Was thunderbolt a big rip-off?

[Kendo]

I can't back it up with a source (not because it doesn't exist but because I'm too lazy to find it ) but I remember reading an article when the iMac first came out a decade ago, USB wasn't supported at all. And Apple still decided to remove the parallel port from the iMac. I also remember them getting killed on their decision to remove the floppy drive from the iMac. They are simply looking ahead into the future like always.

And how is it a rip off? Last time I checked, the new iMacs follow the same pricing structure as the July 2010 models.

 

[Badger^2]

clearly none of you remember the of what USB cables cost when they first came out.

 

[bungiefan89]

clearly none of you remember the of what USB cables cost when they first came out.

Please, enlighten me! [/no sarcasm]

At barely 22 less than years old today, I was far too young when USB was first introduced to appreciate the price of such technology.

 

[rnb2]

There's no reason they can't use an add-in card for USB 3.0. Most consumer laptops that cost more than $500 are coming with USB 3.0 as standard these days, and this is a $1500 desktop we're talking about. It's definitely a rip off, in the same way that buyers guide would say not to buy a Macbook Pro if it still had a Core 2 Duo processor in it.

Nonsense. Apple can't add an existing third party USB3 controller because there is no room on the MacBook Pro logic boards. All those cheap Windows laptops are much thicker and bulkier than the MBP, and they sacrifice battery life for feature checklists.

 

[atMac]

Nonsense. Apple can't add an existing third party USB3 controller because there is no room on the MacBook Pro logic boards. All those cheap Windows laptops are much thicker and bulkier than the MBP, and they sacrifice battery life for feature checklists.

That's just BS. There are smaller boards than the MacBook Pros that have USB3.

The original unibody MBP had Core 2 duo, and separate chipset and memory controller, and IGP and GPU.

The memory controller, IGP, and parts of the chipset are now ON the CPU, thats a lot of room that has been cleared out. a USB3 controller could easily fit if they wanted to. The reason there is no USB3 is because they want to push Thunderbolt and if they included USB3 then Apple would have less bragging rights to push it as a feature.

In a Perfect world Apple out have Thunderbolt port, a FW800 port, a USB3 port, and a USB3/powered eSATA port. Now that would make for a REALLY professional machine As they have unused PCIe lines on the board currently (2 or 4 I believe) They could have easily added an eSATA port if they wanted.

 

[AppleDApp]

@smiddlehurst

There's no reason they can't use an add-in card for USB 3.0. Most consumer laptops that cost more than $500 are coming with USB 3.0 as standard these days, and this is a $1500 desktop we're talking about. It's definitely a rip off, in the same way that buyers guide would say not to buy a Macbook Pro if it still had a Core 2 Duo processor in it.

There's no point in getting USB 3.0 right now because intel's chipset does not support it

 

[atMac]

There's no point in getting USB 3.0 right now because intel's chipset does not support it

Well thats a ridiculous answer. No reason just because Intel doesn't integrate it yet?
Yes, lets ignore all the professional tools out there because Intel doesn't support it yet. LMAO I hope you never make technology judgement calls.

 

[Vylen]

Well thats a ridiculous answer. No reason just because Intel doesn't integrate it yet?
Yes, lets ignore all the professional tools out there because Intel doesn't support it yet. LMAO I hope you never make technology judgement calls.

It's not ridiculous because Intel provides the chipsets and most likely the design of the boards. Apple doesn't make their own chips and probably can't stick on a random third-party controller because, again, it's Intel's design.

 

[shady28]

I've been pretty frustrated at the lack of adapters for TB as well. But, there's one really major saving grace that could make tb a must have device in the future.

The ability to have an external PCI-e slot. For laptop owners, this means you may be able to put a high performance gpu in a laptop dock. That's a killer use for tb in the laptop world, and would go a long way toward making laptops better desktop replacements. Same goes for all in ones like the iMac, or hp touchscreen aio systems. If apple laptops get this ability, PC laptops will quickly follow suit.

 

[soLoredd]

I just hope Apple uses it in some awesome ways. Like implementing in a display so we can "dock" a MacBook and only have to use one cable. Or even do what Sony is doing and add some GPU functionality with it.

Can't really say it's a rip-off at this point though.

 

[bob99]

Why HDMI? You can't connect a 12TB drive array via HDMI. Thunderbolt allows you to connect two additional cinema displays, if you need more screen real estate.

Just wait, some sweet new items will be out soon!

 

[PSpfano]

Give it time

Everything takes time to develop. As stated previously, USB didn't take off in 4 months. Apple has always been the first at incorporating new technologies, so ThunderBolt will take off soon

 

[Hellhammer]

Nonsense. Apple can't add an existing third party USB3 controller because there is no room on the MacBook Pro logic boards. All those cheap Windows laptops are much thicker and bulkier than the MBP, and they sacrifice battery life for feature checklists.

Somehow Apple managed to find space for Thunderbolt controller. Sony Vaio Z has both, USB 3.0 and Light Peak (they don't call it Thunderbolt because it doesn't use mDP connector) and it's thinner and lighter than MBA.

It's not ridiculous because Intel provides the chipsets and most likely the design of the boards. Apple doesn't make their own chips and probably can't stick on a random third-party controller because, again, it's Intel's design.

Intel provides the chipset which is just one chip (PCH). They don't design the boards for Apple, that is done by Apple and Foxconn (who manufactures the boards). Most of Intel's motherboards actually support USB 3.0 via a discrete chip so it's not like Intel dodges USB 3.0.

 

[dr Dunkel]

Why HDMI? You can't connect a 12TB drive array via HDMI. Thunderbolt allows you to connect two additional cinema displays, if you need more screen real estate.

Just wait, some sweet new items will be out soon!

Why not have both? HDMI/DVI is the standard for transfering multimedia today and tomorrow, Thunderbolt could have been a nice bonus for those of us who use our computers a long time.

 

[johneaston]

I totally agree with the OP. Maybe one day it'll be something but like Bluray and HD-DVD, I'm going to wait til it's a sure thing before I invest.

Talking of Apple rip-offs, what happened to all these 3rd party speakers and hifis that use Airplay? I think I've only every heard of a couple of very expensive add-on modules.

 

[OllyW]

There's no point in getting USB 3.0 right now because intel's chipset does not support it

Intel's chipset doesn't support Thunderbolt either so is there no point in having that?

 

[theSeb]

Actually it did. Apple just took forever putting it into their machines in relation to other PC manufacturers.

It's funny. If you look at Apple when they were trying to recover, they were doing everything to plan ahead.

First to adopt USB mainstream in their computers.
DVD-RAM drive in my G4x2-500.
Optical audio in and out standard.
One of the first (if not the first) to use Dual-Link DVI on their video cards.

Now there are technologies that are more common in the PC world that they won't implement. Blu-Ray comes to mind. USB 3.0 (waiting on Intel with Ivy Bridge/Rockwell).

Thunderbolt will be nice if it takes off. I know it's early, but I remember when Apple did a lot more pre-emptive stuff to distance themselves from competitors. I miss those days.

actually it didn't. It took over a year from the time the ports were added to computers before peripherals were widely available.

 

[theSeb]

clearly none of you remember the of what USB cables cost when they first came out.

Most posters in this thread are probably too young.

 

[NutsNGum]

I don't care if it ever becomes standard, if it lets me use an external SSD at native speed and daisy-chain peripherals to my computer, you can take your USB 3.0 and toss it up your jacksie.

 

[theSeb]

I don't care if it ever becomes standard, if it lets me use an external SSD at native speed and daisy-chain peripherals to my computer, you can take your USB 3.0 and toss it up your jacksie.

According to the benchmarks for the promise R6 that's exactly what it can do

 

[Mr MM]

As it is know, thunderbolt is just for the prosumer.

yeah thats right, thunderbolt is for prosumers.

why would anyone want a super fast connection, since usb 2 covers the need for most people?

basically the uses of thunderbolt are for high bandwidth need scenarios, basically high volume of data transfers and for external attachments that need the capacity

I dont see the influx of whatever trash people make for usb, like feet warmers, lamps, fans, hand warmers, coffee heaters, and for data transfers the usb 2 is still the kind with the high prices of usb3 thumbdrives and external hdds, I actually see the usb3 low traction as of a consequence from the lack of need for the consumer, rather than intel not supporting it from the chipset

 

[chrono1081]

Yes, a pretty inflammatory title, and I don't mean to cause any trouble here but this thunderbolt port thing seems more and more to be like a big rip-off.

I mean, every time I look at the back of my lovely 27" iMac, I can't help but think how much more useful an HDMI port would have been over these two thunderbolt ports. Or if my iMac came with a thunderbolt adapter for VGA out or something wold have been nice.

For six months we've had access to this technology, and all Apple has to show for it is a laughably over-priced cord and a crazy small amount of 3rd party devices that use the technology.

Thoughts?

Not even close to being a rip off. I can't wait to get a thunderbolt PCIe card for my tower. Its not just a monitor connection, it also carries data and for those of us who have huge amounts of data on external drives TB is a great feature and I can't wait to upgrade my storage systems to TB.

 

[OllyW]

I can't wait to get a thunderbolt PCIe card for my tower.

It's still not certain you will even be able to get a Thunderbolt PCIe card.

there are no plans for a PCIe adapter card for Thunderbolt; the only way to get it will be with a new computer/motherboard.

http://www.tuaw.com/2011/02/24/thunderbolt-apple-and-intels-new-interconnect/

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/25/notes-of-interest-on-thunderbolt-and-macbook-pro/

 

[Hellhammer]

It's still not certain you will even be able to get a Thunderbolt PCIe card.



http://www.tuaw.com/2011/02/24/thunderbolt-apple-and-intels-new-interconnect/

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/25/notes-of-interest-on-thunderbolt-and-macbook-pro/

That is not an official statement from Intel. It's a conclusion that CNET's editor made:

10:25 a.m. (Dong Ngo) : There won't be TB PCIe cards it seems. You'll need a new computer.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-20035571-76.html

The issue with TB PCIe card is that it needs to be a GPU as well. You can't get video from anywhere if it is just a PCIe card with the TB chip. In a laptop it's easier because it is a closed system (everything designed by one company so they can build it so that video will be routed to the TB chip as well).

Since Intel doesn't make discrete GPUs, it will take time until they can come up with deals with GPU manufacturers, if they even can. Data-only TB kind of defeats the purpose of TB.

 

[wxman2003]

For most imac users, TB will never get used on this generation of imacs. Down the road when TB becomes more accepted, it likely will have a greater impact. Of course, most of us will have moved on to the next generation of imacs. So the question arises, what percentage of imac owners will actually use it with this current generation? I would guess, and it's just a guess, less than 10%.