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

New Mac Pro and USB 3.0?

nanofrog said:
They are. That's why USB 3.0 support won't be added to their chipset offerings until 2012, as to help stall it, and allow LP to gain traction (they do have control over an awful lot of systems made... ;)).
Click to expand...

yeah. have to agree with that but i think that intel is gonna lose with LP here. many manufacturers are already pushing USB3 ports in their mobos so intel can't do much about it. if intel wants LP to overtake usb 3. i have a suggestion. how about getting it to the market?
 
wywern209 said:
yeah. have to agree with that but i think that intel is gonna lose with LP here. many manufacturers are already pushing USB3 ports in their mobos so intel can't do much about it. if intel wants LP to overtake usb 3. i have a suggestion. how about getting it to the market?
Click to expand...
This will be something they'll have to deal with, but there's differences between the two standards, namely that USB uses a fixed protocol, and LP doesn't (why it can run multiple standards).

It's that ability to run multiple standards that will set it apart from USB 3.0, as it will allow fewer ports (important for laptops), and is a faster as well (LP will have to deal with latency, but even then, it will still be faster than USB 3.0, even if it didn't suffer latency at all).

They have a solid marketing point, now all they have to do is get the gear out, and deliver on the promises. :eek: :p

If it does prove to be the superior interface, it will win out IMO (would be cheaper for system vendors, and they definitely watch the bottom line).
 
nanofrog said:
It's that ability to run multiple standards that will set it apart from USB 3.0
Click to expand...

It doesn't 'run multiple protocols. It transports multiple protocols. Just because you transport an iSCSI protocol over Ethernet ( or Inifiniband) doesn't mean the underlying protocol isn't present. If transporting multiple legacy protocols at the same time on the same "wire" that likely means that neither one of them is in charge of the transport.

It will be easier for Intel to get folks to adopt it if the new protocol enables old legacy ones than if just introduced a new one that required all new stuff. It is a slippery slope if this is going to be its only and primary benefit though ( keeping your old legacy equipment in the game.)
 
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