Thunderbolt to usb 3.0

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Ryan Of Seattle, Feb 24, 2011.

  1. Ryan Of Seattle macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2011
  2. dime21 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    #2
    LMAO, what for? Seems pretty useless to me. USB3 is a crappy dead-end technology, which is why intel has skipped it and gone straight to light peak. There's no such thing as an intel chipset with built-in USB3.
     
  3. colmaclean macrumors 68000

    colmaclean

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Berlin
    #3
    At the moment, is there such a thing as a consumer device with a Thunderbolt-compatible port?

    Are we supposed to upgrade all our cameras with Thunderbolt-friendly versions?
     
  4. thedarkhorse macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #4
    Oh man stop drinking the koolaid dime. USB3 is still super fast compared to usb2 which is what 99% of people use now, and unlike thunderbolt there are actually usb3 products on the market. Also intel has said they will start supporting usb3 this year. Besides most devices won't even max out a usb3 connection so what's the point of using a faster IO?
     
  5. dime21 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    #5
    I think you've smoked too much USB granola. I don't use USB for anything except my mouse. My external hard drives, both my cameras, my card reader, my DVD burner, and my flat bed scanner are all Firewire. Once equivalent Light Peak devices come available, I'll transition to that.

    Sorry, but USB just plain sucks. It provides almost no bus power, it has very high latency, bandwidth absolutely sucks when you compare actual to theoretical, which is due to massive protocol overhead. Also, it isn't isochronous, which is required for audio and video work. USB3 is a hack on top of a band-aid. It's a piss poor solution.

    Your tinkertoy USB devices are not what media professionals use.
     
  6. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #6
    Because if more people use thunderbolt then more manufacturers will use it instead of inferior technologies like USB 2.0 and 3.0.

    Do you really need an explanation why thunderbolt is better? Must we really list these things easily found with a simple Google search.
     
  7. thedarkhorse macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #7
    So professionals aren't using Blackmagic's UltraStudio Pro? or USB 3.0 drives over FireWire 800? It must be nice to know every media professional.
     
  8. acunit86, Feb 24, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2011

    acunit86 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2011
    #8
    I have 2 usb 3 3tb drives that I use for my home theater pc and love them. Their read and write times are just as fast as the 2 3tb western digital green drives I have on sata, but their random access speeds and latency are a bit slower. It's not a big deal for what I use them for - and I would love to be able to connect them to my new thunderwhatever port.

    I may not be a 'media professional', but I and every other economist in my department have been using WD usb 3 drives to store our data because of the increased speed and compatibility with usb2 when necessary. We don't need the instant latency, and thunderstruck whatever will be just as fast as usb 3 because you've reached the mechanical limits of the hard drive. (doesn't apply to ssd necessarily)
     
  9. davefave, Feb 24, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2011

    davefave macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    #9
    Yes. Because everyone in the world is a media "professional".

    Your use of FireWire accounts for one hundredth of one percent of people who use computers. My IT company has worked with thousands of SME and large corporations and literally 0% use FireWire for any devices.

    Compatibility wins at the end of the day.

    LightPeak / Thunderbolt is the new Firewire. It will always take backseat to USB 3.0 in terms of adoption. Period.
     
  10. Faux Carnival macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2010
    #10
    Haha, USB 3.0 will kick a$$ and you won't have it. Suck it up!
     
  11. Aidoneus macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    #11
    Bringing us back to the original point of this thread, is a USB 3 to Thunderbolt adapter even possible?
     
  12. jclardy macrumors 68040

    jclardy

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    #12
    Uhh yeah, Thunderbolt supports USB 3.0 protocol along with many others, so like the OP said he would like the adapter. Thunderbolt is faster, supports more standards and has a better physical connector.

    I'd imagine a USB3->Thunderbolt adapter will be on monoprice at some point soon in the next few months. The port was just announced so it will take some time before manufactures start using it.
     
  13. davefave macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    #13
    I don't see why it won't be possible.

    And I wouldn't be surprised if Apple implements USB 3.0 in the 2012 MBP refresh.
     
  14. PhoneI macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    #14
    Give me an iPhone/iPad compatible with Thunderbolt and an external HD with Thunderbolt compatibility and that is all I will ever need.
     
  15. iMacDragon macrumors 65816

    iMacDragon

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #15
    They almost certainly will, as that's when intel chipset is expected to have support.
     
  16. CrAkD macrumors 68040

    CrAkD

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #16
    Lol cause that makes sense. Help develop a better standard then include the slower standard a year later. I would bank on either another tb port or one less USB port next year.
     
  17. d0vr macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2011
    #17
    Even if it is just a firewire update, which I doubt, I'd still welcome it. You know something, I used to install media for the elderly. If there was just one plug for them to handle, they probably would have died and gone to heaven (I've often been told by them there should be just that).

    I don't think the media professionals only situation is realistic for that reason. T-bolt has the possibility to be that one port, USB3 never will.

    @OP yes of course support will be there for T-bolt to USB3. Google it. :)
     
  18. Kissaragi macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    #18
    yes, usb is so awful, thats why no ones uses it... oh wait...
     
  19. Rocketman macrumors 603

    Rocketman

    #19
    I think Thunderbolt is a sensational idea that will get good adoption due to the simultaneous release on Wintel and Mac.

    The literature says you don't need a hub, which is fine, but I want a dongle that resembles a hub that has Tunderbolt I/O and legacy ports such as USB 1/2, FW400, FW800, VGA, DVI, and HDMI A/V. I do not want to throw out my devices that have ports more than a month old as "obsolete".

    Since one aspect of Thunderbolt is PCIe native, perhaps a plug for that to hard drives would be in order. I suspect this wish list is more of a Belkin thing than an Apple thing, but it could also have wifi, bluetooth and possibly even data only 3G/LTE and be a "super extreme" Apple unit.

    I want a data plan where I can have three wireless cellular data devices authorized to use my pool of GB.

    Rocketman
     
  20. Beige Panda macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    #20
    Media professionals don't use AMD GPUs, either, because so many programs only officially support nvidia. Avid and Adobe, to name two that I use a ton.

    However, the new macbook pros don't have nvidia options, only AMD. Huh.

    On topic, though, there's no reason there couldn't be a thunderbolt/usb3 adapter.
     
  21. Faux Carnival macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2010
    #21
    You Apple slaves! You would buy and defend it to death if Apple started selling Steve Jobs' poo.

    Doesn't the new Macbook Pro have USB 2.0 ports. They could have been USB 3.0 as well. (Still keeping the SOO beloved Thunderbolt) Wake up!
     
  22. thedarkhorse macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #22
    yeah, no one is arguing that USB3 is faster or more robust, but USB is gonna be around for a long while. If we have to have USB(which we do), it might as well be 3.0 as it's backwards compatible with the millions of 2.0 devices out there and the 3.0 devices out there and future 3.0 devices. There would be no change whatsoever physically on machines and intel is supporting USB3.0 in 2011, it makes sense to have both USB3 and TB. It's not like it's going to add cost to the machine, maybe a marginal amount in manufacturing but nothing that would push up the price of the machines.
     
  23. davefave macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    #23
    Orly?

    What about the first 3 generations of the iPod being FireWire only, and then phased over to USB 2.0 only?

    IIRC - Apple developed a "better" standard: FireWire... and now NONE of their iOS devices (not to mention the rest of the iPods, MacBook, and MacBook Airs) utilize any type of FireWire support.

    Please tell me why this will be any different.

    Consumers (and their wallets) will FORCE Apple to use USB 3.0.
     
  24. Ryan Of Seattle thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2011
    #24
    I was planning to buy blackmagic shuttle so that is why usb 3.0 would rock but i guess i will have to wait for black magic to make a thunderbolt model.
     
  25. peskaa macrumors 68020

    peskaa

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Location:
    London, UK
    #25
    Those USB 2.0 ports are there because that is what is provided on the Intel chipset. Intel don't do USB 3.0 yet, PC makers have been using 3rd party controllers. Apple however use reference Intel chipsets, so USB 2.0 only.
     

Share This Page