or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Intel details Thunderbolt, says Apple has full year head start
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Intel details Thunderbolt, says Apple has full year head start - Page 3

post #81 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by myapplelove View Post

so you would have to ask specifically for optical to copper cables, could be a bit confusing when you have a few say...but it makes sense.

NO the part that converts optical to electrical will be in every optical lightpeak cable. Right now when you say run fiber that part is in the adapter. With lightpeak it will be in the cable itself. This way a lightpeak optical cable can plug into todays lightpeak ports .

Thats far away though because optical cable is still too expensive
post #82 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

People should be very excited as this tech is certainly not a replacement for USB. I'm not sure many in this thread recognize the incredible gulf between the two standards. TB is clearly a solution for things USB could never do.

As to the other posters I see big confusion with respect to the terms used here. Head start does not imply exclusive.

As to implementation this really has me curious. It appears that TB requires a different support chip. I suspect that this might be why Apple has not been held up by the SATA bug. TB most likely has direct access to the DMI bus or whatever it is called on Sandy Bridge. I need to dig up an architecture diagram ASAP. TB could go very far in other industries like instrumentation.

The sandybridge bug effects the sata 2 ports on sandybridge motherboards. The first two sata ports are sata 3. So on a laptop this is not a problem .Usually the hdd is one sata port and the dvd drive is the other. on sandybridge this would be the 2 sata 3 ports which are not effected.
post #83 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Then you haven't been checking much of late. Apple's world wide is approaching 10% for their Mac install base, and much larger obviously when we include the iOS platform.

he was talking osx not ios, but where are your figures for worldwide install base coming from?
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #84 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Not a chance.

Guess Apple won't be showing us an iPad at the iPad event in six days, then.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #85 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecphorizer View Post

Suggestion from one who has been there for 40 years: when pulling your cable through the smurf tube, be sure to pull a waxed string to be used as a pull when you want to add something. CAT cables aren't flexible enough for this.

Also, regarding the double ganged outlets, you have power in case you ever pull fiber.

I used to feed string in the conduits, but gave up after it was more of a pain than it was worth. The Cat6 I use has a very heavy sheath around it so I do not need string in the conduits. I just mask-tape the ends with regular blue-tape with the tape rolled into a cone that extends a couple inches past the end of the cable and it self-aligns. No problem.

With fiber cabling, I insert the fishing cable (the thick plastic lines) into one end and then pull the cabling through. It all works great.

For those complaining about Thunderbolt not having power for fiber, chances are if you're going to feed 100ft of fiber, whatever you're plugging it into will most likely need more power than what the cabling can support anyways. It's moot.
post #86 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

I don't know if and how much better this Thunderbolt is compared to USB3... but it is missing one thing USB has, and that is backward compatibility with USB2. Moving to USB3 is no brainer for manufacturers - everything will work.

Backward compatibility with USB3 is irrelevant but for those who need it, Intel does state in its Thunderbolt info:


Quote:
Extend to reach other I/O technologies by using adapters that use widely available PCI Express controllers. It's simple to create a Gigabit Ethernet, or FireWire, or eSATA adapters using existing device PCI Express drivers.



It be unsurprising if you complained about USB's incompatibility with RS-232 ports at the first iMac's introduction in 1998 with USB ports..
Besides, adapters soon appeared for the minority who still needed those legacy ports.
post #87 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


The new standard is not backwardly compatible with USB 3.0, and Thunderbolt ports can't be added to existing PCs via an expansion card; Intel says the only way to have it is to buy a system or logic board that incorporates the new Thunderbolt controller chip. That's because the Thunderbolt chip needs direct access to both the system's video and PCI Express architecture.

Ok I am confused. If I have a Mac pro and my video card is in a pci slot, how is thunderbolt going to access my video card if it can only work if it has direct access on the motherboard?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #88 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by dagamer34 View Post

Um... this is bad reporting. "One year head start" != exclusive. The difference is this: if it was the latter, I couldn't ask Intel for the support this year even if I paid them. The former just says that Apple had all the design documents before any other manufacturer did, but if they can hurry up with new products, Intel would be happy to let them release them.

Exclusive means restricted or available to a limited set. While you might think it means "a contract saying only one group can get it," the fact that Apple will be the only one offering it for the next year does indeed make it exclusive.

The fact that you'd make a production about a word and try to drum it up as "bad reporting" just makes you an asshole.
post #89 of 132
Reading seems to be a forgotten art these days.

First of all, the initial headline is wrong. There is no post-release exclusivity, the one year's headstart is the pre-release 12 months when Apple worked with Intel in partnership to develop the technology. Wikipedia:
"Thunderbolt (codenamed Light Peak) is a proprietary interface designed by Intel in collaboration with Apple Inc."

As for "will it work with my Mac Pro/PC whatever?" Did nobody read the bit that says it will only work if you buy a motherboard with it on?

Sheesh, I know handwriting is poor these days, but reading too? Bit of irresponsible reporting from AppleInsider though...
post #90 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archos View Post

Exclusive means restricted or available to a limited set. While you might think it means "a contract saying only one group can get it," the fact that Apple will be the only one offering it for the next year does indeed make it exclusive.

The fact that you'd make a production about a word and try to drum it up as "bad reporting" just makes you an asshole.

You can purchase it exclusively from apple for however long period before anyone else can supply it, but it is not exclusively supplied to apple, which is what AI claimed. Denying this turns you into what you claim the other poster is.
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #91 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwissMac2 View Post

As for "will it work with my Mac Pro/PC whatever?" Did nobody read the bit that says it will only work if you buy a motherboard with it on?

Fine, so Thunderbolt ports on the Mac Pro will not be display-connectable, then. We'll have to have separate, identical-looking Mini DisplayPort ports on the GPUs.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #92 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

And it failed because it didn't manage to spread through the rest of the market - non-Apple part.

I don't know if and how much better this Thunderbolt is compared to USB3... but it is missing one thing USB has, and that is backward compatibility with USB2. Moving to USB3 is no brainer for manufacturers - everything will work.

We have a winner. USB 3.0 is here now with tons of devices and backwards compatibility. Thunderbolt is nice but it will lose to USB 3.0.

USB 2.0 needed a speed boost. That said once you go past the speed of modern HD's or SSD's the extra speed does nothing for you. I 3.5 inch typical 7200 RPM SATA drive wont go past 80mbs. Sure SSD will, but I need USB 3.0/Thunderbolt speed when moving large amounts of days in the hundreds of gigs to storage, and SSD are just two small. Most 2TB and larger drives are 5400 RPM's.
post #93 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by majortom1981 View Post

This allows one port for EVERYTHING. Devices connected to it look to the pc as if they are connected to pcie or as a display port. You can plug in a usb device to it with the right cord even an ethernet adapter.

This is the exact kind of things laptops and netbooks needed.

Name one item that needs this vs. what we already have.
post #94 of 132
...not a contractual exclusivity. Just the Intel guy's thinking given the hurdles in getting a mobo design to market with the new chips.
post #95 of 132
Just noticed that they said the logic board has to come with it. Boy does that suck.

Guess I'll have to get another Mac Pro next revision. Oh well, at least I feel better knowing it's not possible and not Apple withholding something from me.
post #96 of 132
That is where is the logic for the TB port on the motherboard? Every indication is that the port needs fast access to both system and video RAM. So the question is this is the support chip custom built with TB support built in? Possibly inplace of the SATA 2 controllers.

The problem is pretty simple, there are limited ways to connect a high speed port like this to a system. Intel has already stated that you can't put the required logic on a PCI Express expansion card, so most likely it is integrated into the bridge chip. I'm certain there is more info out there to explain this I just haven't had time to look.
Quote:
Originally Posted by majortom1981 View Post

The sandybridge bug effects the sata 2 ports on sandybridge motherboards. The first two sata ports are sata 3. So on a laptop this is not a problem .Usually the hdd is one sata port and the dvd drive is the other. on sandybridge this would be the 2 sata 3 ports which are not effected.

Yes everybody and their brother now knows this. My point is this, do the new Mac Books even use this interface chip. It seems to be extremely likely that another solution is on the motherboard.
post #97 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by sippincider View Post

Awesome! Now what can I plug it into, today?

Sometimes Steve skates a little too far ahead of the puck.

This would be good for fast Time Machine backups.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #98 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Not a chance.

Hay dudas!
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #99 of 132
I am really excited about this tech, but what options will there be for devices that lack daisy chain capabilities? I have a WD Studio portable hard drive with only a single FW800 port, which makes connecting this and my video camera at the same time, impossible.

Also, I happen to use the wired keyboard with my iMac due to the fact that I use the 10-key regularly, and I have really liked the accessibility of the USB ports on it. My external storage devices are usually tucked away, once they are connected to my iMac, and therefore even for the peripherals with passthrough, the ports become less accessible the more devices you have daisy chained. Just curious what their solution (if any) will be for these types of issues , as I know there aren't many for FW800.

I'm also curious as to how long it will be before Thunderbolt replaces SATA as the interface for internal hard drives. SATA III is just coming to market really at 6 Gbps where Thunderbolt will start at 10 Gbps (seems like it really is utilizing 40 Gbps of total bandwidth though, due to 10 up and 10 down over each of the data and video paths) and scaling to 100 Gbps.
post #100 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Fiber's 100Gbps and no power.
Copper's 10Gbps and power.

They'll both have their uses.

How much power is the tiny copper jack going to offer? The big Display Port jack supplies 8W. I can't find mDP power specs, but I would expect it to be smaller, say 4W, roughly what USB offers. There aren't a lot of multi-gigabit speed data devices that can sip power that efficiently. Most bus powered USB devices are very slow.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sacto Joe View Post

Amazing that some posters think this is bad news for Apple! Oh, that's right; we get lots of PC fanatics that post here....

\

Still, USB did have the market for the better part of a decade, once USB 2.0 was available, FW400 couldn't hold on to much market beyond professional users and enthusiasts. The acceptance of FW 800 was almost negligible, which was unfortunate because my favorite dual drive enclosure never supported FW 800 with SATA drives. Most video cameras dropped Firewire years ago. I've only heard of one FW "thumb" flash drive, and it was part of a package of diagnostic software for Mac, intended for rescue use. There are three products announced right now, Lacie plans to offer their first Thunderbolt compatible drive in Summer? Promise's device is supposed to be released in Q2, which could be in 5 weeks or 4 months from now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Me too, Firewire is far better than USB 2.

Specs sometimes lie. Even though USB 2.0 is supposed to be rated at 480 and the original Firewire is rated at a lower 400, the Firewire beats the USB 2.0 in real life usage, such as when using external drives. Firewire (400) has better sustained throughput and is faster than USB 2.0.

This is known by the people that pay attention, but it's tough to convince people to go for FW as it does add to the cost of the product and it requires more components and board space to construct, witness Apple's dropping of FW support on their iDevices.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I think they'll start adding Thunderbolt to all of their products, which would ensure wide adoption. Think about it. iPhone 4, next iPods, all computers going forward, iPads. Come on!

Would it make a difference in sync speed? Last I timed an iPhone sync, it only moved data at about 50Mbps, I don't know if Thunderbolt would make much difference in sync speed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by majortom1981 View Post

NO the part that converts optical to electrical will be in every optical lightpeak cable. Right now when you say run fiber that part is in the adapter. With lightpeak it will be in the cable itself. This way a lightpeak optical cable can plug into todays lightpeak ports .

Are you sure about that? Where do you get that? I'm skeptical that the converter can operate at what meager power that the jack can supply.
post #101 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

How much power is the tiny copper jack going to offer? The big Display Port jack supplies 8W. I can't find mDP power specs, but I would expect it to be smaller, say 4W, roughly what USB offers. There aren't a lot of multi-gigabit speed data devices that can sip power that efficiently. Most bus powered USB devices are very slow.



Still, USB did have the market for the better part of a decade, once USB 2.0 was available, FW400 couldn't hold on to much market beyond professional users and enthusiasts. The acceptance of FW 800 was almost negligible, which was unfortunate because my favorite dual drive enclosure never supported FW 800 with SATA drives. Most video cameras dropped Firewire years ago. I've only heard of one FW "thumb" flash drive, and it was part of a package of diagnostic software for Mac, intended for rescue use. There are three products announced right now, Lacie plans to offer their first Thunderbolt compatible drive in Summer? Promise's device is supposed to be released in Q2, which could be in 5 weeks or 4 months from now.



This is known by the people that pay attention, but it's tough to convince people to go for FW as it does add to the cost of the product and it requires more components and board space to construct, witness Apple's dropping of FW support on their iDevices.



Would it make a difference in sync speed? Last I timed an iPhone sync, it only moved data at about 50Mbps, I don't know if Thunderbolt would make much difference in sync speed.



Are you sure about that? Where do you get that? I'm skeptical that the converter can operate at what meager power that the jack can supply.

It has been stated in every info sheet I have seen that the TB port will provide 10W power over the tiny connector.
post #102 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

That is very very *BAD*

I was going wow the minidisplay port is going to get popular, then boom, exclusivity until 2012. WTF they want to make sure it doesnt work or what?

Apple "control-freak" attitude is going to kill the company some day.

Read the article for what it reports and don't add your personal biases to it. There is no exclusivity, it will just take manufacturers time to incorporate Thunderbolt into their products.

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

 

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete...

Reply

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

 

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete...

Reply
post #103 of 132
For folks expecting Thunderbolt on upcoming iOS devices, this from an article at Macworld (which does a good job of laying out the specifics and is worth reading in its entirety):

Quote:
Will iOS devices get Thunderbolt?

As noted above, Thunderbolt relies on PCI Express, the architecture that underpins Macs and most PCs. But iOS devices don’t use a PCI Express architecture, which would presumably make it difficult to simply stick a Thunderbolt port on an iPhone. Plus the dock-connector port on iOS devices provides quite a bit of additional functionality—it’s got 30 connection pins for a reason, after all. Finally, it’s not clear what benefits Thunderbolt would provide that the dock-connector port is missing. We suspect it’s far more likely that Apple will eventually sell an optional Thunderbolt-to-dock-connector cable for charging and syncing.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #104 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

For folks expecting Thunderbolt on upcoming iOS devices, this from an article at Macworld (which does a good job of laying out the specifics and is worth reading in its entirety):


"Finally, it’s not clear what benefits Thunderbolt would provide that the dock-connector port is missing."

They clearly didn't think very hard. The dock connector is incapable of outputting digital video and data transfers are limited to USB 2.0 speeds. It's in dire need of an update. I'd say they are wrong on this one. The dock connector will last a few more generations for legacy reasons, but I'd expect iOS devices to start including this port as well very soon.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #105 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Docking stations were also listed among the potential applications for the new interconnect, with Intel noting that Thunderbolt can "extend to reach other I/O technologies by using adapters that use widely available PCI Express controllers. It's simple to create a Gigabit Ethernet, or FireWire, or eSATA adapters using existing device PCI Express drivers."

Even if im thrilled about those speeds im still tinking about the other aspects!!!

Is this like a firewire bus so that you can do stuff without the cpu being involved? If they didnt make any security alterations to pci express then this sounds as good as wireless firewire.... \
post #106 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

The dock connector is incapable of outputting digital video and data transfers are limited to USB 2.0 speeds. It's in dire need of an update. I'd say they are wrong on this one. The dock connector will last a few more generations for legacy reasons, but I'd expect iOS devices to start including this port as well very soon.

The shortcomings of the dock connector isn't the point, however. It's simply a fact that Thunderbolt is based off of the PCI Express architecture and iOS does not implement that architecture. Apple could start moving towards such an implementation, but the article is responding to the idea (which is being tossed around this thread) that Apple could just stick a Thunderbolt port on an iPad and do some internal wiring and be good to go. It can't, and it won't be able to without some serious work.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #107 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Then you'll have to wait for the fiber implementations. Current Thunderbolt is 10 feet. Fiber Thunderbolt will be 100 meters and 100Gbps, but no power.



We also get Apple fanatics who cheered the rise of FireWire and wept at its death. The same thing is happening here.

The death of firewire? You mean the studio/industry standard that is sat there next to thunderbolt on the new macbook pros? The audio and video interfaces that are installed in studios worldwide died? When did that happen?

I remember apple dropping the port and the public outcry, less than a year ago - that's far from dead!
post #108 of 132
.....
post #109 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

How much power is the tiny copper jack going to offer?

10w, didn't it say? Perfect for charging an iPad and whatnot. Copper Thunderbolt carries 10w, while fiber can't. There was some talk of doing a copper/fiber combo to give the faster implementations power, as well.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #110 of 132
.....
post #111 of 132
adapter coming out?
post #112 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

There goes adoption.

How could they be stupid enough to make this thing of beauty into another FireWire?!

Can't be added? Yeah fricking right. How long before someone makes a PCIe Thunderbolt card for Mac Pros? I don't care if those don't do videothat's why my graphics card existsI just want the transfer speed.

Shoah there. What's the problem?
We should be seeing cheap soundb dlaster cards to Apogee/Mackie/ProTools/etc to hard drives, displays and more. Now we know why fw 800 AND 400 were dropped, only thing is:
1) Will they make available and not just to Aoole Store employees, the next two weeks of returns at a discount to Joe and Jane Apple shopper, the old MacBook
Pros AND
2) how fast and easy will it be how fast the products hit the steers. I'm guessing audio and hard drives are first as the demand is there.

OT fwiw I ran bench a few times yesterday on the new machines and when it hit the user interface test, it kind of froze. Do run it on the device you buy before leaving the store.

Godspeed!!!
post #113 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

The shortcomings of the dock connector isn't the point, however. It's simply a fact that Thunderbolt is based off of the PCI Express architecture and iOS does not implement that architecture. Apple could start moving towards such an implementation, but the article is responding to the idea (which is being tossed around this thread) that Apple could just stick a Thunderbolt port on an iPad and do some internal wiring and be good to go. It can't, and it won't be able to without some serious work.

Yes, that seems like the only reasonable argument they made in that section, but how long has Apple been working with Intel on Thunderbolt now? It's not like they'd just be starting now if they wanted to add it.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #114 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

10w, didn't it say? Perfect for charging an iPad and whatnot. Copper Thunderbolt carries 10w, while fiber can't. There was some talk of doing a copper/fiber combo to give the faster implementations power, as well.

I think you have that backwards. What I read was that the standard fiber implementation will likely be a fiber/copper combo (with power) and there was some talk of a fiber only implementation for spanning very large distances.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #115 of 132
Apple recently killed (well, leapfrogged) Flash, Blu-ray, and now USB 3.0. Go Apple!
post #116 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

The shortcomings of the dock connector isn't the point, however. It's simply a fact that Thunderbolt is based off of the PCI Express architecture and iOS does not implement that architecture. Apple could start moving towards such an implementation, but the article is responding to the idea (which is being tossed around this thread) that Apple could just stick a Thunderbolt port on an iPad and do some internal wiring and be good to go. It can't, and it won't be able to without some serious work.

Is it possible that that the "serious work" could have begun some time ago -- say, about the time that Apple began the "serious work" on Thunderbolt inclusion in the Mac products?

I guess what I am asking is: Are there physical (power, heat, space, battery, etc.) or cost considerations that prevent it being on the iPad 2 (in particular)?

Or is this, mainly, an engineering consideration? Hardware? Software? Both?

An iPad with Thunderbolt capability would have significant advantages over tablets offered by the competition.

And, it would be very un-Apple-like to not have considered this in its long term planning.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #117 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

he was talking osx not ios, but where are your figures for worldwide install base coming from?

He's probably talking about this article:
http://best-gadget-2011.com/apple-le...-manufacturer/

Of course there are also these articles which help show the impact of Apple on the market (yes these 2 are old):
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...et-in-june.ars
http://osxdaily.com/2010/08/05/70-of...hman-use-macs/
post #118 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

Yes, that seems like the only reasonable argument they made in that section, but how long has Apple been working with Intel on Thunderbolt now? It's not like they'd just be starting now if they wanted to add it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Is it possible that that the "serious work" could have begun some time ago -- say, about the time that Apple began the "serious work" on Thunderbolt inclusion in the Mac products?

I guess what I am asking is: Are there physical (power, heat, space, battery, etc.) or cost considerations that prevent it being on the iPad 2 (in particular)?

Or is this, mainly, an engineering consideration? Hardware? Software? Both?

An iPad with Thunderbolt capability would have significant advantages over tablets offered by the competition.

And, it would be very un-Apple-like to not have considered this in its long term planning.

Good point and good questions. I too would be curious if PC Express is power hungry/volume using/heat generating.

If not, if it could be incorporated into a phone sized device (or at least iPad sized device) without undue consequences, then I'm persuaded that Apple would probably have started work on this a while back.

Then the question is, would they bring this out to its own port or just incorporate it into the dock connector (I seem to recall the dock connector has some unused pins)? Apple has seemed very keen on keeping the dock connector as the one and only I/O on their iOS devices (outside of the headphone port). And, how soon?

Being able to sync your iPad to your late model Mac in seconds would be a great selling point, but it's not compelling until Apple has sold a lot more Macs with Thunderbolt on board. And outside of that, what does the format bring to iOS devices? Not using external drives, not wiring up printers or scanners, no video cameras or DSLRs with the connector for the time being, likely not a lot for a while.

So if this does come to iOS, I would expect next year at the earliest, when there's some actual ecosystem to take advantage of. And I wouldn't rule out Apple selling a dock connector to Thunderbolt dongle even then, because they just seem to roll that way.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #119 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

And outside of that, what does the format bring to iOS devices?

HD video out, 10W of power (faster charge times), faster syncs (ensuring that the flash memory is the bottleneck).

Edit: Also one cable keyboard, monitor, mouse nettop/netbook potential. I think as iOS becomes more advanced Apples going to start implementing a desktop UI option (similar to but better than what the motorola Atrix does) for the iPhone and iPad.

Quote:
So if this does come to iOS, I would expect next year at the earliest, when there's some actual ecosystem to take advantage of.

When you have a head start, it's best to make use of it. It's fine to add the port as long as you still have legacy support. It's quite interesting that the MBP refresh and the iPad 2 event were spaced less than a week apart, especially considering the previous case leaks with what looked like a mini-displayport opening up top.

Quote:
And I wouldn't rule out Apple selling a dock connector to Thunderbolt dongle even then, because they just seem to roll that way.

The dock connector doesn't have enough free pins for TB, nor do they need separate pins for USB and Firewire with TB. If they added this to the dock connector, it would be a brand new and likely incompatible one.

The royalty income from the dock connector may be hard to let go of, but I think they might ultimately end up doing that because TB can act as a total replacement for the dock connector once they get around whatever technical issues there may be (which would be beyond my level of understanding).

The dock connector serves a purpose as it combines multiple I/O formats into one port, but TB already does that so there's little reason to change the shape of the plug (the only reason would be to add pins to support analog audio and video but I think we're moving away from that).

I guess we'll see what happens Wednesday. I suspect we'll see the dock connector and one TB port (and hopefully a splitter or a dock for TB), but perhaps you're right and it isn't coming yet.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #120 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Good point and good questions. I too would be curious if PC Express is power hungry/volume using/heat generating.

If not, if it could be incorporated into a phone sized device (or at least iPad sized device) without undue consequences, then I'm persuaded that Apple would probably have started work on this a while back.

Then the question is, would they bring this out to its own port or just incorporate it into the dock connector (I seem to recall the dock connector has some unused pins)? Apple has seemed very keen on keeping the dock connector as the one and only I/O on their iOS devices (outside of the headphone port). And, how soon?

Being able to sync your iPad to your late model Mac in seconds would be a great selling point, but it's not compelling until Apple has sold a lot more Macs with Thunderbolt on board. And outside of that, what does the format bring to iOS devices? Not using external drives, not wiring up printers or scanners, no video cameras or DSLRs with the connector for the time being, likely not a lot for a while.

So if this does come to iOS, I would expect next year at the earliest, when there's some actual ecosystem to take advantage of. And I wouldn't rule out Apple selling a dock connector to Thunderbolt dongle even then, because they just seem to roll that way.

Here are the pinouts:

http://pinouts.ru/CellularPhones-A-N...r_pinout.shtml


As to usage of Thunderbolt on the iPad, syncing would be way down on my list.

I'd like to see the iPad as a co-peripheral to a Mac -- the iPad is an I/O peripheral to the Mac and the Mac (and connected peripherals) is an I/O peripheral to the iPad.

I attempted to describe this in a prior post (below), I am specifically thinking of Macs and iPads used for the coming Final Cut Studio. This could be so compelling that it would sell Macs, iPads and FCS -- whatever it takes to get the "jaw-dropping" capability.

... Not to mention any 3rd-party Mac app like CAD or Photo editing that uses a graphic tablet and/or would benefit from a multitouch control surface.

Just imagine, you sit down at your Mac/iPad workstation, do some Photo editing, CAD, or Video editing. Then you drag and drop the finished product to the iPad. You grab the iPad and walk into your living room, or the client's office and AirPlay the results to the HDTV.... WOW!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I think that, at the Mar 2 iPad 2 event, we'll see the iPad being demoed:

-- with an iPad app as a visual control surface for an app running on a Mac
-- with an iPad app as a graphics tablet input device for an app running on a Mac
-- dragging and dropping content between between the iPad and a Mac (both ways)
-- as an external display for an app running on the Mac (the iPad is a peripheral display)
-- as a source of information displayed on the Mac (the Mac is the peripheral) Not

I suspect that:

-- every Mac and iDevice will include Thunderbolt support in the next upgrade.
-- the next release Pro apps will include support for the iPad as above.
-- iLife and iWork will have full iPod/Mac implementations
-- and iLife and iWork can act as stand-alones or as described above.


The dividing line between desktop and mobile blurs -- depending on how the devices are used.

Atrix, had the right idea -- they just didn't think it through properly (who wants a "Scarecrow/Tin Man" computer?}
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Intel details Thunderbolt, says Apple has full year head start