Any idea of the Mac can boot into Target Disk mode using USB Type C?
Probably not... so, Thunderbolt is still needed for many
Probably not... so, Thunderbolt is still needed for many
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.
New Reversible USB Type-C Standard Gains Support for DisplayPort Video
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think the problem with most of you guys is that you need to realize Thunderbolt is not for you. It's for professionals. It doesn't have the overhead that USB does and it's twice as fast as this new USB standard, with optical versions on the way that go 50Gbps and 100Gbps bi-directional. It's about having direct access to the motherboard externally. You run things like USB on top of Thunderbolt.
Sounds really nice. Finally an idea that at least aims to combine ergonomics, high current charging, small size, fast data transfer, and video display in a single connector. I would say they really should have done this years ago because it's not some futuristic magical technology, it just makes sense, but hey.
People that would do that would do that through separate Thunderbolt ports.
That's if they hit the bandwidth limits at all.. even at 4k, there's a lot more bandwidth available in Thunderbolt than necessary.
The bandwidth of USB 3.1 is not even sufficient for 4K. I cannot see Apple pedalling back on that. Which would exclude the rMBPs as switching over to this USB connector as their monitor output. However, TB 3 is rumoured to get a new connector, so who knows what happens with that.
I still have my doubts though if USB and TB could use the same connector, it could be highly confusing for consumers. (USB 2 and USB 3, for example, share the same connector but they are backwards compatible, something TB and USB will not likely do).
So USB type-C _can_ include DisplayPort.. and it _can_ provide power up to 100 W. But only if the computer makers want to.
Why would they? They are still using VGA.. which is good enough for most monitors, and good o'l USB power is still good enough for most peripherals, and why anew connector at all? There's _billions_ of gadgets that won't be able to use the new connector without adaptors, so why bother? Most PC vendors doesn't give a **** about the users.. if they had, they wouldn't ship with 5 year old Pentium M or Core 2 Duo processors, sub par track pads, sub par displays, keyboards with ****** ergonomics, batteries not lasting a workday and fans that runs constantly whether the machine need cooling or not. And there's still new machines released with USB2.
I'm betting that most PC computers won't include these features before 2020 at the earliest.
Why would they? They are still using VGA.. which is good enough for most monitors, and good o'l USB power is still good enough for most peripherals, and why anew connector at all? There's _billions_ of gadgets that won't be able to use the new connector without adaptors, so why bother? Most PC vendors doesn't give a **** about the users.. if they had, they wouldn't ship with 5 year old Pentium M or Core 2 Duo processors, sub par track pads, sub par displays, keyboards with ****** ergonomics, batteries not lasting a workday and fans that runs constantly whether the machine need cooling or not. And there's still new machines released with USB2.
I'm betting that most PC computers won't include these features before 2020 at the earliest.
You will always want at least two TB ports on a TB-based system.
I'm wondering about the "100 Watts" part. That sounds like a good way to start a fire.
Seems pretty likely that it will go that way. USB 3 is getting very good and is more than enough for the majority of people. Thunderbolt probably has a future in the pro sector but I do wonder if we will start seeing it disappear from consumer macs soon.
Who should have priced it? Apple gave all the rights of their research to Intel, to make up for FireWire. And that reversible plug here? Where do you think that idea came from?
----------
Thunderbolt belongs to Intel, like USB.
Now usb 3.1 has power + data + video all in one port. It is now possible to have a computer that connects to a docking station with just one port. I feel like this is what thunderbolt was trying to do the whole time, yet it never quite got there. While thunderbolt II can have 2x the data speed, the difference in price makes that advantage pretty minor in comparison.
Thunderbolt needs a new feature that USB can never quite emulate, which is external GPUs. Thunderbolt is right on the PCIe bus, so only thunderbolt can support external GPUs natively. Otherwise, thunderbolt is going to disappear pretty quickly, as the price for something as simple as an external HD is 2x the price of competing USB drives.
Thunderbolt needs a new feature that USB can never quite emulate, which is external GPUs. Thunderbolt is right on the PCIe bus, so only thunderbolt can support external GPUs natively. Otherwise, thunderbolt is going to disappear pretty quickly, as the price for something as simple as an external HD is 2x the price of competing USB drives.
Cool, this sounds like it will be a cheaper option than Thunderbolt for consumer docking stations. Though I wonder what resolutions it will be able to push? (EDIT: seems with DP 1.3 that won't be a problem, nice)
However, to people predicting the demise of Thunderbolt: No, USB and Thunderbolt are overall complementary not competitive technologies. USB is the cheaper and good-enough consumer option for connectivity to external devices. Thunderbolt is a replacement for Express Cards with DisplayPort added on. USB is not a replacement for Thunderbolt because it is not a replacement for PCI-E. The addition of DisplayPort on Thunderbolt was meant to drive adoption so that makers using ExpressCards would use Thunderbolt instead, not so that USB would be replaced. I'm sure Intel had hopes that Thunderbolt would also get wider adoption beyond that market, but that hasn't happened too much and indeed even replacing ExpressCards has been slower than they would've liked. However, connection adoption tends to be at glacial pace (the slow adoption of USB 3.0 from 2.0 is a case in point and that's on consumer products with higher turnover rates).
While Intel did make some mistakes that slowed adoption further, Apple exclusivity wasn't one of them - that was merely a rumor that got tossed around that Apple would have 1 year exclusivity. Both Intel and Apple denied it and indeed PC makers came out with machines with Thunderbolt ports long before that. Apple simply released devices with Thunderbolt soon after announcement as they helped bring it to market.
However, to people predicting the demise of Thunderbolt: No, USB and Thunderbolt are overall complementary not competitive technologies. USB is the cheaper and good-enough consumer option for connectivity to external devices. Thunderbolt is a replacement for Express Cards with DisplayPort added on. USB is not a replacement for Thunderbolt because it is not a replacement for PCI-E. The addition of DisplayPort on Thunderbolt was meant to drive adoption so that makers using ExpressCards would use Thunderbolt instead, not so that USB would be replaced. I'm sure Intel had hopes that Thunderbolt would also get wider adoption beyond that market, but that hasn't happened too much and indeed even replacing ExpressCards has been slower than they would've liked. However, connection adoption tends to be at glacial pace (the slow adoption of USB 3.0 from 2.0 is a case in point and that's on consumer products with higher turnover rates).
While Intel did make some mistakes that slowed adoption further, Apple exclusivity wasn't one of them - that was merely a rumor that got tossed around that Apple would have 1 year exclusivity. Both Intel and Apple denied it and indeed PC makers came out with machines with Thunderbolt ports long before that. Apple simply released devices with Thunderbolt soon after announcement as they helped bring it to market.
Last edited:
Remember thunderbolt2 and maybe even 1 will be able to do USB 3.1 via an adapter.
We use Thunderbolt all the time. I have a Thunderbolt2 LG monitor on my desk now. We have dozens of very large thunderbolt 1 & 2 RAIDs. I use it on set for networking.
To me it is not an either or, thunderbolt did not make USB 2 or 3 go away and USB 3 while fast enough for most people did not make thunderbolt go away anny more than those technologies did not make 10GbE, Inifiniband, or even good ol' fiberchannel go away. Both connectors are small so I would want Thunderbolt AND USB 3.1.
Once the networking stack gets optimized (all done in software right now so IO can affect performance) then thunderbolt can take off as a networking technology too (also need switches). Remember too thunderbolt is specced to go to 100Gbps and USB 3.1 is just catching up to Thunderbolt 1
We use Thunderbolt all the time. I have a Thunderbolt2 LG monitor on my desk now. We have dozens of very large thunderbolt 1 & 2 RAIDs. I use it on set for networking.
To me it is not an either or, thunderbolt did not make USB 2 or 3 go away and USB 3 while fast enough for most people did not make thunderbolt go away anny more than those technologies did not make 10GbE, Inifiniband, or even good ol' fiberchannel go away. Both connectors are small so I would want Thunderbolt AND USB 3.1.
Once the networking stack gets optimized (all done in software right now so IO can affect performance) then thunderbolt can take off as a networking technology too (also need switches). Remember too thunderbolt is specced to go to 100Gbps and USB 3.1 is just catching up to Thunderbolt 1
That may eventually come - in fact there are products that do so now. But my crystal ball is broken when it comes to predicting when eGPUs via Thunderbolt will be good enough.
Still Thunderbolt and USB are mostly complementary not competitive products. Better USB technology is great but isn't going to kill Thunderbolt.
*Looks around*
Nope.
----------
Read the AT article. Type C can support PCIe pass thru.
That may eventually come - in fact there are products that do so now. But my crystal ball is broken when it comes to predicting when eGPUs via Thunderbolt will be good enough.
Still Thunderbolt and USB are mostly complementary not competitive products. Better USB technology is great but isn't going to kill Thunderbolt.
Amen, I like my USB3 stuff, and I love my Thunderbolt ports. They complement each other, I want both. They server similar but different purposes.
And having R&D on two separate technologies can actually benefit each other as each R&D group sees what works well with the other. For example, would the new and improved USB specs be where they are now if Thunderbolt hadn't been there? Keep the progress coming from both camps!
I don't believe that alternative mode has been announced - only DisplayPort. Which is not to say it couldn't come, but I don't believe another signal types have been announced (EDT: in an earlier AnandTech article they mention it only as a possibility and this announcement was that the first alternative mode is DisplayPort, there may be more coming). Also that's not quite the same thing as Thunderbolt which encapsulates other protocols and allows direct access by PCI. And in the case of eGPUs, even Thunderbolt 2 has trouble sending enough bandwidth (currently) - though tests on Thunderbolt eGPUs showed it wasn't as bad as you might think.
Last edited:
Are you living in some time warp?
Most PC systems that come out are generally ahead of Apple machines as you can buy something NOW for a PC, but have to wait for Apple to decide to implement it in their machines.
PC's had USB3, pretty much before it was even officially out!
While I hope Henriok is exaggerating for effect, it is true that connection changes happen slowly. When USB 3.0 came out it took years for it to gain traction over USB 2.0. Yes of course, some computer makers put it in immediately on some lines, but it took years for the market as a whole to adopt it. Before Thunderbolt, most news articles lamented how slowly USB 3.0 was being adopted, then Thunderbolt came along and its adoption rate was even slower so they had something else to castigate.
You are talking about two different adoption modes - what can you get on a small percentage of PC's versus all Macs/PC's. The same is the case for iPhones vs Androids. On Androids a lot of experimental machines get released while iPhones tend to only adopt a technology once it becomes a standard. Thunderbolt was one of the few exceptions to this for Apple interestingly. Probably because Apple wanted to replace Firewire ports and ExpressCard slots
.
Last edited:
I think you mean DVI. I haven't seen a monitor with VGA (that didn't have DVI or HDMI as an option) in years.
I love how we're getting yet another standard. My plethora of USB cables in my desk at home would disagree with the "universal" point of the name. But at least they're cheap, unlike lightning or thunderbolt.