thunderbolt slowly becoming the next fw800

[booksacool1]

Meh, FireWire 800 is already as fast as a 7200-rpm drive can take anyway. The only time you'll see speed advantages above FW800 is when you have an SSD in which case Thunderbolt will blow USB 3.0 out of the water.

Actually FireWire 800 would be bottlenecking any modern HDD. Modern 2TB HDD's have sequential read speeds of over 130MB/s (1050Mb/s), whereas FireWire 800 seems to max out at 75MB/s (600Mb/s).
http://macperformanceguide.com/Storage-Drive-SATA-vs-Firewire.html

This is ignoring the other problem with FW800 - its bloody expensive!

apple wouldn't necessarily HAVE to support usb 3.0 just because intels chipsets do, it's just a lot more likely since it won't require any additional controllers to support usb 3.0

They wouldn't have to, but it would be stupid if they didn't, considering they'll be paying intel for the hardware regardless. And given that USB 3 ports are also physically cross compatible with USB 2, apple would be loosing no valuable laptop space by integrating USB 3.

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

Sorry, I'm a noob, but I'm guessing that Firewire was supposed to take off, but failed to become popular?

Really the wrong question! FW800 is a standard for professional demands (realtime applications and more). TB is a bit "broader" i.e. it can be used for more devices. FW800 is very popular in the professional and semi-professional markets. So i think, some people should not measure the success based on the wrong scale. Or how many non-professional users use FW800?

I use two inXtron-FW800 (very reliable, unlike other FW-cases) for Time Machine-backups and 200 GB video projects because it (the FW-protocol) requires zero CPU time. They have also a case with eSATA/FW800/USB3. All these cases support FW800-daisy chaining (which i use).

 

[basesloaded190]

They wouldn't have to, but it would be stupid if they didn't, considering they'll be paying intel for the hardware regardless. And given that USB 3 ports are also physically cross compatible with USB 2, apple would be loosing no valuable laptop space by integrating USB 3 (unlike thunderbolt).

How did Apple lose space when implementing thunderbolt when they used the same port that was already there? (Mini DP)

 

[MrNomNoms]

i dont know about you guys, but im slowly getting the feeling as if thunderbolt is becoming the next fw800.

even the adaption of usb3 was faster. thunderbolt release was 4 months ago.

and still there are no TB devices with a set release date.

how do you guys feel about this?

Excuse my rudeness but why would I remotely give a crap about USB3 when the current generation of external hard disks can't even max out the USB2 bus - at max I'd be getting 10MBps (80Mbps, 1/6 of USB2's theoretical capacity). USB3 isn't going to magically address long standing issues in a long chain of crappy hardware.

Btw, Thunderbolt is more than just another port - the fact that there is a delay between the launch and products is idiotic given that it took almost 6-12 months for USB3 products to appear on the shelves where I live and even then the majority of computers being sold in said shop were still USB2.

 

[booksacool1]

How did Apple lose space when implementing thunderbolt when they used the same port that was already there? (Mini DP)

Whoops. I've corrected my post.

Excuse my rudeness but why would I remotely give a crap about USB3 when the current generation of external hard disks can't even max out the USB2 bus - at max I'd be getting 10MBps (80Mbps, 1/6 of USB2's theoretical capacity). USB3 isn't going to magically address long standing issues in a long chain of crappy hardware.

No rudeness there but current external drives certainly do max out the USB2 bus (in sequential read/writes). Even my half-decade old 60gb 2.5" drive manages ~44MB/s which maxes out my USB2 bus. If your drive is only doing 10MB/s, there's something wrong with it.

 

[Tapiwa]

Well it would help if Apple bothered to update its own products to support TB...like for example a new time capsule for fast backups...

Or even new ipads/iphones with almost instant syncing

 

[xxBURT0Nxx]

They wouldn't have to, but it would be stupid if they didn't, considering they'll be paying intel for the hardware regardless. And given that USB 3 ports are also physically cross compatible with USB 2, apple would be loosing no valuable laptop space by integrating USB 3.

I know they aren't going to lose space, just saying that just because ivy bridge supports usb 3.0 doesn't mean apple has to implement it if they don't want to. People shouldn't be saying that because ivy bridge supports usb 3.0 that apple will also support it in their next refresh. Although it's likely, it's not confirmed or guaranteed, that was my point.

How did Apple lose space when implementing thunderbolt when they used the same port that was already there? (Mini DP)

They had to add an additional controller/chipset onto the logic board for thunderbolt.

Btw, Thunderbolt is more than just another port - the fact that there is a delay between the launch and products is idiotic given that it took almost 6-12 months for USB3 products to appear on the shelves where I live and even then the majority of computers being sold in said shop were still USB2.

while I can agree it's a little annoying not having accessories to use with the port, you have to realize that accessories are always going to come after the fact. Nobody is going to buy a TB drive that they can't plug into their computer, but people will buy a computer with a TB port which may be of use at a later date to them.

As for waiting 6-12 months, use the freaking internet. You will be able to buy any usb 3.0 or TB drives right when they are released on the web. There is no sense in waiting for products to get to brick and mortar stores in this day and age, especially when they are often also more expensive than their internet counterparts.

 

[dusk007]

The problem with Firewire has always been and still is cost. It is just not worth it for most things. You can get a USB 3.0 external HDD case for almost the price of better old USB2.0 eSATA cases. FW800 capable ones cost more than the hdd you put in. That is why it is only in devices where price really is a secondary concern.
The controllers/licences are just too expensive I hope that Thunderbolt won't have the same problem. In the near future and for the first devices I am quite sure it will be the case though. Quantity might help in the future and Intel if they aren't too greedy.

 

[Scuby]

I like the idea of thunderbolt, but not sure how much it will be used for external storage just because of the power issue (ie thunderbolt doesn't provide any!) - means it either has to piggyback off USB for its power, or have an external power supply, meaning it's only good for things that live on the desk. Sure, it'll be great for some big desktop drives, multi-drive enclosures, etc, but for the majority of users, and particularly those with laptops, they will probably prefer the convenience of a single cable.

David

 

[xxBURT0Nxx]

I like the idea of thunderbolt, but not sure how much it will be used for external storage just because of the power issue (ie thunderbolt doesn't provide any!) - means it either has to piggyback off USB for its power, or have an external power supply, meaning it's only good for things that live on the desk. Sure, it'll be great for some big desktop drives, multi-drive enclosures, etc, but for the majority of users, and particularly those with laptops, they will probably prefer the convenience of a single cable.

David

thunderbolt DOES provide power. The original idea to use fiber would have meant no power but because they are using copper, it is now able to carry power. Also as far as I know, they plan to continue using copper alongside fiber in the future so that the cable can still carry power (at least in short runs of cable.... one of the advantages of fiber is the ability to have very long cables with no performance loss, so in these situations, there would probably be no power from the cable and the device would be powered on the other end)