Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Ron K · Jul 5, 2011, 03:54 PM

I believe that USB 2.0 is really slow and obsolete, and wonder why Apple continues to favor it over firewire 800, or USB 3.0, both of which are considerably faster, and have established peripherals. Since Thunderbolt is really ahead of its time, it seems premature to include it at the expense of more available USB 3.0 or firewire 800. Certainly I could purchase the new MBP but would have to pay a premium price for any peripherals. If Apple really wanted to offer the state of the art laptop it should have included at least one port with firewire 800 or USB 3.0 in combination with an SSD. My memory is foggy, but I believe that my MBP bought in 2001 or 2002 had a firewire 800 port. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Big Mac · Jul 5, 2011, 04:19 PM

I'm confused. The MBPs have Firewire 800.

Spheric Harlot · Jul 5, 2011, 04:29 PM

And have since 2003.

Ron K · 05:02 PM

OPPS! I was reading through a comparison with the other models of the MacBook series and obviously got it mixed up. Too bad I cannot delete this post and start over. I am still curious why Apple did not include a USB 3.0 port when the MBP has (2) USB 2.0 ports? And the 17" model has (3) USB 2.0 ports. It is not as if this model did not have the room. Is there some issue with USB 3.0 with which I am not familiar?

Spheric Harlot · Jul 5, 2011, 05:23 PM

Intel does not make a USB 3 controller.

Apple will include 3.0 when intel does.

SierraDragon · Jul 5, 2011, 06:21 PM

Originally Posted by Ron K

Since Thunderbolt is really ahead of its time, it seems premature to include it at the expense of more available USB 3.0 or firewire 800. Certainly I could purchase the new MBP but would have to pay a premium price for any peripherals. If Apple really wanted to offer the state of the art laptop it should have included at least one port with firewire 800 or USB 3.0 in combination with an SSD.

Sorry, you are missing something. Apple has always provided Firewire, and that includes FW800 on all the current MBPs. Plus now also Thunderbolt which is far superior to USB 3. And SSDs available on all MBPs.

-Allen

Spheric Harlot · Jul 5, 2011, 07:16 PM

Originally Posted by SierraDragon

Sorry, you are missing something. Apple has always provided Firewire, and that includes FW800 on all the current MBPs. Plus now also Thunderbolt which is far superior to USB 3.

I believe those things have already been made clear in this thread.

mduell · Jul 6, 2011, 03:00 PM

Regardless of your belief, USB2 is fast enough for the vast majority of peripherals. And for the peripherals that USB2 bottlenecks (hard drives, external arrays, SSDs, CF cards), you really need a multi-gigabit connection (SATA, USB3, PCIe, or TB) rather than FW800 to get full performance.

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

Intel does not make a USB 3 controller.

Apple will include 3.0 when intel does.

Right, because Apple uses only Intel controllers for ethernet (nope), wifi (nope), FireWire (nope), MDP (nope), SD cards (nope)... well gee, that's most of the ports on a MacBook Pro.

Spheric Harlot · Jul 6, 2011, 04:35 PM

"My beliefs"? — beg pardon?

Who makes the USB controller, btw?

CharlesS · Jul 6, 2011, 05:02 PM

I realize it's irrelevant for the MBP which has FW800 anyway, but any Thunderbolt-equipped Mac is also FW800-capable, once this comes out (scroll to the bottom of the page). It probably won't take too long for someone to come up with USB 3.0 and eSATA adapters, too.

P · Jul 6, 2011, 05:11 PM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

"My beliefs"? — beg pardon?

Who makes the USB controller, btw?

It's included in the platform controller hub (PCH), the one remaining chip of what used to be called the chipset, which also delivers things like SATA support. Since Intel refuses to license the DMI bus for connecting to the CPU, use of an Intel CPU requires use of an Intel PCH, so the USB controller is "for free". Once Intel includes USB 3.0 in the PCH - which I believe is planned for the first Ivy Bridge chipsets, whatever they're called - Apple will get USB 3.0 support unless they refuse to connect those pins for some reason.

Spheric Harlot · Jul 6, 2011, 05:20 PM

Exactly.

Apple would have to jump through some extra hoops NOT to get USB 3.

Veltliner · Jul 7, 2011, 03:59 AM

Originally Posted by CharlesS

I realize it's irrelevant for the MBP which has FW800 anyway, but any Thunderbolt-equipped Mac is also FW800-capable, once this comes out (scroll to the bottom of the page). It probably won't take too long for someone to come up with USB 3.0 and eSATA adapters, too.

That's superb for the upcoming MBA, which will probably have a Thunderbolt port, and, again, no FW800 port.

Any idea of the price range of such a thing?

mduell · Jul 7, 2011, 12:27 PM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

"My beliefs"? — beg pardon?

I was referring to Ron K's belief that USB2 was slow and obsolete - it's more than fast enough for keyboards, mice, printers, iPods, phones, etc.

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

Who makes the USB controller, btw?

Apple currently uses Intel's "free" built-in USB2 controller, but Intel's lack of USB3 support doesn't preclude Apple from supporting USB3; they could use a third party chip like they do for most other ports on the MacBook Pro.

turtle777 · Jul 7, 2011, 12:29 PM

But I want a Thunderbolt keyboard and mouse, dammit.

-t

Waragainstsleep · Jul 7, 2011, 01:01 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

But I want a Thunderbolt keyboard and mouse, dammit.

-t

Yes, that would make me even better at Call Of Duty!!!