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.
Upcoming USB 3.2 Specification Will Double Data Rates Using Existing Cables
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No. USB 2.0 does 480 Mb/s, or about 48 MB/s. The iPhone 7 does > 400 MB/s sequential reads and > 130 MB/s sequential writes. It'll easily benefit from USB 3.0 (not so much from 3.2).
NO they do not do USB 3.0 speeds. It has been proven hundreds of times that they have the USB 3 hardware inside but they sync at USB 2 speeds only. Apple restriction.
They have USB 3 but they sync at USB 2 ONLY.
I don't necessarily want it back; but I DO want a reasonable USB-C/TB3 to FW Adapter, without having to resort to TWO cascaded Apple adapters (that also leaves anyone that needs more than 7W of power from the FW bus out in the cold) or a fairly expensive OWC TB-3 Dock...
No they don’t even use USB 3 compliant fast charging. It is again custom Apple charging where you need a specific 29W USB-C Apple adapter ONLY. Use any other USB-C charging adapter, it falls back to slow regular 12W charging.
Which is the essence of what is wrong with Apple strategy these days. Of course, Cook is just thinking, "people still use cables, with wireless you can get half the speed, more jitter, more errors, and it costs us less."
How can Apple claim this then?
https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MJYT2AM/A/lightning-to-sd-card-camera-reader
Ah, you are saying it won't sync at 3, just 2?
Seems to be barely any testing out there as well.
By all means, email Tim and tell him to switch to Lightning to USB-C (or just USB-C) for the iPhone 8. That way the majority with older Macs and other PCs can start complaining that they have to buy USB-A dongles.
/s
If you can’t afford a $10 cable, you have bigger problems than this.
I doubt Cook is thinking about this much at all, since it's not a very interesting topic to think about.
Most people don't care and will never, ever connect their iPhone to a computer.
And of those who do, a minority will have a 2016 or newer MacBook Pro.
And of those who do, every single one will be able to afford a stupid cable.
Maybe SD card transfer doesn't use USB as its protocol?
Wifi sync from the iMac to the iPhone is even slower and also less reliable to actually connect and/or finish. At least USB cable sync is reliable; it always see the iPhone. It's actually radically faster to download a movie from Apple via the internet than it is to sync that same movie from an iMac on the same network. And no, I don't mean stream. I mean download the full 4.5GB movie at 100Mbs through my modem+router. That is faster than syncing to iTunes on the iMac. I find this to be stupid.
Well this is a better example then:
https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MK0W2AM/A/lightning-to-usb-3-camera-adapter?fnode=97
Has an actual USB port there.
Though having a number that is a power of two is useful.
[doublepost=1501012523][/doublepost]
The current iPad Pro models (and the previous 12.9" model) have USB 3, but there is no Lightning to USB 3 (male A) cable. Simple as that. Though one could also argue that the iPad Pro only supports USB 3 with the iPad being the host device and not while it is the client device.
Last edited:
You don't need active cables for USB, and currently Thunderbolt 3 requires a separate internal chip that also adds to the bill of materials.
Coffee Lake should integrate it, but TB remains more expensive.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Are you new here? You throw away the car and buy a new one. When Apple decides something, you must roll with it. Resistance is futile.
Wrong, Intel has removed the royalties and fees related to Thunderbolt 3.
Source: http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/...olt-3-tech-in-hopes-of-wider-adoption-2949801
Whenever I buy my next macbook it's going to be a hell of an upgrade coming from a 2011 model.
- non-retina > retina
- standard SSD > faster pci-e SSD
- 802.11n 2.4ghz > 802.11ac or ax
- USB 2.0 > 3.1 or 3.2
- hardware decoding of HEVC, VP9, and hopefully AV1 if I can hold off long enough
- better battery life I assume
Con: horrible new keyboard
- non-retina > retina
- standard SSD > faster pci-e SSD
- 802.11n 2.4ghz > 802.11ac or ax
- USB 2.0 > 3.1 or 3.2
- hardware decoding of HEVC, VP9, and hopefully AV1 if I can hold off long enough
- better battery life I assume
Con: horrible new keyboard
So my Apple Thunderbolt Display from years ago the 27" cannot hook up to my new July 2017 iMac, can't fid an adaptor, Apple told me to look in Amazon, tried three USB C to mini Display Port connectors nothing worked.
The USB 3.0 Promoter Group, comprising Apple, HP, Intel, Microsoft, and other companies, today introduced an upcoming USB 3.2 specification, which will eventually replace the existing USB 3.1 specification upon release.
An incremental update, USB 3.2 is designed to define multi-lane operation for USB 3.2 hosts and devices. USB Type-C cables already support multi-lane operation, and with USB 3.2, hosts and devices can be created as multi-lane solutions, allowing for either two lanes of 5Gb/s or two lanes of 10Gb/s operation.
With support for two lanes of 10Gb/s transfer speeds, performance is essentially doubled over existing USB-C cables.
As an example, the USB Promoter Group says a USB 3.2 host connected to a USB 3.2 storage device will be capable of 2GB/sec data transfer performance over a USB-C cable certified for USB SuperSpeed 10Gb/s USB 3.1, while also remaining backwards compatible with earlier USB devices.Along with two-lane operation, USB 3.2 continues to use SuperSpeed USB layer data rates and encoding techniques and will introduce a minor update to hub specifications for seamless transitions between single and two-lane operation.
More information about USB 3.2 will be unveiled at USB Developer Days 2017 later this year.
Article Link: Upcoming USB 3.2 Specification Will Double Data Rates Using Existing Cables
Your Thunderbolt Display doesn't use DisplayPort. It uses Thunderbolt. You need a Thunderbolt 3-to-Thunderbolt 2 adapter. The physical connector is mini-DisplayPort, but the signaling is Thunderbolt, not DisplayPort.
Jeezus guys, give it a rest!
It's called different products in different phases of their different development cycles. The iPhone 7 had to be submitted to the FCC (and other equivalent agencies in the EU, etc) and the same thing had to happen for the MBP. So, the designs were "frozen" LONG before there was a common interest in USB-C for both devices.
It wouldn't be feasible regardless. If the iPhone 7 only shipped with a USB-C-to-Lightning cable, that would cause much bigger problems — your car, your airplane seat, your bedroom charger, etc. probably all use USB-A. That leaves us with either the iPhone shipping with both cables, or the MacBook Pro shipping with an additional cable.
I think a valid argument can be made that, given the rather radical transitional path the MacBook Pros are taking, they should ship with more adapters.
I think it's stupid they didn't switch their mobile line to USB c...
Plug in a USB-C/Lightning cable to the 12.9" iPad Pro. You'll be surprised.
So will current Macbook Pros that use USB-C gen 1 be able to take advantage of gen 2? Is this a firmware update or yet another hardware update?
I'm getting sick of USB because they came out with USB 3.0 with the Type A connector going at 5GB/sec then changed adapters to Type C and increased to 10GB/sec in 12 months and now Gen 2 at 20GB/sec in another 12 months!! That's insane! Would they just finalize the damn standard so we can all live in peace?
Am I supposed to wait another 12 months and have USB Type C gen 3 that goes at 30GB/sec and then 40Gb/sec the year after that?! This is madness!
I'm getting sick of USB because they came out with USB 3.0 with the Type A connector going at 5GB/sec then changed adapters to Type C and increased to 10GB/sec in 12 months and now Gen 2 at 20GB/sec in another 12 months!! That's insane! Would they just finalize the damn standard so we can all live in peace?
Am I supposed to wait another 12 months and have USB Type C gen 3 that goes at 30GB/sec and then 40Gb/sec the year after that?! This is madness!