I really don't get the people here. First they want the newest technology and now they'd rather keep old technology. USB 3.0 will break through in 2010 - 2011 I'm sure of it. Unless you guys want to buy a new macbook when it refreshes once again I don't see why it shouldn't be in the mac.
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.
Will the new macbook pros have usb 3.0?
- Thread starter newConvert
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
According to my tests, FW800 can only reach 77mb/sec. Here are the Xbench test results for my 1Tb disk on FW800:
Sequential:
Uncached Write 4K: 63MB/sec
Uncached Write 256K: 54.3MB/s
Uncached Read 4K: 13.2MB/s
Uncached Read 256K: 77.3MB/s
I did three tests, and all of them were within a few MB/s. This one was the fastest.
Here's what I get with eSATA (using two different eSATA cards, tested 3 times each. This is the best test from one of them, and the other one had a best test within a few MB/s):
Uncached Write 4K: 112MB/sec
Uncached Write 256K: 90.3MB/s
Uncached Read 4K: 13.2MB/s
Uncached Read 256K: 107.2MB/s
There was more variability in the eSATA tests, but the Uncached Read 256K was always around 105-107MB/s. On FW800, it was always very close to 77.3MB/s.
For comparison, where's what I got with USB:
Uncached Write 4K: 25.3MB/sec
Uncached Write 256K: 23.1MB/s
Uncached Read 4K: 6MB/s
Uncached Read 256K: 31.8MB/s
The USB were always within a few MB/s even between two different enclosures.
Clearly, the 4K read speed and some of the write speeds depends on what was on the disk at the time, but all these tests were run with the same set of files, so the only variation was anything Xbench might have left behing (should be nothing). Even if the first 3 numbers are invalid because of variability of the disk, I would say that the last number (Uncached Read 256K) is valid for all tests because of the very low variability between tests.
Of course, some of the limitation could be due to the chipset (firewire or USB) and not just the interface itself, but my FW800 enclosure used the Oxford chipset that is supposed to be among the best, and I got similar results for USB using two different enclosures.
I have never seen over 77.3 MB/s using this FW800 enclosure with two different disks that I know are both capable of more than 77MB/s read speeds. Although FW800 is theoretically capable of 800mbps/8=100MB/s, there is some overhead in the protocol. Just like USB2 is theoretically capable of 480mbps/8 = 60MB/s, but it is rare to see much over 30-32MB/s.
I say eSATA is unreliable because all the eSATA expresscards cause kernel panics. I haven't seen or heard of any kernel panics or data corruption caused by USB2, and I don't see any reason why USB3 would be any different. If Apple doesn't want to include USB3, a combo eSATA/USB2 port would be nice, since a proper built-in eSATA port shouldn't cause any KPs (the same way the internal SATA hard drive doesn't cause any KPs).
Matt I don't trust USB3.0 for the results you just showed in you tests: USB2.0 can barely reach 50-60% of its theoretical throughput ...
Do you think that 3.0 will be different ?
I never said I would like to stay with the actual FW800/USB2.0. I just said I would like to have something more reliable, like FW 3200 or LightPeak.
So I don't really see any reason to have a USB3.0 interface in this MBP revision.
If USB3.0 is going to be the new standard, well, we could have it in the next MBP revision, a "late 2010" or "early 2011".
Do you think that 3.0 will be different ?
I never said I would like to stay with the actual FW800/USB2.0. I just said I would like to have something more reliable, like FW 3200 or LightPeak.
So I don't really see any reason to have a USB3.0 interface in this MBP revision.
If USB3.0 is going to be the new standard, well, we could have it in the next MBP revision, a "late 2010" or "early 2011".
True, it could be in the next revision, but then the forthcoming "early 2010" revision with USB 2.0 would, as I said, be outdated out of the box - Apple would be stuck with an antiquated standard for another six to eight months while the other manufacturers put USB 3.0 in every machine from workstation to Netbook. It would be disastrous. I for one would definitely not buy such a device, and neither would I advise any of my mac-owning friends to get one. FW3200 and Light Peak wouldn't change any of that, because - as interesting as these technologies are - they are incredibly niche.
maybe in your dreams only
The upcoming high-end Sony Vaio Z still use USB2.0 : is Sony blind too ?
Or maybe it's simply too early for USB3.0 ?
The only thing that would really benfit from usb3 is external HD and FireWire and esata are already good on that end...they could put in a combo USB-esata port like pcs have and take up no additional space AND have really fast external HD transfer speeds
So Sony is making a mistake with the Vaio Z. That would not excuse Apple's making the same mistake, now would it?
I don't really care about what Sony is doing (although the Z looks awesome; that's what the 13" MBP should be like), I care about getting what I pay for. USB 2.0 in a supposedly high-end machine is not it.
Also, how can you say that it's "too early" for USB 3.0 (whatever that means) when the necessary hardware is available and true professional devices with the interface can be bought RIGHT NOW? I'll reiterate that: the new, faster version of the most commonly used interface is available NOW and it offers great backwards compatibility, so there is simply no excuse for not using it. I don't get these low expectations. Or are you afraid USB 3.0 will drive up the price by 200$ or something?
It's also quite ridiculous that you would be delighted to see FW3200 or Light Peak in the next MBP - shees, talk about too early
I don't really care about what Sony is doing (although the Z looks awesome; that's what the 13" MBP should be like), I care about getting what I pay for. USB 2.0 in a supposedly high-end machine is not it.
Also, how can you say that it's "too early" for USB 3.0 (whatever that means) when the necessary hardware is available and true professional devices with the interface can be bought RIGHT NOW? I'll reiterate that: the new, faster version of the most commonly used interface is available NOW and it offers great backwards compatibility, so there is simply no excuse for not using it. I don't get these low expectations. Or are you afraid USB 3.0 will drive up the price by 200$ or something?
It's also quite ridiculous that you would be delighted to see FW3200 or Light Peak in the next MBP - shees, talk about too early
No USB 3.0, no Blu ray in the foreseeable future on Macs, certainly not on the upcoming MacBooks/Pros.
Although I agree with you, Apple should be offering the very best for a "professional" laptop as Lenovo does with the Thinkpad W510, I haven't seen anything that states that it has USB 3.0. Do you have any verification of this?
Apple will continue to sell "top of the line" products with "middle of the line" specs, and call them "pro", at a premium price point because they can. Fanboys will continue to buy them. Average Mac users, like myself, will continue to buy them. Why?
1. OSX - nothing beats it
2. Aesthetics - nothing else looks so good
Sad, but true.
Because Sony is the only other manufacturer that can build decent notebooks out there, and they are not using USB 3.0 in the upcoming high-end models.
So they are making mistakes and YOU are correct ?
Speaking about who is ridiculous ...
I would like to see FW3200 or Light Peak by the end of 2010/start of 2011.Also, how can you say that it's "too early" for USB 3.0 (whatever that means) when the necessary hardware is available and true professional devices with the interface can be bought RIGHT NOW? I'll reiterate that: the new, faster version of the most commonly used interface is available NOW and it offers great backwards compatibility, so there is simply no excuse for not using it. I don't get these low expectations. Or are you afraid USB 3.0 will drive up the price by 200$ or something?
It's also quite ridiculous that you would be delighted to see FW3200 or Light Peak in the next MBP - shees, talk about too early
Right now USB2.0 and FW800 is perfectly fine.
And, just in case you don't know, there is no Intel chipset supporting USB3.0
Even if USB3.0 only reaches 50% of its theoretical speed, it will still be faster than anything we have now, and faster than any disks on the market, even SSDs. USB3 claims 4800mbps, or 600MB/s. If we get half that, that's 300MB/s, which is very good. 3gbps SATA can only manage a bit less than 300MB/s.
in a time when manufacturer are trying to integrate all the logic in a single chip, it's not a good solution IMHO
I agree with you. I'm just saying that MAYBE there is something better that we could have.
We have a little more time to see what will be the new standard.
Thanks for the response, but I was looking for verification (ie: website, spec list). You saying so is not verification.
I just found this page on the W510.
It states that it has 4 USB ports and only one of them is 3.0?!?!
What is the point of that?
If they are backwards compatible, why not make them all 3.0?
It shows how even a top of the line computer, that isn't a Mac, still doesn't offer full 3.0 support.
I'm not sure we can expect 3.0 on the next MBP.
Yep, the W510 only has one USB 3.0 port, but it's better than none at all I guess the reason for this is that they needed a separate controller for USB 3.0 (I think NEC manufactures them) and could only add it to one port for whatever reason. It's not perfect, since Intel is dragging its feet on USB 3.0 for some reason, but I would disagree with you that this does not constitute "full USB 3.0 support". The port is there and it can be used, thus the W510 is future-proofed as fas as connectivity is concerned.
And by the way, I completely agree with you about Apple selling middle-of-the-road hardware at high-end prices - it's always been this way. I've usually been OK with the Apple tax because of the awesome design, the reliability and of course OS X, which is still fantastic. But even some cursory glances at the models offered by some of Apple's competitors reveal that the gap has narrowed, a fact that is not acknowledged by many posters here who seem to insist that last-gen technology is "good enough" if that be the will of almighty Steve. Lenovo, HP and Sony especially are offering some amazing laptops. Add to the equation that Windows 7 is actually pretty good and suddenly we have a situation where Apple has to step up its game again. I probably won't switch back to Windows, but I sure wish I'd never seen the W510 (or the Elitebook 8450).
And Max, who says Sony is the only decent manufacturer apart from Apple? You? Don't make me laugh. And let me get this straight: Sony doesn't implement USB 3.0 in their new high-end ULV and you take this as proof that it's too early for this technology? Again, two wrongs don't make a right. Sony is wrong to not put current-gen technology into a 2'000$ laptop, just like Apple would be wrong if they did the same thing in the forthcoming upgrade. Why is it so hard for you to accept that at these prices, the devices we're discussing should meet certain very basic expectations? Are you a masochist or something? And you keep ignoring that "right now" is not the only thing on a person's mind when they shell out a few thousand Dollars/Euros/whatever for a computer. Yes, "right now" USB 2.0 still does its job, but even just one year from now it will become painful to use as USB 3.0-devices start to flood the market. If you buy a "professional"-level computer - which the MBPs are in name only at this point - you should be able to expect the machine to remain viable not just for a few weeks or a few months, but for a few years. This requires that the manufacturer put current-gen technology into these devices. There. It's really rather simple.
I guess the reason for this is that they needed a separate controller for USB 3.0 (I think NEC manufactures them) and could only add it to one port for whatever reason. It's not perfect, since Intel is dragging its feet on USB 3.0 for some reason, but I would disagree with you that this does not constitute "full USB 3.0 support". The port is there and it can be used, thus the W510 is future-proofed as fas as connectivity is concerned.And by the way, I completely agree with you about Apple selling middle-of-the-road hardware at high-end prices - it's always been this way. I've usually been OK with the Apple tax because of the awesome design, the reliability and of course OS X, which is still fantastic. But even some cursory glances at the models offered by some of Apple's competitors reveal that the gap has narrowed, a fact that is not acknowledged by many posters here who seem to insist that last-gen technology is "good enough" if that be the will of almighty Steve. Lenovo, HP and Sony especially are offering some amazing laptops. Add to the equation that Windows 7 is actually pretty good and suddenly we have a situation where Apple has to step up its game again. I probably won't switch back to Windows, but I sure wish I'd never seen the W510 (or the Elitebook 8450).
And Max, who says Sony is the only decent manufacturer apart from Apple? You? Don't make me laugh. And let me get this straight: Sony doesn't implement USB 3.0 in their new high-end ULV and you take this as proof that it's too early for this technology? Again, two wrongs don't make a right. Sony is wrong to not put current-gen technology into a 2'000$ laptop, just like Apple would be wrong if they did the same thing in the forthcoming upgrade. Why is it so hard for you to accept that at these prices, the devices we're discussing should meet certain very basic expectations? Are you a masochist or something? And you keep ignoring that "right now" is not the only thing on a person's mind when they shell out a few thousand Dollars/Euros/whatever for a computer. Yes, "right now" USB 2.0 still does its job, but even just one year from now it will become painful to use as USB 3.0-devices start to flood the market. If you buy a "professional"-level computer - which the MBPs are in name only at this point - you should be able to expect the machine to remain viable not just for a few weeks or a few months, but for a few years. This requires that the manufacturer put current-gen technology into these devices. There. It's really rather simple.
I'm with you. If only Lenovo could make that W510 look a little less ugly I would consider getting one.
The fact of the matter is... we shouldn't even be looking at a computer like that and wishing MBPs were up to that standard. Apple should be setting that standard!
Yeah I don't really get peoples desire for Blu Ray in a notebook.
1080p video is pretty pointless on a 17" or smaller screen, plus the blank media is pricey still I would sooner used DVD and USB storage devices.
Why not? Lenovo is a great company though we can't really compare the two. One is form over function (i'm looking at you SJ) and the other is just function. My T61 looks like the starship enterprise mixed with a jumbo jet cockpit i.e. ugly as sin with too much to do. Being a minimalist-in-training I do appreciate the minimalistic design of Apple's offerings.
I could care less about USB, on my MacBook Pro all I use USB ports for is memory sticks and digital cameras/scanners. And that all works fine with USB2...