I pray this is indeed a disruption. Many people said the same thing about Firewire ages ago but it seems the market never caught on. I hope TB will be different.
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.
Thunderbolt to usb 3.0
- Thread starter Ryan Of Seattle
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I pray this is indeed a disruption. Many people said the same thing about Firewire ages ago but it seems the market never caught on. I hope TB will be different.
well now that we have established if its possible to have this adapter, is there one, me and my old friend google cant seem to find the damn thing.
Ok, does the ipad2 support the thunderbolt interface? If not, then that shows that apple cant be that serious about the port! If the ipad2 isn't supported, then cant image the iphone5 will support it. Also I dont think that the current external LCD display that apple sells even supports thunderbolt daisy chaining. Correct me if i'm wrong, a single hardrive cant handle 10Gbs of read/write data, therefore, for the 'average user' I cant see how thunderport is really advantageous over USB 3.0!
Ok, does the ipad2 support the thunderbolt interface? If not, then that shows that apple cant be that serious about the port! If the ipad2 isn't supported, then cant image the iphone5 will support it. Also I dont think that the current external LCD display that apple sells even supports thunderbolt daisy chaining. Correct me if i'm wrong, a single hardrive cant handle 10Gbs of read/write data, therefore, for the 'average user' I cant see how thunderport is really advantageous over USB 3.0!
The iPad came out a few days after the Thunderbolt announcement, I think Apple can be forgiven for leaving it out. Also, if you've seen the teardowns, you'll notice that the Thunderbolt chip in the MBP takes up quite a bit of space and space is the one thing the ipad does not have inside. Also, the Mini-DP port on the MBP is probably thicker than the entire iPad.
The display doesn't need to be daisy-chained, just connect it to the end of the chain. Also, you can't expect Apple to support the standard in a product that was launched long before Thunderbolt.
You're right, a single HDD can't saturate even a SATAII connection but what happens when you daisy chain multiple devices? Besides, Lacie already has announced a dual SSD Thunderbolt enclosure with SSDs that each exceed the bandwidth of a SATAII connection. You can't expect Intel to launch a new standard that caters of the today's needs only and ignores possible future developments, they'll get laughed at.
The advantages of Thunderbolt are mostly invisible to the consumer. What Intel has done is opened up a direct channel to the PCI bus which allow peripheral makers to make a variety of devices without consumers having to deal with all the different ports that we do today. The MBP is also missing out on the fastest three of the current external interfaces: E-SATA, expresscard and USB3.0. With Thunderbolt, we hopefully won't need to worry about.
I realize that over the last few years the forums here have turned into a giant circle jerk for the Apple marketing department, but it's important to remain objective about developments in hardware.
Apple is beholden to the much larger PC market (and more importantly peripheral market) that it is still a relatively small player in. If mainstream PCs adopt USB 3.0 instead of Lightpeak or start offering USB 3.0/Lightpeak ports together (just like Firewire/USB existed on many motherboards) Apple would be extremely foolish not to follow suit. USB 3.0 is backwards compatible with the tens of thousands of different USB 2.0 based devices already on the market.
For piddly things like mice and cheap microphones, people would repurchase those for a new standard like Lightpeak. The problem is there is a massive pool of expensive devices that connect with USB 2.0 and/or Firewire/eSATA.
So I really cannot see how anyone can make the argument/prediction that Apple will not keep at least some USB 2.0 ports going forward for the next few years for the massive pools of existing devices. Legacy ports are extremely hard to dump. Until recently almost every motherboard, no matter how expensive, still included PS/2 ports. That crap dates back to the late 80's.
They're going to have to keep a minimum amount of USB 2.0 ports on products going forward or replace them with USB 3.0 as they gradually phase in more Lightpeak connectors. At this point there aren't even any Lightpeak devices on the market and USB 3.0 is on many new laptops and desktops. Not to mention there are USB 3.0 devices on the market already.
That is what I think is key here.
Either Apple has to re-introduce Expresscard on it's 15" model (which would be pointless), introduce eSATA (which would be pointless over USB 3.0 unless it operated at 6Gb/s) or use Lightpeak/USB 3.0
I think they'll wind up dragging their heels on USB 3.0 as long as possible to give Thunderbolt some time to get devices on the market and for Intel to shrink the controller size. It's not exactly a tiny controller, puts out enough heat to warrant thermal paste and a heatsink, and it needs to be in both the host device and the peripheral, making it an issue for thing things like an Ipad or Iphone where space is at a premium.
You're missing one of the key advantages of Thunderbolt. It exposes the PCIe bus such that external devices which support the PCIe interface can communicate with the system via Thunderbolt. So take this eSTATA PCIe card. All they have to do is throw a Thunderbolt controller on it, change the pin connectors to a pair of Thunderbolt ports, and wrap an enclosure around it and you've got an eSATA Thunderbolt adapter. That's going to be an easier process than having to come up with something from scratch. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing external PCIe boxes which connect via Thunderbolt. Just imagine having BOTH the portability of a MBP AND the flexibility of PCIe slots from a Mac Pro. That's going to be possible only with Thunderbolt, not USB.
Given all of this, why would Apple feel at all compelled to add Expresscard, eSATA, or any other external interface to their machines? They'll add USB 3.0 down the line simply because Intel will add it to their chipset later this year, unless they decide to cripple it through OS X.
Last edited:
thunderbolt to usb3? of course! whats the discussion here? I expect Apple or others to release adapters for all kind of ports. Think about the macbook air. One thunderbolt port will be enough to hook up your super adapter which will have hdmi, usb2/3, esata, minidisplayport, ethernet and so forth.
Ok, I understand what say about ipad and iphone integration of thunderbolt due to side constraints. I dont think that apple needed to make the ipad2 thinner than the Ipad1, integration of a tunderbolt port would have been better in my opinion, but then I'm not mass markering guru. Well I guess that would mean any future external HD's that operate from tunderbolt port will be larger an heavier than current range of external HD's due to the need to house the thunderbolt chip and heatsink. So it seems you cant have everything, size and performance. USB 3.0 makes esata and other older peripherals obsolete. Its already in the market and accoding you you comment about the thunderbolt chip required to be in ever device, means that devices will be smaller and cheaper. If its performace if already suitable for 'average' users, why not include it, but asking apple a question like why? is silly!
Well I partially agree with you, I think the USB3.0 would be the better standard for most people and I would have been really happy if Apple replaced the existing USB2.0 ports with USB3.0.
Regarding your comment about Thunderbolt drives being larger heavier... not necessarily. Existing drives already have a USB and/or Firewire controller chip and I don't think the Thunderbolt chip will need a huge heatsink, the teardowns make the heatsink over them look quite measly so they probably don't run much hotter than the HDDs themselves but that is just speculation on my part.
Regarding your comment about Thunderbolt drives being larger heavier... not necessarily. Existing drives already have a USB and/or Firewire controller chip and I don't think the Thunderbolt chip will need a huge heatsink, the teardowns make the heatsink over them look quite measly so they probably don't run much hotter than the HDDs themselves but that is just speculation on my part.
johnnyturbouk
macrumors 68000
Apple has snubbed usb3 to a point, they have not updated osx to provide the right firmware/drivers for usb3 support in osx? Allowing those with expresscard34 to use one of the hundreds expresscatd34s out there
Lacie, with their custom firmware have one of the only advertised option for USB3! However, the % sucres rate of MBP using the lacie usb3 expresscard is pathetically low!
The point is even if 3rd part developers make a thunderbolt to USB3 adapter, it's pointless unless apple give them firmware and drivers for mac osx
Lacie, with their custom firmware have one of the only advertised option for USB3! However, the % sucres rate of MBP using the lacie usb3 expresscard is pathetically low!
The point is even if 3rd part developers make a thunderbolt to USB3 adapter, it's pointless unless apple give them firmware and drivers for mac osx
You mean like firewire has been? (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)
+1 on the market demand for a USB3.0 adapter.
At this point USB3.0 is more standard than Thunderbolt (there's actually real products that use it), and it's not yet clear when (or if) Thunderbolt will get much momentum beyond Macs. Even the brandy-new iPad doesn't support Thunderbolt, not even via an iPad connector adapter.
I think Intel makes more profit on Thunderbolt than on USB3.0, so it'd be obvious which they'd try to support first. The offical Intel statement: "Intel fully supports USB 3 and plans to integrate it in the future," said the company's Jason Ziller. It's seems to be scheduled for the Panther Point chipset with 4 USB 3.0 ports (along with 10 USB 2.0 ports).
Arguments against USB 3.0 based on fanboism are stupid. The bottom line is that I can run out and buy a USB 3.0 drive from any electronics retailer today. Can't buy any Thunderbolt stuff. Will it be better in the long run? Perhaps, but lack of USB 3 support today hurts more than Thunderbolt support tomorrow helps.
Real pros aren't using firewire either, it's all SAN.
Unless your idea of pro is that small 2-5 person shop.
I fail to see how looking toward the future makes one a fanboy. It's just one of those "anyone who disagrees with me is a fanboy" arguments.
Support isn't in the Intel chipset, so it would have replaced the Thunderbolt port because that space on the logic board would have been needed for a USB3 chip. So basically there is a period of inconvenience between the Early 2011 release and such time that an adapter is released. Not that big of a deal to get a far superior port in the long term.
Fanboy = "USB is a dieing technology, Thunderbolt is awesome"
Reality = "USB is useful today, Thunderbolt may be useful tomorrow"
I want a Thunderbolt to USB 3.0 hub so I can have just one cable on the side of my MBP that enables sound, video and all my periphals. Right now I've got 3 to do the same job.
When I can grab a powered USB 3.0 hub that interfaces with my MBP for under $50 I'll pick one up immediately. It would be quite useful.
When I can grab a powered USB 3.0 hub that interfaces with my MBP for under $50 I'll pick one up immediately. It would be quite useful.
It, in fact, does as Ivy Bridge's (intel's upcoming die shrink of the just released Sandy Bridge) chipsets will be replacing the USB2 ports with USB3 ones. Apple uses Intel's chipsets, just like everyone else who uses current gen intel CPUs, thus the next MBPs will absolutely certainly have USB3
I am sure this has been discussed. Is thunderbolt's high transfer rates somewhat hindered by the speed of your computers HDD (I have macbook pro 2008 early)? My HDD has a rate of around 65 mb/s. How can I transfer something off my HDD to an external HDD/SSD using thunderbolt and get 800mb/s+ out of it?
Just seems as if you would have to have the fastest SSD in your computer and external enclosure, even then doesn't seem it could reach those speeds.
This is all new to me so take my assumptions/opinions "with a grain of salt."
Just seems as if you would have to have the fastest SSD in your computer and external enclosure, even then doesn't seem it could reach those speeds.
This is all new to me so take my assumptions/opinions "with a grain of salt."