why didnt the new imacs have USB 3.0?

[aliensporebomb]

True

Apple said good-bye to the floppy the day they introduced easy Internet connectivity and USB (thumb drives). And people could still get a USB floppy drive as I did. But they weren't needed much once legacy data was copied.

Apple's support of FireWire on computers is the best in the industry. It puts FireWire on any machine a pro might use. What I would have liked is keeping FireWire 400 Mbps connectors as well as the 800 Mbps connectors and here Apple has fallen short on its newest boxes.

True and I do have my current mac connected to my older one via FW800 but I find far faster data transfer rates using Gigabit Ethernet.

So if I want to access the hard drives in the old Mac (which I do frequently) I initlally did this in target disc mode on the old machine but now I boot it up the good old way so I have two Macs running and I can access the old drives via gigabit and it's much faster than FW800.

 

[Hellhammer]

LightPeak only has potential which means nothing in the technology world. USB 3.0 is real and has been finalized since Nov 2008. Intel needs to be wise here and take their time with LightPeek, rushing it out just to slow down the USB 3 is a major risk that it could turn LightPeek into a major flop. There's nothing that needs to be said about firewire 1600/3200, I seriously doubt it'll have the success of previous firewire 800 and likely to be replaced by USB 3.0.

LightPeak has more than potential because it's made by the dominator of CPU and chipset markets. Intel dominates the market, if they want something to happen, it will very likely happen. Same applies to something that they don't want to happen. USB became so popular because it was made by market leading companies; Intel, M$ and NEC for example. FW never became popular because it was made by Apple which is fairly small computer company compared to Intel and MS for example.

We are just speculating, remember that. LP won't be available for mainstream market anytime soon but USB 3.0 is BUT the era of USB 3.0 may not be that long. In couple of years when LP becomes more popular, I can see it replacing the USB. Of course this is pretty much up to Intel and their greediness. They have a good hand but they have to play it right to win the pot.

 

[300D]

LightPeak will have its way with USB3 like a dog and a rag doll.

 

[Thermonuclear]

Light Peak will drastically change the internals of a modern computer. For one instance, the idea of a PCI (-X, -X2,-E) bus with it's expensive slots, expensive interface circuitry, and limited bandwidth will disappear. In its place we'll see a bus that has only power and ground pins; all data and signaling will be done by Light Peak.

 

[MikhailT]

Light Peak has been demoed on desktops and laptops. It can handle 10 Gbps today (twice the upper limit of USB 3), can be aggregated, and will hit 100 Gbps over time. A Light Peak cable can be 100 meters or more, some thirty times the limit of USB 3. There are Light Peak bidirectional adapters that plug into current USB, FireWire, and Ethernet ports.

Remeber boys and girls, it's easier to push a photon than an electron.

USB 3 is DOOMED.

http://www.zdnet.co.uk/reviews/adapters/2010/08/05/intel-light-peak-a-tech-guide-40089748/

Demonstrations don't mean anything as long as there's no official standard for other companies to take advantage of. This is directly from your link:

Intel is talking to manufacturers of consumer electronics, PCs, peripherals and phones about a Light Peak standard that will take advantage of 'the full capability' of fibre, although this could take 'a few years' to finalise. The official process starts later this year, and there are early adopters: "Sony and Nokia would like to work with us on a global standard for mobile computers and smartphones", Ziller confirms. Toshiba is positive about Light Peak too: "I think it could supersede USB 3.0 very quickly", notebook product manager Ken Chan told ZDNet UK. However, Light Peak will take longer to appear in phones, warns Intel's Ziller: "the solution we have today wouldn't fit into a phone, but we're on the path to miniaturise in next few years".

The switch to optical won't happen overnight, so you'll still be using copper cables for the foreseeable future. But it will happen, says Ziller: "the move to optical connections is a transition to a whole new generation, and we need to start it now".

Standards are far more important than demonstrations and the final question is will Intel open the LP standard as an royalties-free standard? Just because it's Intel doesn't make it an immediate success.

Also LightPeek can be used to support USB 3.0 and other protocols, so it's not going to kill any other protocols any time soon. It is far more likely that LP will start as a physical media standard than a logical communication standards like USB and Firewire.

 

[Thermonuclear]

Regarding Light Peak standards: they exist in two flavors: the physical layer and the protocol. The first describes the cables and connectors and there is only one such standard now. Other physical standards may come into existence such as for small mobile devices, but any differences will be trivial. As Intel makes its money from silicon and not from paper rental, I assume that licensing for its Light Peak physical standard will be free. This is the same as Apple's donation of a free FireWire standard (now IEEE 1394) and of its work on Display Port.

The protocol standard class is slightly different, but not significantly so. What is most likely to happen is the establishment of a free Light Peak protocol standard just like there's been a free Ethernet protocol from many years ago. (Thanks, Xerox! Some of us still remember.) But this protocol standard is merely an envelope for all kinds of piggyback protocols like the obvious IP standard. And all will be free because Intel wants to sell as many Light Peak chips as possible.

What Intel might do is to license for fee the silicon itself and this could be expensive for chipset manufacturers. But not too expensive. Maybe just cheap enough to kill off alternatives.

Really, all the hard technical work is in the silicon design and implementation. And this has been done. The protocols can be copied from the existing peer-to-peer FireWire almost without change. It's like instead of having FireWire 800 over 10 meters maximum, we'll have FireWire 10,000 over 100 meters.

 

[cnolan011]

its only thing thats keeping from buying a imac i7. now i might have to look into a mac pro so i can use the black magic intensity pro card. why didnt they include it there were rumors of them including it

i like the looks of that black magic thing. right now i am using a haupauge HD-PVR to record HDTV, have it piping into a linux box. I then repackage into mp4 container. i think i will grab a new motherboard, and a new CPU, purchase that black magic thing and make another linux box to work with that, . . . i will record it onto a eSata drive, and then walk that drive over to my new iMac 27"(16GB-i7), stick it in my FW800 external hard drive doc, transfer that footage, and cut it up in final cut pro, . . . that works for me, cause i love the **** out of my new iMac!!!
thank god i a make a few dollars so i can do that. thanks for the link