Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Notebooks > New MBP will have LightPeak

New MBP will have LightPeak
Thread Tools
Atheist
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Back in the Good Ole US of A
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 10:02 AM
 
Looks like it's official. Apple has branded it Thunderbolt:



It appears they've combined Mini-Displayport and Thunderbolt into a single port.

     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 10:10 AM
 
     
Atheist  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Back in the Good Ole US of A
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 10:23 AM
 
DOH! Guess my searching skills suck... I did a search on Thunderbolt and didn't get a hit.
     
AllanCook
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 23, 2011, 12:18 PM
 
When I think Thunderbolt, I think of this:

     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 03:20 AM
 
Trying to capitalize on the Thor movie, obviously.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 07:54 AM
 
Why does Apple do that ?

Why can't they call it LightPeak, like everybody else ?

-t
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 07:56 AM
 
Because it's not optical - yet.

Edit: Also, nobody calls it "LightPeak", because nobody has a ****ing clue what it's supposed to be.

The small handful of people who do will have no problem learning the term "Thunderbolt" for the copper-wired version of it, any more than we had trouble learning the term "Airport" way back when nobody knew what "WLAN" was supposed to be.
( Last edited by Spheric Harlot; Feb 24, 2011 at 08:03 AM. )
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 08:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
Because it's not optical - yet.
Oh, I'm obviously missing something big then.

(Didn't know that LightPeak came in two variants.)

-t
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 08:26 AM
 
Light Peak - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Copper vs. Optical
In January 2011, Intel's David Perlmutter told Computerworld that initial Light Peak implementations would be based on copper wires.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 10:15 AM
 
LightPeak is a signalling standard that can run over any connection, and it wouldn't surprise me if LightPeak is simply a codename even if it's spelled that way. Intel has done this before with things like HSI (became 3GIO and then PCIe) and CSI (became QPI). Note how the announcement for Thursday doesn't mention LightPeak at all - it talks about "a new technology that is about to hit the market". That logo looks very Apple-y, though.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 10:35 AM
 
It's official Intel lingo:

Thunderbolt™ Technology
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 11:05 AM
 
Correct, and even the DP combination is standard. Very good. I was afraid Apple had done something funny again.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Jolt21
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 11:10 AM
 
So if I have an external display...what do I do when I wanna use thunderbolt?

And are they going to make external HDD's with lightpeak now? (or have they started already?)
blah
     
-Q-
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 11:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by Jolt21 View Post
So if I have an external display...what do I do when I wanna use thunderbolt?
The Lightpeak specs say you can daisy chain up to six devices, so I wouldn't be surprised to see the Apple Cinema Display updated with a Thunderbolt/mini Display port. I am surprised to see that they haven't already updated the display to include that.
     
Atheist  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Back in the Good Ole US of A
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2011, 11:35 AM
 
Now all we need is a Thunderbolt PCI card.
     
Atheist  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Back in the Good Ole US of A
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 10:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by Atheist View Post
Now all we need is a Thunderbolt PCI card.
Guess that's not gonna happen.

Originally Posted by Macrumors
- CNet's live coverage reveals that there are no plans to offer Thunderbolt PCIe cards. In fact, Intel says that you will need a new computer/motherboard to get Thunderbolt. That means Mac Pro owners won't be able to add it on to their systems.

10:25 a.m. (Dong Ngo) : There won't be TB PCIe cards it seems. You'll need a new computer.
10:34 a.m. (Dong Ngo) : There won't be add-in TB adapters, you'll need a new computer/motherboard that supports TB.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 11:04 AM
 
That makes sense.

Thunderbolt is two channels of PCIe plus DisplayPort.

That would mean you'd actually need THREE PCI slots working in unison to get up to spec, no?
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 11:12 AM
 
That's disappointing. It looks like Thunderbolt will take a long time to catch on.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 11:30 AM
 
I don't really think it will take that long. Intel's promoting the standard, so it's going to show up on pretty much all motherboards, and the laptops that are driving the PC market right now don't have PCI slots anyway (until now, of course, considering that Thunderbolt can be considered an external PCIe slot).

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 01:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
That makes sense.

Thunderbolt is two channels of PCIe plus DisplayPort.

That would mean you'd actually need THREE PCI slots working in unison to get up to spec, no?
No, it means you'd need one PCIe x4 slot with some sort of bypass connection from the GPU - or implement it ON the GPU. That last actually seems like the best idea: the GPU has an x16 PCIe 2.0 slot, and rarely needs all that bandwidth (unless you're running in SLI/Crossfire). Remains to see what happens with that, but Apple at least could sell a GPU update with a Thunderbolt connection for past MP models.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
ibook_steve
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 02:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
That's disappointing. It looks like Thunderbolt will take a long time to catch on.
That's what they said about USB on the original iMac.

I think this is going to be huge, and I don't think it's going to take too long. And I'm proud that one of my friends still at Apple was one of the lead hardware designers on this who couldn't tell me anything about it until yesterday.

Steve
Celebrating 10 years and 4000 posts on MacNN!
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 02:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
Remains to see what happens with that, but Apple at least could sell a GPU update with a Thunderbolt connection for past MP models.
That'd probably be a 3rd party thing, not from Apple.

P.S. Would Firewire Target Mode work over Firewire via Thunderbolt?
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2011, 11:06 PM
 
Have you noticed that "Thunderbolt" rolls nicely off the tongue after a mere day?

(The P-47 is a nice plane, too.)
     
ibook_steve
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2011, 12:22 AM
 
It does roll off the tongue. But I worry about the unfortunate universal symbology Apple has decided to use for the port. Compare:

electrical warning symbol - Google Search

to

apple thunderbolt - Google Search

Non-technical people might think the port is dangerous. I know, silly, right? But you never know with non-techies how they will react.

Steve
Celebrating 10 years and 4000 posts on MacNN!
     
chabig
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2011, 05:18 PM
 
What do you think they might try to do with that port that could be dangerous? I can't come up with anything.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2011, 05:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by chabig View Post
What do you think they might try to do with that port that could be dangerous? I can't come up with anything.
You get electrocuted if you lick it.

-t
     
chabig
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2011, 05:52 PM
 
Perhaps Apple is smarter than we give them credit for. That lightning bolt will undoubtedly deter someone from trying to put their tongue into the port.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:54 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,