[amazing]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Apple has probably held off USB3 in order to stop it from killing Thunderbolt before it has a chance. Once TB has taken off a bit, they'll add USB3.

It's that high-and-mighty attitude that gets Apple such bad press, even among the faithful!

[turtle777]

Interesting.

Finally, we were able to suss out a few details about why Thunderbolt devices are taking so long to come to market. One vendor told Ars that supply of Thunderbolt controllers has been constrained somewhat as Apple was typically first in line to get them, with certain storage vendors then getting access, and others in line after that. We know that next-generation Thunderbolt controllers should be available around the second quarter of this year when Ivy Bridge launches, and that Intel plans an "official" launch of general Thunderbolt availability then.

We also heard that there are potential intellectual property issues associated with licensing Thunderbolt that has some vendors leery about Thunderbolt. We weren't able to learn what the specific issues are, but we heard similar complaints from another source last year shortly after Thunderbolt was unveiled by Apple and Intel. Hopefully those issues can be resolved; the vendors we spoke to are anxious to get their product ideas in the pipeline as they expect Thunderbolt adoption to grow significantly in the coming year.

Will 2012 be Thunderbolt's year? Devices arrive in force at CES

-t

[Eug]

Yeah, that part of the article was interesting.

I can definitely see Apple hogging most of the chips. Makes perfect sense.

The part that seems quite odd though is the stuff about IP.

[P]

Originally Posted by amazing 

It's that high-and-mighty attitude that gets Apple such bad press, even among the faithful!

It's that assumed attitude that gets Apple bad press among people that don't understand its motives.

The key word here is "use case". If you're someone proposing to add a new chip to the MBP or MBA (because that's where most of Apple's sales are these days), you're basically saying "let's add this chip to let someone copy a file a little faster" and will be forced to admit that that the tradeoff is a little bit of battery life (because that space on the mobo means that much less space for the battery). Do you think the product manager or whatever his title is that makes this call will make that trade? No. The case for the eSATA (where the tradeoff is a marginally wider USB port that looks weird) is much stronger in that case, and even that didn't get added.

Now do the same thing for Thunderbolt. There the argument is that everything you could previously do with a PCcard - something Apple did have, and removed in favor of more battery life - and more besides could be done with the new port. That's a much stronger argument, and I could see someone falling for it - and I could especially see why, having added a TB port, you wouldn't add a USB3 port.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by amazing 

It's that high-and-mighty attitude that gets Apple such bad press, even among the faithful!

Theres nothing high and mighty about it. Apple were trying to help Thunderbolt get going. USB3 had the potential to undermine it while there were no products about. They simply protected the tech from dying a premature death and Intel has been doing the same by holding off USB3 on its own boards.

Ultimately it will benefit everyone as TB is a fantastic technology. It was a shame that Firewire never took off more as it too was a genuinely brilliant tech, much better for storage devices than USB. Apple is trying to stop that happening again. They are doing the world a favour IMO.

[Eug]

As I've said before, if the technology really is that good, it should succeed on its own merits.

I don't need Apple to mother me to protect me from my own choices.

Also, as I've said in so many other threads... better is not just about faster or smoother or multiple daisychaining or whatever. It's also very much about cost. One of the things that made Firewire stagnate was cost. Indeed, the fact that some of you think Thunderbolt needs to be protected from USB 3 suggests to me that you or Apple or both are quite worried that its high cost is a significant disadvantage.

Originally Posted by P 

The key word here is "use case". If you're someone proposing to add a new chip to the MBP or MBA (because that's where most of Apple's sales are these days), you're basically saying "let's add this chip to let someone copy a file a little faster" and will be forced to admit that that the tradeoff is a little bit of battery life (because that space on the mobo means that much less space for the battery). Do you think the product manager or whatever his title is that makes this call will make that trade? No. The case for the eSATA (where the tradeoff is a marginally wider USB port that looks weird) is much stronger in that case, and even that didn't get added.

Now do the same thing for Thunderbolt. There the argument is that everything you could previously do with a PCcard - something Apple did have, and removed in favor of more battery life - and more besides could be done with the new port. That's a much stronger argument, and I could see someone falling for it - and I could especially see why, having added a TB port, you wouldn't add a USB3 port.

I guarantee that Macs will have USB 3 ports within a couple of years or perhaps even within the year. I just want them asap, because the peripherals are already here, and they're relatively inexpensive.

And fortunately, if you have USB 3 ports, they don't take up any more physical space than USB 2 ports on the side of the laptop. Once you have USB 3 ports, you don't need dedicated USB 2 ports at all. USB 3 has better power management than USB 2 anyway.

I can only hope that Apple will be reasonable and will include USB 3 with all its Ivy Bridge Macs. If not, then that will be lame. The new iMac is due for release in a few months. So is Ivy Bridge. We'll see what happens.

It'd be nice to see a new iPad 3 with 28 nm A6 and USB 3 come out in the summer too. That way you could actually charge off that nice shiny new iMac 2012.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Ultimately it will benefit everyone as TB is a fantastic technology.

In the meantime, however, Mac users are left stuck with a slow connection and a virtually non-existant fast connection while PC users are able to enjoy USB3 *right now*.

The reality is that Apple's market share really can't do too much to help TB take off. Why produce a TB device if the only possible customers are those who recently purchased Macs? TB won't take off until the PC community adopts it.

[P]

USB 3.0 is far from standard on PCs now - it's there fairly often on desktops, but it becomes standard when it's in the chipset. Which it will be with Ivy Bridge. Which is when Apple will include it as well.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

In the meantime, however, Mac users are left stuck with a slow connection and a virtually non-existant fast connection while PC users are able to enjoy USB3 *right now*.

I just checked the Lenovo website.

Just looking through the laptops, USB 3.0 is available on the W520 model of the W-series, and…that's it. None of the T-series appear to include it, and the Edge series explicitly mentions USB 2 (albeit with the inclusion of eSATA on those machines, which is neat if all you're after is storage).

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

I just checked the Lenovo website.

Just looking through the laptops, USB 3.0 is available on the W520 model of the W-series, and…that's it. None of the T-series appear to include it, and the Edge series explicitly mentions USB 2 (albeit with the inclusion of eSATA on those machines, which is neat if all you're after is storage).

Toshiba has USB 3.0 available on 83 laptops across at least 13 different model ranges, from $650 and up.
Laptop Finder | Find the Best Laptops and Netbooks for Your Needs | Toshiba

[Spheric Harlot]

In the meantime, Thinkpad users are left with a slow connection that doesn't seem to bother anyone just yet.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

In the meantime, however, Mac users are left stuck with a slow connection and a virtually non-existant fast connection while PC users are able to enjoy USB3 *right now*.

The reality is that Apple's market share really can't do too much to help TB take off. Why produce a TB device if the only possible customers are those who recently purchased Macs? TB won't take off until the PC community adopts it.

Won't help it take off, might stop it dying in its infancy.

You don't need USB3. Its a luxury, and if you had it, it might be worth getting a USB3 disk but ultimately it won't change your life. If speed was that important, you'd get a Promise Pegasus or one of those Lacie TB SSDs, but its not so just wait and stop bitching about how life isn't fair. You already have immeasurably superior design, build quality and operating system, let the rank and file have a pseudo-win for a little bit. (Thats aimed at everyone moaning here, not specifically you Wiskedjak)

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

In the meantime, however, Mac users are left stuck with a slow connection and a virtually non-existant fast connection while PC users are able to enjoy USB3 *right now*.

Actually, in the meantime _PC_ users are left stuck with slower USB connections (mostly USB 2, some USB 3) while _Mac_ users are able to enjoy much faster Thunderbolt *right now* that most PC users may never have available to them.

Note that very few current USB 2 PC users would feel the need to pay to instead have USB 3 on board, which is one reason why USB 3 has been around for years without taking off.

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

The reality is that Apple's market share really can't do too much to help TB take off. Why produce a TB device if the only possible customers are those who recently purchased Macs? TB won't take off until the PC community adopts it.

I disagree. Apple is the major player at the profitable top end. IMO Apple alone is enough of a market to cause Thunderbolt peripherals to be developed, because:

• Thunderbolt is not just a faster hard drive connection. Thunderbolt ports the PCIe bus to outside the Mac. That is quite a huge deal that USB of any flavor will never be capable of. The fact is that Thunderbolt is excellent technology far, far superior to USB 3 - and we are only looking at v1 of Thunderbolt. Down the road, PC vendors with just USB 3 on board will be significantly compromised at the high end.

• USB 2 meets lower end needs just fine and it is already ubiquitous. The small bit of extra utility that USB 3 provides to the world is far better served by Thunderbolt and can be purchased right now.

• Most importantly, Thunderbolt allows many additional capabilities not available to USB that peripheral developers _will_ take advantage of.

IMO Apple adding Thunderbolt to Sandy Bridge Macs with exclusivity was an excellent tech move and also was an excellent marketing move, further differentiating Mac boxes as "better" at the upper end - which is where the profit is.

Covering the full range of user needs with Thunderbolt plus USB 2, and not adding USB 3 until after the PC world fully adopts USB 3 (which after 3 years has not happened yet) also makes perfect sense to me. We all know how the market has whims that can kill superior technology (e.g. VHS/Beta) so IMO Apple should not facilitate USB 3 until after both Thunderbolt and USB 3 are solidly established.

-Allen

[Eug]

Originally Posted by waragainstsleep 

won't help it take off, might stop it dying in its infancy.

You don't need usb2. Its a luxury, and if you had it, it might be worth getting a usb2 disk but ultimately it won't change your life. If speed was that important, you'd get a promise fw drive or one of those lacie fw drives, but its not so just wait and stop bitching about how life isn't fair. You already have immeasurably superior design, build quality and operating system, let the rank and file have a pseudo-win for a little bit. (thats aimed at everyone moaning here, not specifically you wiskedjak)

t,ftfy

It's the whole YOU DON'T NEED USB 2 BECAUSE YOU HAVE FIREWIRE argument all over again.

Originally Posted by SierraDragon 

Note that very few current USB 2 PC users would feel the need to pay to instead have USB 3 on board, which is one reason why USB 3 has been around for years without taking off.

What are you talking about? USB 3 is more common on PCs than is Firewire now. USB3 hard drives are everywhere, and USB3 flash drives are relatively common too.

• Thunderbolt is not just a faster hard drive connection. Thunderbolt ports the PCIe bus to outside the Mac. That is quite a huge deal that USB of any flavor will never be capable of. The fact is that Thunderbolt is excellent technology far, far superior to USB 3 - and we are only looking at v1 of Thunderbolt. Down the road, PC vendors with just USB 3 on board will be significantly compromised at the high end.

So what? TB does a lot of things, and it's great at a lot of things, but being inexpensive isn't one of them. That's the big problem.

• USB 2 meets lower end needs just fine and it is already ubiquitous. The small bit of extra utility that USB 3 provides to the world is far better served by Thunderbolt and can be purchased right now.

Nope. USB 2 does meet the lower end but USB 3 is a HUGE improvement. We're talking twice the performance for USB pen drives or more, and 8X the performance for external SSD.

Covering the full range of user needs with Thunderbolt plus USB 2, and not adding USB 3 until after the PC world fully adopts USB 3 (which after 3 years has not happened yet) also makes perfect sense to me. We all know how the market has whims that can kill superior technology (e.g. VHS/Beta) so IMO Apple should not facilitate USB 3 until after both Thunderbolt and USB 3 are solidly established.

Beta deserved to die in the consumer space. It was an inferior product, not because the quality sucked, but they made one serious critical mistake. It had limited recording time.

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by Eug 

It's the whole YOU DON'T NEED USB 2 BECAUSE YOU HAVE FIREWIRE argument all over again.

It is an argument that consumer demand has clearly expressed that USB2 fills all the needs of the vast majority of users. And that the higher-end needs of the users whose needs exceed the vast majority is better served by the far more competent Thunderbolt than by USB3.

Of course Thunderbolt+USB3 is by definition better than either one alone. However if market whims might kill Thunderbolt in its infancy, high end users IMO should encourage Apple to support Thunderbolt at the expense of USB3. I do, because I want what PCIe access will bring.

What are you talking about? USB 3 is more common on PCs than is Firewire now. USB3 hard drives are everywhere, and USB3 flash drives are relatively common too.

What am I talking about? What I am talking about is that most PC consumers have been sticking with just USB2 as evidenced by their 2011 PC purchases, the vast majority of which had USB2 and not USB3. This in spite of USB3 being available for ~3 years. PC vendors would already have fully converted to USB3 if PC buyers had been demanding it.

The fact that FW is uncommon on PCs just supports my premise that the overall PC market has not been demanding bandwidth beyond USB2.

The fact that peripheral vendors are now making USB3 available is not an indicator of USB3 demand. It simply reflects the fact that USB3 is backwards compatible to USB2, so any vendor with any sense will switch to providing USB3 to reach the maximum market.

Note that I am not saying that USB3 will not become ubiquitous like USB2 is now; it will. What I am saying is that USB3 demand has been very slow in coming, very clearly indicative of lack of demand from the overall PC market space. PC vendors will slowly switch to USB3 because it is tech-logical and backward compatible rather than due to strident consumer demand.

OTOH I do expect PC vendors to end up offering Thunderbolt at the high end specifically due to demand from high end users. High end demand is a different animal.

Of course there will always be folks who want it all and for free but IMO we can ignore that segment. Also, as USB3 peripherals become even more ubiquitous on things like cameras many folks will want USB3, a need that Thunderbolt can provide via adapters. USB3 however will never be able to provide Thunderbolt adapters or PCIe access.

-Allen

[Eug]

Originally Posted by SierraDragon 

What am I talking about? What I am talking about is that most PC consumers have been sticking with just USB2 as evidenced by their 2011 PC purchases, the vast majority of which had USB2 and not USB3. This in spite of USB3 being available for ~3 years. PC vendors would already have fully converted to USB3 if PC buyers had been demanding it.

No, low end PCs are about razor thin margins. However, at the mid-end and high end, USB 3 is quite common.

The fact that FW is uncommon on PCs just supports my premise that the overall PC market has not been demanding bandwidth beyond USB2.

My point is that the overall PC market is price conscious. This is the problem with Thunderbolt, which was the problem with FW. Furthermore, back in the day, FW400 offered only marginal improvements over USB 2, for much higher cost. By the time FW800 came out, it was a lost cause.

BTW, it's not as if FW was better supported either. I own several FW devices and I've actually had more compatibility issues with FW than I've had with USB 2. On top of that, I've had multiple machines get blown FW ports. Quite concerning.

The fact that peripheral vendors are now making USB3 available is not an indicator of USB3 demand. It simply reflects the fact that USB3 is backwards compatible to USB2, so any vendor with any sense will switch to providing USB3 to reach the maximum market.

Note that I am not saying that USB3 will not become ubiquitous like USB2 is now; it will. What I am saying is that USB3 demand has been very slow in coming, very clearly indicative of lack of demand from the overall PC market space. PC vendors will slowly switch to USB3 because it is tech-logical and backward compatible rather than due to strident consumer demand.

Indeed. Any vendor with any sense should include USB 3. That includes Apple.

OTOH I do expect PC vendors to end up offering Thunderbolt at the high end, specifically due to demand from high end users. High end demand is a different animal.

I agree, and most of Apple's customers aren't at the high end.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Eug 

It's the whole YOU DON'T NEED USB 2 BECAUSE YOU HAVE FIREWIRE argument all over again.

Except Firewire is far more similar to USB than TB is. TB and USB are not equivalent technologies.

Originally Posted by Eug 

What are you talking about? USB 3 is more common on PCs than is Firewire now. USB3 hard drives are everywhere, and USB3 flash drives are relatively common too.

Firewire has never been all that common on PCs. It never really needed to be in the end because the only reason you really needed it over USB2 was if you had a video camera and did a lot with it. Most people with DV camera who used them a lot were Mac using pros. For pretty much all of Firewire's heyday, every video pro was using Final Cut and therefore Macs, so it wasn't a problem.

Thing is, when you say USB3 is everywhere, you mean in shops. As has been pointed out, it would be pointless at this point for WD or Seagate to ship new products with only USB2, because their competitors won't either and they are in a low margin, low innovation market. I don't sell much volume in any kind of hardware these days, and I don't repair all that much anymore either but I couldn't be sure that any of the kit I've ever sold has been USB3 (if it was, the socket it went into wasn't) and I have yet to see a USB3 pen drive in the wild. This would seem to refute your claims somewhat.

Originally Posted by Eug 

So what? TB does a lot of things, and it's great at a lot of things, but being inexpensive isn't one of them. That's the big problem.

Its not a big problem. There is no big problem. USB3 doesn't do anything at all that USB2 didn't do. It just does it a bit faster. I think you'd be surprised how many people won't notice and how many don't care. The difference between USB2 and 3 is nowhere near as significant as it was between 1.1 and 2. Using a hard drive on 1.1 was painful. 2.0 was and still is adequate. I can move 100GB in a couple of hours with cheap USB 2.0 kit. How many price conscious consumers do you think do that ever, let alone often? Its not many, I can tell you.

Also, TB will come down in price as it gets more popular. Something that might never have happened if Apple weren't making an effort to protect it right now. It would be a real shame if TB died because of USB3. I still lament the loss of ADC and if I were still doing Apple warranty repairs I'd be really bothered about the upcoming death of firewire target mode, already gone from the Air and those 2008 Alu MacBooks. For technicians, it cannot be overstated how brilliant firewire target mode is.

Originally Posted by Eug 

Nope. USB 2 does meet the lower end but USB 3 is a HUGE improvement. We're talking twice the performance for USB pen drives or more, and 8X the performance for external SSD.

Where price is the driving factor as you claim, those people are going to buy cheaper, crappy USB pen drives which even if they have USB3 controllers won't have flash that can keep up.

Originally Posted by Eug 

Beta deserved to die in the consumer space. It was an inferior product, not because the quality sucked, but they made one serious critical mistake. It had limited recording time.

Beta was better quality than VHS. A big part of the reason it died is because the rights owners refused to let people sell porn on it. VHS was porn friendly which fuelled its adoption as the standard.

[amazing]

Who'd have thought this discussion would go on this long?

Of course, now that we know that VHS adoption was fueled by its being porn-friendly, is there anyway we can establish Thunderbolt as being porn-friendly?

[SierraDragon]

Rotflmao

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Beta was better quality than VHS. A big part of the reason it died is because the rights owners refused to let people sell porn on it. VHS was porn friendly which fuelled its adoption as the standard.

Nope. It's a popular claim, but one that is false. Porn was already available on beta in the '70s.

alt.comedy.firesgn-thtre | Google Groups

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Thing is, when you say USB3 is everywhere, you mean in shops. As has been pointed out, it would be pointless at this point for WD or Seagate to ship new products with only USB2, because their competitors won't either and they are in a low margin, low innovation market. I don't sell much volume in any kind of hardware these days, and I don't repair all that much anymore either but I couldn't be sure that any of the kit I've ever sold has been USB3 (if it was, the socket it went into wasn't) and I have yet to see a USB3 pen drive in the wild. This would seem to refute your claims somewhat.

Of course I mean in shops.

And yes, several USB 3 pen drives are available in the wild and have been for months. My local shop had the USB 3 Voyager GT 32 GB on sale a couple of weeks ago for $30. They also had other ones, but they were about $45-55.

Also, TB will come down in price as it gets more popular.

You mean like Firewire? It did drop in price, but it always remained a high cost product in comparison.

Where price is the driving factor as you claim, those people are going to buy cheaper, crappy USB pen drives which even if they have USB3 controllers won't have flash that can keep up.

For pen drives, price won't be a factor in the USB 3 vs TB discussion, because just about nobody is going to sell a TB pen drive any time soon. A TB pen drive would be larger, higher cost, and no faster, and it wouldn't work with the vast majority of computers out there.

BTW, for that USB 3 flash drive above, the similar model USB 2 version was the same price.

TB and USB are not equivalent technologies.

No they're not, which is why I say Macs should have both TB and USB 3. Ironically though, it's several people here and apparently people at Apple who are afraid the very different USB 3 will kill TB off and therefore TB needs protection from USB 3.

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by Eug 

...several USB 3 pen drives are available in the wild and have been for months.

Like I stated earlier, due to backwards compatibility the existence of USB3 in peripherals like pen drives is not an indication of consumer demand. That role falls to computers, and adoption of USB3 has been very slow.

Originally Posted by Eug 

...it's several people here and apparently people at Apple who are afraid the very different USB 3 will kill TB off and therefore TB needs protection from USB 3.

Correct. Any new tech needs to obtain a certain (sometimes seemingly whimsical) critical market mass to survive. Strong USB3 demand could in some scenarios siphon off enough hard drives demand (USB3 being cheaper, and most of the PC world already considering even USB2 "good enough" for mass storage) to cause Thunderbolt to not reach the necessary critical market mass that will allow Thunderbolt to evolve to where we know it can go, which is way beyond simple mass storage.

IMO Thunderbolt as evidenced by Intel/Apple's commitment and by CES announced products is probably now on a safe track regarding the critical market mass issue. However as a policy I do believe that Thunderbolt is important enough that Apple's decision not to specifically support USB3 in Sandy Bridge boxes was very appropriate.

-Allen

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Nope. It's a popular claim, but one that is false. Porn was already available on beta in the '70s.

alt.comedy.firesgn-thtre | Google Groups

This anecdotal evidence is highly suspect. 6 hours on a VHS required long play VCRs and Beta was long dead before they showed up in any significant numbers. Thats how I remember it anyway. I am certain that the video rental market was very well established before LP VCRs came along. I did a quick google on this subject and despite one or two people linking to pages that supposedly contained a "good debunking of the myth" they didn't. Nothing but forum posts of people with dodgy memories. Maybe its a myth, maybe not. Sounds plausible enough to me.
Its also possible that Sony eventually relented and allowed porn on beta and the guy in your post just remembers his dates a bit wrong.

Originally Posted by Eug 

Of course I mean in shops.

And yes, several USB 3 pen drives are available in the wild and have been for months. My local shop had the USB 3 Voyager GT 32 GB on sale a couple of weeks ago for $30. They also had other ones, but they were about $45-55.

Several? Thats your idea of them being everywhere? There are probably tens of thousands of different USB 2 products available. If not more.

Originally Posted by Eug 

You mean like Firewire? It did drop in price, but it always remained a high cost product in comparison.

Because it wasn't widespread enough to drive down the cost of the controller chips. I think a lot of the price of TB is the straight lack of competition. The cables ought to get cheaper over time too.

Originally Posted by Eug 

For pen drives, price won't be a factor in the USB 3 vs TB discussion, because just about nobody is going to sell a TB pen drive any time soon. A TB pen drive would be larger, higher cost, and no faster, and it wouldn't work with the vast majority of computers out there.

BTW, for that USB 3 flash drive above, the similar model USB 2 version was the same price.

I don't expect to see a TB pen drive. I recall one Firewire pen drive that shipped with a piece of software but it was very expensive. Very useful, but very expensive.

Originally Posted by Eug 

No they're not, which is why I say Macs should have both TB and USB 3. Ironically though, it's several people here and apparently people at Apple who are afraid the very different USB 3 will kill TB off and therefore TB needs protection from USB 3.

And they will have both reasonably soon but in the long run TB is the better, more versatile, more useful and therefore more important tech. It is good that Apple and Intel are protecting it. When everyone is used to having both, they'll continue to expect both and everything will be fine. I'm sure a Thunderbolt to USB 3 adaptor will appear soon enough anyway.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

This anecdotal evidence is highly suspect. 6 hours on a VHS required long play VCRs and Beta was long dead before they showed up in any significant numbers. Thats how I remember it anyway.

Beta was 1 hour at introduction (1975). VHS was 2 hours at introduction - 1976. (The cassettes were physically larger, so they could hold more tape.) Plus, VHS recorders actually cost significantly less than beta.

Several? Thats your idea of them being everywhere?

A few in just one store. And with most larger computer stores carrying them.

There are probably tens of thousands of different USB 2 products available. If not more.

Indeed, and USB 3 is backwards compatible with them.

Because it wasn't widespread enough to drive down the cost of the controller chips. I think a lot of the price of TB is the straight lack of competition. The cables ought to get cheaper over time too.

All of this stuff will get cheaper, but TB is inherently more complex, so it will always be more expensive than USB 3.

Also, I can only hope that that daisychaining on TB is way better than daisychaining on SCSI and Firewire. Cuz daisychaining on those sucked.

I don't expect to see a TB pen drive.

I don't expect to see a TB iPad either. Nor a TB iPod. USB 3 iPad and iPod? Most definitely.

And they will have both reasonably soon but in the long run TB is the better, more versatile, more useful and therefore more important tech. It is good that Apple and Intel are protecting it. When everyone is used to having both, they'll continue to expect both and everything will be fine. I'm sure a Thunderbolt to USB 3 adaptor will appear soon enough anyway.

Heheh, I hope it's not $300.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Also, I can only hope that that daisychaining on TB is way better than daisychaining on SCSI and Firewire. Cuz daisychaining on those sucked.

How exactly does Firewire daisy chaining suck?

SCSI was annoying b/c it required termination, and wasn't hot-pluggable.

Neither applies to Firewire.

[Waragainstsleep]

I think being able to fill a retina display equipped iPad 3 with HD content nice and fast over TB would be pretty cool.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

How exactly does Firewire daisy chaining suck?

SCSI was annoying b/c it required termination, and wasn't hot-pluggable.

Neither applies to Firewire.

Some equipment is incompatible with others. Daisy chain them and one or both won't work properly.
For some equipment, if you shut off the power to the first in the chain, stuff down stream is cut off. This is two issues. First off you lose power to bus powered devices, but even if you don't need bus power, you may lose the FW connection anyway. I'm not sure this is supposed to be normal behaviour, but nonetheless this happens.
Similarly if the first in the chain locks up, then stuff down stream is cut off.

So, what I prefer to do is use hubs, and for the important stuff I'll connect directly to the hub, and for the stuff I use less often (eg. external optical drive) I'll put it on the end of the chain if there are no compatibility issues. (My current Firewire hub is FW800 but it only has 3 ports.)

You can still get incompatibilities through hubs, but most of the rest of the stuff I mention usually doesn't happen. (Hubs are always on, and never lock up.)

Oh and of course, a lot of Firewire devices don't have two ports anyway, so they always terminate the chain.

---

Ironically though, right now I use my $$ FW800 Seagate external drive in USB 2 mode. My other devices just don't like being daisy chained to it. If I plug my FW800 flash memory reader into it, it usually works, but not always. If I plug my FW400 optical drive into it, the optical drive simply doesn't work.

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

SCSI was annoying b/c it required termination, and wasn't hot-pluggable.

Worse. SCSI was a black art. Some configs would fail to work, switch the connection points and then they would work. With multiple drives daisy chained that was a lot of permutations and combinations to try. And do not even begin to consider cable issues...

[P]

Ah, SCSI, fond memories... You were supposed to have one terminator on each end of the chain, and there was one in the Mac itself, so you needed one more - except when you didn't. A short chain with only the Mac + one item was usually best left unterminated on one end and a long chain sometimes needed a terminator in the center somewhere as well. To make it more amusing, a long cable in effect acted like a terminator, so sometimes it really did make a difference to switch the order of the cables. Great times, great times.

[Eug]

Don't forget the DIP switches.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Some equipment is incompatible with others. Daisy chain them and one or both won't work properly.
For some equipment, if you shut off the power to the first in the chain, stuff down stream is cut off. This is two issues. First off you lose power to bus powered devices, but even if you don't need bus power, you may lose the FW connection anyway. I'm not sure this is supposed to be normal behaviour, but nonetheless this happens.
Similarly if the first in the chain locks up, then stuff down stream is cut off.

I hear you on the first issue. This also makes troubleshooting a defective drive annoying. But there is nothing about Firewire that poses a difference to ANY other protocol in that respect. It seems completely impossible that Thunderbolt should be an improvement in this regard, so why bring it up?

On the second issue of stuff being "incompatible", the only device I've ever seen this happen with was my Firewire iSight, back in the day. Beyond that, my experience is limited to audio interfaces and hard drives, and I've never had compatibility issues with those.

[SierraDragon]

"Lightning" Bolt from AMD:

http://www.electronista.com/articles...n.development/

I thought this was an appropriate thread for AMD's goofy new product. Interested to see what everyone has to say. For instance:

• Unless AMD has bombproof prior trademarking how can they get away with using the name? The only real value add provided by Lightning Bolt would be to fool the low end into thinking that they got Thunderbolt capabilities (which they would never use anyway) on a cheap low end box.

• Even if they can use the name, I would love to be the Thunderbolt marketer. Sooo easy to use AMD's crap product as a foil...

• Or is AMD maybe obfuscating the Thunderbolt market space just to screw with Intel?

In any event, the whole issue of "protecting" the entry of Thunderbolt into the market just got way more complicated. IMO very bad for AMD because (a) Intel's and Apple's resolve just got strengthened and (b) AMD is publicly staking out the low end, which denigrates their brand and places them in the low-margin competitive space.

[EDIT] Note too that to market Lightning Bolt AMD must suggest that USB is not enough, thus building an awareness in consumers that also benefits Thunderbolt. And Intel/Apple have the IMO easy chore of differentiating (for their high end users) Thunderbolt versus Lightning Bolt - which is dumb stupid easy.

-Allen

[Eug]

Wow, that would totally confuse the market, not so much because of the name, but because it uses the same port.

[P]

Fortunately AMD has a tendency to drop harebrained ideas quickly, because this is one of the sillier I have seen.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Wow, that would totally confuse the market, not so much because of the name, but because it uses the same port.

That's awesome.

BTW, I've been working on a new connection standard myself, behind closed doors. I might as well come out with it in this thread, being appropriate and all:

It will be called Lightning Port, and it will be a 230V AC power line running over Mini DisplayPort connector.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

On the second issue of stuff being "incompatible", the only device I've ever seen this happen with was my Firewire iSight, back in the day. Beyond that, my experience is limited to audio interfaces and hard drives, and I've never had compatibility issues with those.

I bought a Kramer FW800 hub. These are small hubs but multiple ones can be put together and rack mounted, and the audio types seem to like it.

I notice this hub seems to cause less issues than the Dino hub I had.



However, I still get the compatibility issues if I try to daisy chain after the hub. I'd buy more hubs except these things now go for over $100, plus shipping, so it seems like a waste to invest further into this dying format, esp. since I'm neither a music nor a video pro.

[amazing]

must-read:

Thunderbolt: One year later | Macworld

Hint: pursue the Sonnet link and look at the costs involved...

[iomatic]

I ended up replacing my whole system with the TB display and MBA (this computer is wicked fast compared to my C2D).

The only thing that I don't get is why Apple didn't make the Thunderbolt plug backwards compatible on the monitor side. That way, people who haven't upgraded their systems, but eyeballing a TB display could get one and be assured that they could take advantage later. Or those who were on the fence about getting one, or those who are upgrading their monitors wouldn't have any reason not to get one. They could then shortlist the existing LED (Mini DisplayPort) display and offer one (or multiple sizes) technology in the display line. This would at least increase the amount of TB devices (ok, the display line) in people's hands. As of now, ain't nothin' out.

Why am i not running product management again???

[Spheric Harlot]

Would you have upgraded to the newest MacBook Air NOW if the display had been backwards-compatible?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Would you have upgraded to the newest MacBook Air NOW if the display had been backwards-compatible?

Exactly. At this point, it should come as no surprise that Apple uses desirable accessories as a tool to render primary systems more than a few years old obsolete.

[Spheric Harlot]

I want to hear iomatic's response.

[iomatic]

I was due for an upgrade, yes, but my point is they'd get more DISPLAYS— a Thunderbolt device (other than a Mac)— in the hands of more folk. I'm not sure how much the display played a factor.

[Wiskedjak]

Apple probably thinks if you've got enough cash to buy a Cinema Display, you've got enough cash to buy a new computer as well.

[iomatic]

I don't know about that. My point is, if the Thunderbolt Display was backwards compatible, it would have a far larger audience.

[Wiskedjak]

It seems to me that Thunderbolt isn't appropriate for 95% of computer users, given its high manufacturing costs and $50 cables with builtin firmware. USB3 is probably more sensible for the vast majority of customers.

[iomatic]

People are confusing Thunderbolt for a simple serial interface; it can handle a whole lot more, a whole lot faster.

[Wiskedjak]

Yep. And, all most people will want is high speed data transfer.

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Yep. And, all most people will want is high speed data transfer.

Indeed "most people" just want Office and web browsing, and actually not even really high speed. The world has crapbooks for that but that is not the higher-margin market that Apple seeks.

-Allen

[iomatic]

True; but let's not kill the baby just yet. One cable to rule them all! I, personally would love that.