Originally Posted by frankinden
HP sells most to business. Its concerned mainly with those customers. Since about the only thing I have plugged into my PC at work is a mouse and keyboard, I can see why they are not too hellbent on adding this costly option.
How much does it cost to add TB to a machine?
Originally Posted by Macintosh Next
The thing is, if not many companies are using it -- not just PC's but companies that make HD Recorders and external hard drives don't support it, then why should a company like HP support it?
Some standards should be adopted because it's the right thing to do and it will be beneficial in the long term. Manufacturers too often think about the here and now. Thunderbolt is a great development for professional applications.
Originally Posted by Strawberry
I really hope it's not another FireWire.
I suspect that with Intel's backing, it will gain quite wide adoption. It really needs to be an open standard though. If camera and HDD manufacturers go with USB 3.0 for data transfer due to TB being limited to Intel machines, it will be similar to firewire. It doesn't make it any less important a standard but it could really dampen its potential.
Originally Posted by solipsism
I'm amazed so many are looking at Thunderbot like it's FireWire simply because it is supported by Apple.
I think it's more to do with the nature of the connector, similar deal with HDMI vs Mini-DP. Mini-DP has higher bandwidth, smaller port but is far outnumbered and it causes problems. Like, if you buy a 27" Apple display for $1,000 and want to hook up a Blu-Ray player, how would you do it?
Originally Posted by dagamer34
If it were $20/chip * 15 million devices, that's $300 million that HP would rather keep to itself until Thunderbolt really takes off.
Or they could tack $30 onto the cost of a machine and make $150m profit.
Originally Posted by iQatEdo
Thundercat perhaps but not Thunderbolt.
The Thunderbolt logo is actually a silhouette of Cheetara:
Originally Posted by Ricardo Dawkins
What use is superior if there is nothing available for using that superiority?
Quite right and more manufacturers need to wise-up and support this technology as well as Mini-DP.
Originally Posted by bloggerblog
There's an interesting article on Engadget, already showing a Sony laptop with Thunderbolt.
I thought that was interesting too that the TB is linked with the USB 3 port. I expected Apple to do that rather than use Mini-DP but as Intel explained, the USB connector wasn't designed to be used as a multi-protocol port. Apple obviously designed Mini-DP with the intention of supporting TB.
More intriguing to me is their external graphics. I wonder if they run it through the TB port or some other connection.
Originally Posted by hittrj01
How confusing would it be to have a thumb drive, plug it in to that thunderbolt port, and then wonder why nothing is happening?
It may be a hybrid port as in both USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt but it conflicts with Intel's intention of being a dual displayport/PCI protocol.