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

[Merged] USB 3.0 Discussion (Next-gen USB Promises 10x USB 2.x Speeds)

jaytv111 said:
Most USB products I have use a standard USB cable that I have a dozen of already. I know the point is moot, but I still say convenience is better.
Click to expand...

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree. :)

However I do want to just beat the dead horse one last time to point out that USB does have multiple connectors. You know those pesky little ones that cell phones and cameras have. So you still need to have two sets of cables around for USB. And three for firewire.

Me, I have a collection of both. Literally, I have two of every possible firewire combination (4 - 6, 4 - 9, etc etc). Actually that isn't true, I don't have any 4 to 4 pin ones. I also have plenty of USB A to B, USB A to mini-B, but at this point I don't have anything with mini-A although I have heard of devices that use it.
 
jaytv111 said:
3.0 looks to be better than Firewire 800 and Esata in terms of speed, and even Firewire 3200. So I'd say get rid of Firewire (and Esata for that matter) so we don't have to deal with port confusion.
Click to expand...

not yet the next sata spec is up to 6.0Gbps and usb 3.0 is 5Gbps
 
When Intel and Nvidia integrate it into the chipsets Apple uses.

Don't think Apple will go out on a limb and add USB3 via PCIe anytime soon.
 
one question a bit off topic.
Isent that USB was supposed to be UNIVERSAL serial bus? what happend that i manufacturers keep inventing ports like (HDMI, DVI, FireWire, eSATA, and all that crap) if after all USB have pretty good performance, i really believe that a computer with nothing else than 10-15usb ports but that every single device conects trough that single port would be very cool.
 
xoggyux said:
one question a bit off topic.
Isent that USB was supposed to be UNIVERSAL serial bus? what happend that i manufacturers keep inventing ports like (HDMI, DVI, FireWire, eSATA, and all that crap) if after all USB have pretty good performance, i really believe that a computer with nothing else than 10-15usb ports but that every single device conects trough that single port would be very cool.
Click to expand...

Well 3.0 could replace all those ports. 2.0 is not very fast, so we needed different ports for different things. But, give it 3 or more years, and we might only need 2 or 3 different ports. Wireless will be big too, I would think. Wireless is still relatively immature though.

sangosimo said:
not yet the next sata spec is up to 6.0Gbps and usb 3.0 is 5Gbps
Click to expand...

Not a lot of devices could take advantage of all that speed. I think the fastest SSD on the market is, at maximum, 250 MB/s, which is 2.0 Gb/s.

Shawn Parr said:
I think we are going to have to agree to disagree. :)

However I do want to just beat the dead horse one last time to point out that USB does have multiple connectors. You know those pesky little ones that cell phones and cameras have. So you still need to have two sets of cables around for USB. And three for firewire.

Me, I have a collection of both. Literally, I have two of every possible firewire combination (4 - 6, 4 - 9, etc etc). Actually that isn't true, I don't have any 4 to 4 pin ones. I also have plenty of USB A to B, USB A to mini-B, but at this point I don't have anything with mini-A although I have heard of devices that use it.
Click to expand...

Dead horse completely beaten. ;) If I were looking to buy gadgets, I would purposely look for a mini USB connector. Many gadgets have gone that route anyway. I think the point I was trying to make was that with Firewire, you have three different host connectors, whereas you have just one USB host connector. So if you bought a new gadget with Firewire, you might not have out of the box connectivity (if it includes a cable).

I might just be nitpicky, though. I was overjoyed to learn that the new Macbooks have Displayport, but then I was pissed when I found out they made a new mini connector. It's really screwed up not only backwards compatibility but forwards compatibility. The new Cinema display can only connect to the new Macbooks, and you can't even connect a regular Displayport display to the Macbooks. See everything gets worse when you make a new connector. lol :D
 
jaytv111 said:
I was overjoyed to learn that the new Macbooks have Displayport, but then I was pissed when I found out they made a new mini connector. It's really screwed up not only backwards compatibility but forwards compatibility. The new Cinema display can only connect to the new Macbooks, and you can't even connect a regular Displayport display to the Macbooks. See everything gets worse when you make a new connector. lol :D
Click to expand...

I totally agree with that, and I have thought the same thing. The difference here though is that mini display port is not part of the official specification. So up until a week ago when Apple announced the zero licensing plan no other manufacturers would have even considered using it. At least with FW and USB all the connectors are part of the official specification, and anyone implementing a solution can utilize them under the same licensing agreement they sign to use the connectivity in the first place.

I guess we'll see what happens, but it would be nice to see mini display port kind of take off and become standardized on a lot of equipment (read non-Apple). Of course it seems to have one potential issue in common with HDMI, no locking function on the connectors, so depending on the thickness of cable and the angle your port is at, they may fall out. I have no idea if this is true with regular display port or not.

Maybe USB 3.0 will be the answer to a lot of these issues. However, based on how the 1.1, and 2.0 specs played out, and the people involved, we won't really know how it performs in the real-world until it is available in the real world. And while a lot of people don't care, there are other that spend a lot of money interconnecting equipment that need isochronos transfer and low latency.
 
usb 3.0 in the macbook when?

ok as all of you know usb 3.0 is coming out on 2010 so is apple going to update the macbook and will they have the new usb's or are they going to wait until thay make a whole new apple macbook?
 
XxpikachuxX said:
ok as all of you know usb 3.0 is coming out on 2010 so is apple going to update the macbook and will they have the new usb's or are they going to wait until thay make a whole new apple macbook?
Click to expand...

Ok... 2009 just started, 2010 is 10 months away, how the hell on earth do you expect us to know?
 
Likely as long as 6 months after Nvidia rolls it out in the chipset Apple is going to use in their next generation of that product.

If it is in the chipset as the main source of USB, Apple will use it when they get it.

Don't think Apple will attempt to beat anyone to the punch by updating it via a PCIe-to-USB3 controller chip.
 
When there's a point to it.

The theoretical maximum transfer rate of USB 3 is much higher than the current transfer rates of internal hard drives, so you won't be seeing anything close to what USB 3 is offering for a long time (at least until SSD become standard)

In the mean time, you will most likely see Firewire 1600/3200, which uses the same ports as firewire 800.
 
XxpikachuxX said:
ok as all of you know usb 3.0 is coming out on 2010 so is apple going to update the macbook and will they have the new usb's or are they going to wait until thay make a whole new apple macbook?
Click to expand...

MacBook PRO first, and then early 2010, MAYbe.

That is depending on its adaptation in marketplace.

Remember that it was a very long time before Apple picked up on USB2.


The competition to USB3 is eSATA, not so much FireWire.
Why would a printer or scanner need USB3 which will cost a lot more?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back