or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › HP exec dismisses Apple and Intel's Thunderbolt in favor of USB 3.0
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

HP exec dismisses Apple and Intel's Thunderbolt in favor of USB 3.0 - Page 4

post #121 of 130
And it's the right decision. More compatibility with more devices is important for high-volume consumer market PCs.
post #122 of 130
Yeah, ADB was good enough. Floppies were good enough. USB 1 was good enough. Netbooks were good enough.

Please, if you want mediocrity, buy an HP.
post #123 of 130
Presumably you can hook up either a USB or a Firewire device with a hub/adapter, unlike USB and Firewire which are incompatible with each other.

But having done so, will Thunderbolt support features of Firewire, like Target disk mode? Or the chaining of 63 devices? Support the peer to peer communication between Firewire devices if those devices are connected to a hub/adapter?

Will it support the 127 or whatever the number of USB devices off a hub/adapter?

Will it support eSata via a hub/adapter?

Thunderbolt itself only supports 6 devices. But if hub/adapters are on the way which can support all the various current cabling schemes, together with the native properties. It sure sounds like a win-win to me. The extra cost of the client side circuitry being borne how many times?

Computer > Hub/Adapter >

Display & TB Raid & eSata & Firewire & USB?

But will TB support Target disk mode?

For myself, I am waiting for hub/adapters to appear and what will they actually do?
post #124 of 130
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. I would guess that when they do decide to add this option, it will be on a select number of systems, and probably as option rather than standard equipment. The real margin at HP is in services anyway. The PC just gets them in the door....
post #125 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankinden View Post

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?

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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?

Quote:
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iQatEdo

Thundercat perhaps but not Thunderbolt.

The Thunderbolt logo is actually a silhouette of Cheetara:



Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.
post #126 of 130
I know it's fun to beat up on HP, but let's be honest.
There are a number of questions about TB that haven't been answered, and it's not smart to blindly adopt something without knowing all the answers.

How many devices can TB support with the use of hubs? Can it match FW's 63 or USB's 127?

How long before the optical version is in play? Will everything be backwards compatible?

What's the difference in price between the copper and optical connections?

I suspect there are good answers to these, because Jobs wouldn't okay a half-baked protocol.
But these answers will probably only come out in June, so wavering on the protocol now isn't a crime.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #127 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

How many devices can TB support with the use of hubs? Can it match FW's 63 or USB's 127?

Show me 127 devices connected to a hub or multiple hubs. One picture on the Internet has to include this.

Or maybe it doesn't, given that no one does anything like this. Thunderbolt's daisy-chaining makes sense in terms of devices/bandwidth.

Quote:
How long before the optical version is in play? Will everything be backwards compatible?

Everything except the speed, sure.

Quote:
What's the difference in price between the copper and optical connections?

It won't matter in the long run. Are USB cables $50 today?
post #128 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Show me 127 devices connected to a hub or multiple hubs. One picture on the Internet has to include this.

Or maybe it doesn't, given that no one does anything like this. Thunderbolt's daisy-chaining makes sense in terms of devices/bandwidth.

Everything except the speed, sure.

It won't matter in the long run. Are USB cables $50 today?

i think his questions are sound and deserve a more thorough answering.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

I know it's fun to beat up on HP, but let's be honest.
There are a number of questions about TB that haven't been answered, and it's not smart to blindly adopt something without knowing all the answers.

How many devices can TB support with the use of hubs? Can it match FW's 63 or USB's 127?

There can up to 7 devices. Yes, that means FW beats it with 63 and USB beats it with 127, but I can’t imagine a scenario where that would be an issue.

Quote:
How long before the optical version is in play? Will everything be backwards compatible?

We don’t know, but it will backwards compatible because it will still be based off the Thunderbolt chip that is protocol independent and connected to PCIe. The port will not likely be backwards compatible to mDP unless they can add an optical receive to the already diminutive size.

Quote:
What's the difference in price between the copper and optical connections?

Optical has the benefit of being of free from electrical interference, but also lacks the option of pushing power without cooper tied to it.

Apple has as patent that puts an optical cable smack dab in the middle of the MagSafe connector. That would have the benefit of supplying power to a Mac notebook whilst pushing all other data to a Mac display via optical. That would be a great single connection “docking station.” The downfall of this that it would be proprietary unless Apple offers up MagSafe to others.

Quote:
I suspect there are good answers to these, because Jobs wouldn't okay a half-baked protocol.
But these answers will probably only come out in June, so wavering on the protocol now isn't a crime.

Remember, Thunderbolt is a technology that is protocol independent and designed to work alongside the current USB implementation. For instance, Macs currently use USB for the IR receiver, iSight, keyboard, mouse.trackpad, Bluetooth host controller, and SD card reader. I doubt these won’t be going away for a long time.

That said, the HP exec knows that Thunderbolt is superior to USB3.0 in data transmissions and that they will likely adopt it, but since they can’t until 2012 there is no good business reason to say how this will be useful. He did leave it open for further investigation and it’s likely by the next CES we’ll see HP and others with plenty of products that an harness the power of Thunderbolt.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #129 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

How many devices can TB support with the use of hubs? Can it match FW's 63 or USB's 127?

If you plug in a firewire card to a PCI slot, it will support that many devices. Given that Thunderbolt is designed to act as a PCI link, I'd expect that adding a firewire adaptor will allow 63 too. The real problem lies in how many devices have two ports on them.

There are adaptors surfacing just now for Thunderbolt:

http://www.holdan.co.uk/Sonnet/Acces...#8482;+Adapter
http://www.holdan.co.uk/Sonnet/Acces...#8482;+Adapter

A little chunky for an adaptor and it seems no TB daisy chain ability. We'll find out sometime if these types of adaptors support daisy chaining.

There's some more info on the Sony Vaio with Thunderbolt too:

http://www.sonyinsider.com/2011/03/1...g-this-summer/

The description isn't clear about the connector but it mentions something that looks like an i.link connection but connects to USB and AC.

This would suggest that Sony have merged USB 3.0 and TB on one port - apparently Apple and Intel originally planned to do this but were told not to by the USB-IF so they changed to use Mini-DP instead. Sony must just have gone ahead without their approval.

I imagine there will have to be cables made to connect each port like there are FW800 to FW400 cables so that the Sony laptop can connect to all the peripherals made at NAB.

The Sony laptop dock also has a discrete mobile GPU. This is the AMD Whistler XT 6770M found in the mid-level iMac and also has a Blu-Ray drive, HDMI, VGA, ethernet and USB. If you can in fact connect an Apple Thunderbolt connector to this dock in some way, it would mean that a Thunderbolt MBA could use the same dock for discrete graphics, Blu-Ray and HDMI, even if some of those things only function properly under Windows.

It proves at least that mobile dedicated graphics can be supported over a Thunderbolt port. C'mon NVidia, get on this.

Seems like Sonnet also have a generic PCI-e 2.0 slot on the way too:

http://www.holdan.co.uk/Sonnet/Stora...s/Echo+Express

This would allow you to fit in a standard FW800 card or desktop GPU. This would actually allow the iMac to have two PCIe 2.0 expansion slots. It doesn't mention GPUs but I don't see why it wouldn't. If the price is affordable, it will finally allow the Mini to get a dedicated high-end GPU.
post #130 of 130
Intel clarified that Sony can't use the Thunderbolt marketing term if they merged USB 3.0 and TB. Intel has specifically defined Thunderbolt to mean displayport merged with PCI. They can probably still say compatible with Thunderbolt products though.

It will create an interesting situation if manufacturers decide to follow Sony and merge USB 3.0 with TB.

In many ways, I'd say it's a more useful way to do it because you're likely to have more USB ports on a device than display outputs. IMO, it would have made sense to have the Mini-DP port support up to 4 displays daisy-chained or with a splitter cable and have 4 x combo USB 3.0/TB ports (or as many can be supported) and get rid of FW800 and ethernet.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › HP exec dismisses Apple and Intel's Thunderbolt in favor of USB 3.0