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
It would not have caused any problem whatsoever if they gave buyers the option to choose their cable at the time of purchase. This would solve issues for those with new MBPs, and would keep the original USB-A intact for those who do not have the new port.
Because not until 2018 will Thunderbolt 3 be royalty free. USB 3.1 is royalty free (hold logo and vendor ID)
2GB/s over USB will be very welcome. It would also be welcome to change the transfer rate protocol to Bytes instead of bits so there is less confusion in the consumer market about storage size vs transfer speed. Hell, I see this mistake in the professional world all too much as well.
https://www.cultofmac.com/483186/intel-will-eliminate-thunderbolt-royalties-boost-adoption/
I do not think they will ever finalise anything. That drives the economy forward when people are rarely ever satisfied with their purchase for even 6 months. It is slowly getting drilled in our heads that no matter what we buy today, tomorrow they are going to outdate it. And that tomorrow will not even come 24 hours later, they are shortening the number of hours faster than we would ever like them to.
So, just buy what serves the purpose till the foreseeable future and relax and enjoy that purchase. USB-C 3.1 with its 10Gb/s is stupid fast anyway even today.
You mean gen 2.
This sounds like a hardware change to me.
USB 3.0 is from 2008, 3.1 from 2013 and 3.2 may be out in late 2017. I don't count 12 months there.
You know, even if it were 12 months, I don't see what's preventing you from using 3.0 or 3.1 right now. They're either good enough for your needs, or they're not.
Going by your last few posts here, I would really urge you to be just ever so slightly gentler in your tone. Hurts nobody, helps everybody.
That's a problem with the iPhone 7. Apple should ditch lightning. Then we would have USB 3.2 speeds and universal standards everywhere. All other devices use USB-C anyway.
2 different technologies.
If people use Thunderbolt then they have to pay royalty to Intel.
If you use USB then you probably pay lot less in royalty.
Thunderbolt 3 (New MBP) uses Thunderbolt technology with USB C Port design.
Also Thunderbolt requires a chip from Intel in MB.
The article is correct. There's some approximation and rounding going on in this article. The writer says USB 3.2 supports two lanes of 10Gb/s is possible, so total 20Gb/s (2.5GB/s) but then USB promoter group proceed to say the USB 3.2 cable can transfer 2GB/s (16Gb/s). Considering 128b/130b encoding overhead and the standard currently underdevelopment, we'll most likely be seeing real world 2GB/s (16Gb/s) as they said.
Implementing Thunderbolt on a device is costlier, more complex,
agree.
unnecessary in many cases.
Don't agree.
even 5Gb/s is fast for regular HDDs/SSDs.
I don't know if some one can transfer data this fast using consumer grade SSD.
May be needed for Video/display
[doublepost=1501016856][/doublepost]
I think MBP uses USB-C port but Thunderbolt 3.0 controller so MBPs are faster than USB C 3.2 already. I know it is confusing.
Not sure what you mean, especially with the post you gave as an example.
My guess is murdoc2k was referring to gen 2 (i.e. 3.1's new speed tier), not gen 1 (i.e. 3.0's), and my second guess is that combining two lanes isn't a change that can be implemented in firmware, and even if it could, there'd be little incentive for hardware vendors to do so when they can instead sell something new.
USB 3.0 isn't two years old, but rather nine; I feel that's a significant difference that makes the "twelve months" assertion look a little silly. When USB 3.0 came out, the newest iPhone was the 3G (the one without the S).
I do get a little annoyed when people complain about fast-paced progress in IT. Yes, sometimes that's hard to keep up with. But in this particular instance, there isn't really any need to. Just buy what works for you. Don't chase the newest technology if you don't need to.
USB 3.0 is still plenty fast for most uses, and the announcement of USB 3.2 doesn't change or take away from that in any way. Nor does 3.2 cause incompatibility problems, obsolete older versions, or otherwise break things, so I think it's a little grating to criticize the USB-IF for doing their job — evolving their standard.
Type C is just the new socket, can carry anything they choose to put in it and will hopefully be around for a long time. Type A has been with us since the start of USB. Seems like a good deal to me as now it's one socket for everything, instead of a mess of ports like tb2, usb, hdmi, dp, power.
It does.
Intel announced the plan to remove the fee in 2018.
But it's not clear when - also, it's not clear if it will apply to future thunderbolt standards.
Also third party companies don't magically release custom TB controllers once the standard is free. It will take years, assuming TB3 will still be the "bleeding edge" standard afterwards.
No it didn't. Client devices and cables are royalty free. That doesn't mean they are open. Also, you still need to use Alpine Ridge chips, and those are still not open and only made only by intel.
"out of the box..." withstanding, try one of these and move along.
https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MK0X2AM/A/usb-c-to-lightning-cable-1-m?fnode=91
Yeah thats a bit ridiculous when you consider that we've had USB 3.0 available for years now, (and now 3.2) and also the fact that we're seeing 256 and 512 GBs storage on iOS devices.
Maybe by 2020 or so...
And if someone isn't the first to jump, it will take even longer. That's why I applaud the decision. Every 5-10 years or so Apple has to drag a whole group of people into the next phase of tech. (5400 RPM hard drives not withstanding) If they didn't we'd have a whole group of people still using floppy disc drives.
You would be right if they supported USB 3, but not USB 2. newer iOS devices can easily write faster than USB 2 can deliver.
Reminds of all it happened for previous standards like FireWire / TB... They come out with a standard that is superior, but expensive. USB inches along to provide better and better performance at a much lower cost... so nobody uses FW / TB.
I understand that 40gbps w/ TB3 is still a jump over USB 3.2, but for most, USB 3.2 will be enough, even to power high res displays.
I understand that 40gbps w/ TB3 is still a jump over USB 3.2, but for most, USB 3.2 will be enough, even to power high res displays.
Latency? TBolt is apparently much better than USB in this regard. Anyone have any figures explaining this would be welcomed to help readers here understand.
Even though I dislike the proprietary nature of Apple's Lighting port, compared to the USB-C port on the MacBook, I substantially prefer the quality of the Lighting connector. I like the snap-in feel (tactile response) of the connector.