Again, how is Thunderbolt a "headache"? Intel has already stated USB 3.0 will be standard in Ivy Bridge. Therefore, it will come to Macs in 2012. Thunderbolt will enable docking stations, PCIe racks, etc. to be standardized. It's just beginning. Yes, it is a bit disappointing Apple didn't do more to take advantage of its one-year head start (such as by releasing the Thunderbolt Display a few months sooner, or releasing some peripherals of its own, like TB to GigaBit Ethernet or Firewire adapters), but the peripherals are coming, and to see someone as mainstream as Seagate support it is encouraging.
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.
Seagate Starts Selling GoFlex Portable Thunderbolt Adapter
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Again, how is Thunderbolt a "headache"? Intel has already stated USB 3.0 will be standard in Ivy Bridge. Therefore, it will come to Macs in 2012. Thunderbolt will enable docking stations, PCIe racks, etc. to be standardized. It's just beginning. Yes, it is a bit disappointing Apple didn't do more to take advantage of its one-year head start (such as by releasing the Thunderbolt Display a few months sooner, or releasing some peripherals of its own, like TB to GigaBit Ethernet or Firewire adapters), but the peripherals are coming, and to see someone as mainstream as Seagate support it is encouraging.
That's just great , so I payed about $120 for the drive and now I'll need to dish out another $100 for the adapter. I waited this long I may as well wait for the price to come down.
Would love this as an SSD option if it worked but the price is a bit of a killer right now. $200+ for the SSD, $100 for the adapter and $50 for the cable. Plus shipping on all three. That's nearing $400 for one hard drive with only maybe 120GB of space. A little out of budget at the moment and no guarantee it would even work.
If the adapter is bootable, that would be awesome. I could buy an SSD and this adapter and use it on my iMac. I didn't want to pay the high prices of an SSD when ordering my iMac, knowing that prices will go down and a Thunderbolt to SATA adapter would come out eventually. So this is very exciting news, now we just need some tests to be done. 
Video professionals who work in the field have already their solutions, because they cannot wait. That's a reality.
I agree. ;-)
If the adapter is bootable, that would be awesome. I could buy an SSD and this adapter and use it on my iMac. I didn't want to pay the high prices of an SSD when ordering my iMac, knowing that prices will go down and a Thunderbolt to SATA adapter would come out eventually. So this is very exciting news, now we just need some tests to be done.
I ordered one and will be testing it out with my OCZ Vertex 3 SSD next week.
Yeah, but all MBP/MBA Early-2011 and Late-2011 owners have just TB as the fastest option (not USB 3.0), which requires additional TB-adapters and/or costs more than necessary. The higher costs + required additional adapters are not good for mass markets. I think you can understand that.
This is great news,
But for 100$ it would be great for it to be sataIII and BOOTABLE. Someone needs to test this asap! If it is bootable its the best upgrade for iMac owners!
It bothers me that it only has 1 TB port... the whole point of TB is daisy chaining. Oh Well.
But for 100$ it would be great for it to be sataIII and BOOTABLE. Someone needs to test this asap! If it is bootable its the best upgrade for iMac owners!
It bothers me that it only has 1 TB port... the whole point of TB is daisy chaining. Oh Well.
Yes, I have a 2011 MacBook Air myself. While USB 3.0 would be nice, I think you can also understand why Apple went with Thunderbolt. Given the design constraints, they could fit either one USB 3.0 controller or one Thunderbolt controller onto the logic board for the MacBook Air and Pro. Given that they knew they had an exclusive with Intel on Thunderbolt, and had a Thunderbolt display planned, I think you can understand why then went with the Thunderbolt port.
First of all, the port has a chance to resurrect the mDP standard that Apple attempted to get off the ground. Second, Thunderbolt could be what lets them get rid of the Mac Pro should they choose to do so. An iMac or even Mac Mini connected to a Thunderbolt PCIe bridge could serve much of the same market currently served by the Mac Pro. It also enables Apple to standardize on a single port. Once the Ivy Bridge chipsets ship with USB 3.0 support native, then Apple will have the best of both worlds, but until then, it fits right into Apple's strategy to have made the choice to go with Thunderbolt.
Doesn't matter much when a fast SSD drive is maybe 2 GBit/second, and a hard drive maybe 1 GBit/second.
But anyway, no, you will most definitely not get 10 Gbit / second.
I have used the FireWire 800 dock to use multiple bare SATA drives for a few years. It has the ability to connect both 3.5 and 2.5 drives easily and securely. They should do the same with ThunderBolt version. I am sure someone will come out with a dual size mounting TB dock any day.
To those bitching about the cost of a dock, mine has paid for itself many times over due to the low cost of only buying bare 1 and 2 TB drives. The base also has to have a dual TB connector for daisy chaining and while you are at it FW 800 also for connecting to Macs with and without TB.
To those bitching about the cost of a dock, mine has paid for itself many times over due to the low cost of only buying bare 1 and 2 TB drives. The base also has to have a dual TB connector for daisy chaining and while you are at it FW 800 also for connecting to Macs with and without TB.
Let us know once you get an answer.
i am also thinking bout getting this adapter and plug a sata3-ssd and make it as my boot/app drive . . .
Even though the Thunderbolt specification says you could reach up to 10Gb/s, the SATA specification is capped at 6GB/s. I confuses me as to why Seagate is labeling their drive as capable of reaching 10Gb/s because that is technically impossible.
As far as 6Gb/s - I don't think any current drive on the market can reach ~ 760MB/s bandwidth. With that said, I'm getting about 3.1Gb/s (~ 400MB/s) with my Macbook Air's SATA III SSD. That speed would be capped if it was a SATA II interface.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)
I got a bunch SSD I would love to test if someone sends Me this adaptor. (got them in 128gb until realizing I need 256gb...)
I got a bunch SSD I would love to test if someone sends Me this adaptor. (got them in 128gb until realizing I need 256gb...)
Still very expensive. And don't blame it to licensing rights or manufacturing costs. Thunderbolt is supposed to take off, but at these prices it may end up fading away.
Vendors are just taking the opportunity to make as much money as they can from the early adopters.
How could a simple SATA to Thunderbolt adaptor cost as much as an iPod Touch??? Expensive Components??? I don't think so!!!
----------
I really hope Apple will adopt USB 3.0 as well as Thunderbolt. It would be more like USB 2.0 and FireWire; each for it's own purpose/application/user-need.
The fact that Intel is well involved with Thunderbolt almost guarantees it's going to become mainstream. The rest of its success depends on the hardware vendors like Seagate and others.
And Apple, please implement USB 3.0 on your upcoming devices!
Vendors are just taking the opportunity to make as much money as they can from the early adopters.
How could a simple SATA to Thunderbolt adaptor cost as much as an iPod Touch??? Expensive Components??? I don't think so!!!
----------
I really hope Apple will adopt USB 3.0 as well as Thunderbolt. It would be more like USB 2.0 and FireWire; each for it's own purpose/application/user-need.
The fact that Intel is well involved with Thunderbolt almost guarantees it's going to become mainstream. The rest of its success depends on the hardware vendors like Seagate and others.
And Apple, please implement USB 3.0 on your upcoming devices!
How is it not? Let's get real, TB has been out a full year (with Light Peak technology existing since 2009 - around the same time USB 3.0 was being developed) and there have been only about 5 peripherals released so far, with the cheapest one being $600, the rest being RAID arrays. It requires a $50 cable that contains circuitry at each end, with Apple being the sole monopoly, I mean, company that sells them. A Japanese company called Sumitomo has been rumored to also make this cable, but it can't be purchased anywhere I know of.
Now, USB 3.0 was announced in January 2010 with the first USB 3.0-enabled computer being released in late October 2010. In late February 2011, the first TB-containing MacBook Pro came out. So, from its first introduction into the market, USB 3.0 has had only a 4 month head-start on TB, yet its peripherals are now ubiquitous within the market and can be bought relatively cheaply. The same cannot be said for TB. As a consumer, it doesn't matter why TB has been slow to catch on, the fact remains that it hasn't. I would have preferred USB 3.0 at this point. Sure, it is slower than TB, but not by much.
Sure, that's fast and all, but at what price? A decent 120 GB TB costs around $200. Plus $100 for the adaptor and plus $50 for the cable. Perhaps you have different requirements than me, but I don't think I would drop $350 for only 120 GB of external storage, regardless of its speed.
I'm hoping this trend changes soon, but nowadays bare drives are just as expensive, if not more, than regular portable HDDs.
http://www.amazon.com/Western-Digit...1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1328120656&sr=1-1
http://www.amazon.com/Western-Digit...2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1328120656&sr=1-2
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Are you saying that $50 cable and $100 adapter is not a headache? While TB will be useful for certain things, it's not a replacement for USB 3.0 and those who insist that it is give us a headache.
That is what I thought - even for USB 3.0 the current drives don't take full advantage of speed - the real killer things is how they can handle multiple devices at same time. My expectation is thunderbolt can handle it better.
----------
That should not be a big deal - likely could run 2 of them at full speed at same time - with the fact that drives can handle full speed - likely even more.
This is nice. I use the GoFlex FW800 adapter to connect all my 2.5" drives to my MBP and the desktop FW800 (has USB 2 as well) as my dock for larger drives.
Each cost only $20. Thank you Seagate for dumping enclosures and going pure SATA.
This is a little bit pricey though.
Each cost only $20. Thank you Seagate for dumping enclosures and going pure SATA.
This is a little bit pricey though.
Where did you here USB 3.0 standard for Intel in Ivy Bridge - I heard at at least in some ares Thunderbolt will be available.
I not sure USB 3.0 is flexible enough, I like that that thunderbolt can do both video and storage. If done right you can have fast external storage connected to your monitor and GigaBit Ethernet - thus your docking station with one cable to your notebook.
Neither I, Apple, nor Intel have ever said that Thunderbolt is a replacement for USB 3.0. The price of the cables will eventually come down, as will the price of peripherals. More PC manufacturers are releasing Thunderbolt this year, so with more compatible PCs, there will be more and cheaper accessories.
They have said this multiple times.
Thunderbolt won't be native or required either by Ivy Bridge or the Ultrabook standard, but AnandTech has reported that they are releasing more Thunderbolt controllers, hopefully lower priced to improve adoption.
Thunderbolt is perfect for a notebook dock. That's why Intel is pushing it for Ultrabooks. Unfortunately, they aren't mandating it in order to qualify for the marketing support.
----------
The biggest difference is that USB 3.0 was available in general on Windows PCs while Thunderbolt was available only on Macs. Only about 20 million Macs were sold, which is about 2% of the global PC market.
2012 Macs will have both USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt. So will many Ultrabooks.
Apple was instrumental in designing the Thunderbolt interface. Part of the deal was a year of exclusivity. It wouldn't have made sense for them from a business perspective not to take advantage of that. I agree they could have done more, such as release more Thunderbolt peripherals themselves.
Last edited: