaces. He had lots of trouble getting it to work. In the mid '00's we had trouble finding those new USB flash drives to work consistently across the presumably identical systems at work.

I've got a 2011 HP Z400 Workstation at work. It has a firewire port (never used), PS/2 ports (I use the keyboard PS/2 for my 1989 Northgate Omnikey), no legacy parallel or serial ports, a USB mouse (is there a choice anymore?), and other USBs go to a whole bunch of (I just counted 9) USB/Serial converters. Every time you plug in a new converter it grabs a new port number, pushing the port numbers higher than most drop-down boxes allow you to select. This means I have to clean out the "drivers" occasionally, reconnecting devices in the order that the ones that need the low port numbers are plugged in first. I could really use real serial ports! USB has been a "bag of hurt".

 

[toke lahti]

Wow,
you sure do have more questions than answers!

I understand you don't believe. Did you follow the link and read Peter Seebach's 1995 article about the dynamics of the USB standard in the marketplace. Did you read the section of the article "The adoption problem" that I included in this discussion yesterday? Do you have any specific commentary on what Seebach (MR user therealseebs) said in that paper -- especially the "Enter the iMac" section?

I'll have to repeat myself:
Apple had 3% global market share when iMac was introduced (1998).
Google that if you don't believe me.
Let's assume that same percentage of macs had usb than percentage of windows pc's. (I have always had problems naming "not macs" as pc's, since for me a mac is a pc with osX and the others are pc's with other os'es.)
This means that there were 33 times more usb ports sold in windows pc's.
And very logical conclusion from this is, that macs had so tiny little market share of usb ports, that they cannot define the market penetration.
AFAIK, there were very few usb accessories for "mac only". Most of all were "mac and windows98 compatible" and there not even a hint for any proof in that Seebach's article that "mac only" usb accessories were sold more than windows pc usb accessories.
Once more AFAIK, around 1998-2000 all pc accessories turned to usb, not because of macs, but because usb was faster, cheaper and easier.
Why not before 1998? Because usb1.1 entered market then and 1.0 was slow and had compability problems.

Do you remember how Apple used color at that point in history? Do you remember the distinctive color of that first iMac and the explosion of color in the next generation? Do you recall the meme of the matching colored USB cables first made by a variety of manufacturers in response to that 1999 iMac? I don't know how much of that you would have seen in Finland, but there was a point of time where those brightly-colored USB cables just exploded in the stores.

IMacs were hyped also in Finland, but for every one iMac, there were 100 windows pc's sold. And all of those started using usb.

I asked where your 99% number came from. You changed the number, but didn't address my original question. What is the source for your number? What year does it apply to? Can you provide us with the year-to-year trend? Or were the numbers pulled out of ... thin air?

It came from market share, and I've now said it enough times.

There are myriad systems that obey they power law -- in all sorts of ratios. How did you come with the claim that the power law "does not work with 3%"? What is the upper bounds that you think the power law applies, and what is your [formal] basis for that conclusion?

I'm not sure how scientific proof you want, but maybe you know that "power law" = "Pareto principle" ≠ "80/20 rule".
And if you don't know more about how to proof things in science, then read about power law from wikipedia.
I don't need to proove you that you can't use power law in this case, you have to proove me, that you can.

And nevertheless all of this doesn't matter anything in few days when all new macs have usb3.
Those who can live with 5Gbps for pennies can enjoy best price-performance ratio in the market and those who need more can buy these $500 dongles as much as they want, if those boxes ever materializes...

Finally, I just can't understand what harm those legacy ports makes? If they don't cost a penny and there's a lot of room for them in full sized ATX motherboard, why not?
I find it really pleasure that once in a couple years, when I find some old 5,25" floppy from somewhere, I can read what's inside of it...

----------

Just want to say as a PC power user - I have never used ESATA. Never. I have no plans on it either. Only USB2/3, Ethernet, Wifi, Firwire and Thunderbolt. ESATA is a niche product and it will never take off. It's dead.

You have never been interested to know about your storage's health (s.m.a.r.t.)?

----------

I've got a 2011 HP Z400 Workstation at work. [...]I could really use real serial ports! USB has been a "bag of hurt".

Why don't you put a serial port card to HP's pci slot?

 

[KnightWRX]

In 2000 my PC had USB ports which I never used. I don't think USB was even supported in Windows NT 4.0

NT 4.0 shipped in 1996. Again, Windows 95 OSR C introduced USB for HID devices in the PC world, Windows 98 made it ubiquitous. In the NT line-up, it was introduced with Windows 2000, but then again, no consumer was running NT 4.0 anyway as it had a different driver architecture and a very restrictive HCL because of it. A lot of the 3D accelerators that were starting to appear on the market (thanks to efforts by 3Dfx in popularizing the hardware) didn't have any NT 4.0 drivers or the drivers they did have lacked a lot of the hardware acceleration features.

USB had many advantages over the legacy ports, I've stated them earlier. If you were into PC building back then (circa 1997/1998 when USB was being talked about actively in magazines), you wanted USB because of them (flexibility, hot plug/unplug capacity, dynamic loading of drivers, no IRQ/IO port/DMA port non-sense).

 

[KnightWRX]

Wow,
you sure do have more questions than answers!

The funny part is he asks you to back your market share assertions, and then he makes wild claims like "explosion of colored peripherals" without providing any backing other than his opinion.