Much better to have ports designed around products, than to have products designed around ports.
One of these two ways is the way Apple has always, always, always done it. The other way is the way PC makers have always done it (with very few exceptions)
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
No port is designed without a concept for its use, and what kind of products it will be good for. No products are designed without using the relevant ports.
Neither is designed without knowledge of the other.
At one of the computer stores that I worked at years ago, the sales team had a mark-up based target rather than a conventional sales target. The stores computer system allowed you to go in and check the mark-up of each item for sale.
Of all the products that we sold, cables had the highest mark-up, by far. The profit margin on cables is unbelievable, even higher than printer cartridges. They were selling £75 SCSI-3 cables which cost the store 70p.
As a result, the switched-on sales team members used to hang around the cables aisle. You couldn't get anybody to help you if you wanted to purchase a computer or monitor etc., but if you stepped anywhere near the cable aisle they descended on you like a flock of seagulls.
I would suspect that most MacBook users purchase some form of Apple proprietary cable at some point. Apple has a long history of using non-standard video interfaces, going back to the G4 with its non-standard DVI connector. ADC was arguably the worst. But if you look at more recent products, the MacBooks used Mini DVI, the MacBook Airs used Micro DVI, and now everything uses Mini DisplayPort.
At the University that I work at, the various Apple display connectors have become a bit of a running joke. The video adaptors have collectively become known amongst the staff as 'lollipops', and you always have to double-check that you have the respective lollipops with you. To make matters worse, you can't always daisy chain adaptors together because, again, Apple uses non-standard implementations. If I've got a black MacBook, and I want to drive a VGA projector, I can't go from Mini DVI to DVI, to DVI to VGA because the male and female DVI connectors have different pin configurations (they won't physically mate).
Everyday I'm lecturing I personally have to carry:
How much do you think Apple gets for those cables? Very little. The 30 pin port is a special port which is rather complex. Apple has been approached by music player and phone manufacturers to license that port, but Apple wisely refused. That port gives Apple a major advantage over other companies. The amount they make from licensing it is minor. Licensing is a way of controlling who uses the design. Apple wants to do some QC over the manufacturing process. That's the only way they can do it. Otherwise we get $0.99 cent cables that fail quickly and can damage Apple's products.
Again I'll mention that they licensed the Mini Displayport to VESA for nothing.
Look all I know is they sell MDP -> DVI and Mini DVI-> DVI for $30. But you can get the same exact thing at any other seller as a generic cable for $4. (Google Shopping) Apple rips us off with accessories and has been since...at least since I can remember in the early 90s. Do I care? Nope. I'll just buy cheapo adapters and cables.
And I'm seriously wondering if there is a better, current solution. Mel clued me in on the extra power cable issue, which is relevant when using portable external drives. USB 3.0 seems superior in that application.
It's not a problem if they used the integrated USB/eSATA port that most PCs use. That allows the USB port to provide the power for the eSATA drive. I think a couple of portable drives already utilize that feature.
At one of the computer stores that I worked at years ago, the sales team had a mark-up based target rather than a conventional sales target. The stores computer system allowed you to go in and check the mark-up of each item for sale.
Of all the products that we sold, cables had the highest mark-up, by far. The profit margin on cables is unbelievable, even higher than printer cartridges. They were selling £75 SCSI-3 cables which cost the store 70p.
As a result, the switched-on sales team members used to hang around the cables aisle. You couldn't get anybody to help you if you wanted to purchase a computer or monitor etc., but if you stepped anywhere near the cable aisle they descended on you like a flock of seagulls.
I would suspect that most MacBook users purchase some form of Apple proprietary cable at some point. Apple has a long history of using non-standard video interfaces, going back to the G4 with its non-standard DVI connector. ADC was arguably the worst. But if you look at more recent products, the MacBooks used Mini DVI, the MacBook Airs used Micro DVI, and now everything uses Mini DisplayPort.
At the University that I work at, the various Apple display connectors have become a bit of a running joke. The video adaptors have collectively become known amongst the staff as 'lollipops', and you always have to double-check that you have the respective lollipops with you. To make matters worse, you can't always daisy chain adaptors together because, again, Apple uses non-standard implementations. If I've got a black MacBook, and I want to drive a VGA projector, I can't go from Mini DVI to DVI, to DVI to VGA because the male and female DVI connectors have different pin configurations (they won't physically mate).
Everyday I'm lecturing I personally have to carry:
Apple MagSafe charger
Apple Dock cable
Mini DisplayPort to DVI
Mini DisplayPort to VGA
Mini DVI to DVI
Mini DVI to VGA
DVI to VGA
Micro DVI to DVI
I used to work electronics dept. as well...yep cable sale commissions were the highest. Better to sell a few monster cables than a huge TV and a lot quicker to make the sale, too. I still can't believe Apple was so stupid as to invent all these custom connectors. I thought they learned their friggin' lesson with ADB and NuBus and crap. I guess not. At least we have x86 anyway. Their nuts expensive adapters are pure profit for AAPL but I wonder how much less business and pro sales they're making because of stupid product design decisions like this. Non-standard stuff doesn't do too well in business. It's sad because Macs could be great work computers. But unless they drop this "cool" shtick and silly designs such as these silly adapters that unclutter precious Steve Jobs' desk, most businesses just aren't going to get Macs.
Look all I know is they sell MDP -> DVI and Mini DVI-> DVI for $30. But you can get the same exact thing at any other seller as a generic cable for $4. (Google Shopping) Apple rips us off with accessories and has been since...at least since I can remember in the early 90s. Do I care? Nope. I'll just buy cheapo adapters and cables.
What you're saying isn't necessarily true. There are bad cables and good cables. The truth is that there are brands that do cost far too much, and there are brands that are priced properly. I can usually tell if a cable is junk or not.
Light Peak appears to be an attempt to replace a huge assortment of connector formats with a new standard. Unfortunately it looks like they will use the same crappy connector design as USB, with no discernible polarization.
To me the ultimate connector design would be a 3.5mm barrel, with power carried on the inside and outside cylinders, and an optical fiber in the center, like a coaxial cable. Small, rugged, and NO polarization/insertion hassles.
But...does anyone know if a single fiber can carry data in both directions at once? or is there too much reflection from the fiber endpoints?
Light Peak appears to be an attempt to replace a huge assortment of connector formats with a new standard. Unfortunately it looks like they will use the same crappy connector design as USB, with no discernible polarization.
To me the ultimate connector design would be a 3.5mm barrel, with power carried on the inside and outside cylinders, and an optical fiber in the center, like a coaxial cable. Small, rugged, and NO polarization/insertion hassles.
But...does anyone know if a single fiber can carry data in both directions at once? or is there too much reflection from the fiber endpoints?
Fiber these days is multi-modal. It can carry many signals at once in both directions, as light won't intefere with itself if it's on different frequencies. That's the way communications fiber optics work now.
Fiber these days is multi-modal. It can carry many signals at once in both directions, as light won't intefere with itself if it's on different frequencies. That's the way communications fiber optics work now.
Comments
What we need now is an controller which could fit and soft layer translate USB 3.0 and DisplayPort Protocol into Lightpeak.
FireWire 800 which your iMac has now?
IEEE approved FireWire 3200 back in July 2008.
Nope. sorry.
Much better to have ports designed around products, than to have products designed around ports.
One of these two ways is the way Apple has always, always, always done it. The other way is the way PC makers have always done it (with very few exceptions)
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
No port is designed without a concept for its use, and what kind of products it will be good for. No products are designed without using the relevant ports.
Neither is designed without knowledge of the other.
Well they are working on LightPeak as we speak. Which will have its first lunch in late 2010. Even before Intel put out an USB 3.0 Chipset.
What we need now is an controller which could fit and soft layer translate USB 3.0 and DisplayPort Protocol into Lightpeak.
The two are related. It's thought that Intel withdrew their USB chipset because of Lightpeak. It was pretty much finished a while ago.
Of all the products that we sold, cables had the highest mark-up, by far. The profit margin on cables is unbelievable, even higher than printer cartridges. They were selling £75 SCSI-3 cables which cost the store 70p.
As a result, the switched-on sales team members used to hang around the cables aisle. You couldn't get anybody to help you if you wanted to purchase a computer or monitor etc., but if you stepped anywhere near the cable aisle they descended on you like a flock of seagulls.
I would suspect that most MacBook users purchase some form of Apple proprietary cable at some point. Apple has a long history of using non-standard video interfaces, going back to the G4 with its non-standard DVI connector. ADC was arguably the worst. But if you look at more recent products, the MacBooks used Mini DVI, the MacBook Airs used Micro DVI, and now everything uses Mini DisplayPort.
At the University that I work at, the various Apple display connectors have become a bit of a running joke. The video adaptors have collectively become known amongst the staff as 'lollipops', and you always have to double-check that you have the respective lollipops with you. To make matters worse, you can't always daisy chain adaptors together because, again, Apple uses non-standard implementations. If I've got a black MacBook, and I want to drive a VGA projector, I can't go from Mini DVI to DVI, to DVI to VGA because the male and female DVI connectors have different pin configurations (they won't physically mate).
Everyday I'm lecturing I personally have to carry:
Apple MagSafe charger
Apple Dock cable
Mini DisplayPort to DVI
Mini DisplayPort to VGA
Mini DVI to DVI
Mini DVI to VGA
DVI to VGA
Micro DVI to DVI
How much do you think Apple gets for those cables? Very little. The 30 pin port is a special port which is rather complex. Apple has been approached by music player and phone manufacturers to license that port, but Apple wisely refused. That port gives Apple a major advantage over other companies. The amount they make from licensing it is minor. Licensing is a way of controlling who uses the design. Apple wants to do some QC over the manufacturing process. That's the only way they can do it. Otherwise we get $0.99 cent cables that fail quickly and can damage Apple's products.
Again I'll mention that they licensed the Mini Displayport to VESA for nothing.
Look all I know is they sell MDP -> DVI and Mini DVI-> DVI for $30. But you can get the same exact thing at any other seller as a generic cable for $4. (Google Shopping) Apple rips us off with accessories and has been since...at least since I can remember in the early 90s. Do I care? Nope. I'll just buy cheapo adapters and cables.
And I'm seriously wondering if there is a better, current solution. Mel clued me in on the extra power cable issue, which is relevant when using portable external drives. USB 3.0 seems superior in that application.
It's not a problem if they used the integrated USB/eSATA port that most PCs use. That allows the USB port to provide the power for the eSATA drive. I think a couple of portable drives already utilize that feature.
At one of the computer stores that I worked at years ago, the sales team had a mark-up based target rather than a conventional sales target. The stores computer system allowed you to go in and check the mark-up of each item for sale.
Of all the products that we sold, cables had the highest mark-up, by far. The profit margin on cables is unbelievable, even higher than printer cartridges. They were selling £75 SCSI-3 cables which cost the store 70p.
As a result, the switched-on sales team members used to hang around the cables aisle. You couldn't get anybody to help you if you wanted to purchase a computer or monitor etc., but if you stepped anywhere near the cable aisle they descended on you like a flock of seagulls.
I would suspect that most MacBook users purchase some form of Apple proprietary cable at some point. Apple has a long history of using non-standard video interfaces, going back to the G4 with its non-standard DVI connector. ADC was arguably the worst. But if you look at more recent products, the MacBooks used Mini DVI, the MacBook Airs used Micro DVI, and now everything uses Mini DisplayPort.
At the University that I work at, the various Apple display connectors have become a bit of a running joke. The video adaptors have collectively become known amongst the staff as 'lollipops', and you always have to double-check that you have the respective lollipops with you. To make matters worse, you can't always daisy chain adaptors together because, again, Apple uses non-standard implementations. If I've got a black MacBook, and I want to drive a VGA projector, I can't go from Mini DVI to DVI, to DVI to VGA because the male and female DVI connectors have different pin configurations (they won't physically mate).
Everyday I'm lecturing I personally have to carry:
Apple MagSafe charger
Apple Dock cable
Mini DisplayPort to DVI
Mini DisplayPort to VGA
Mini DVI to DVI
Mini DVI to VGA
DVI to VGA
Micro DVI to DVI
I used to work electronics dept. as well...yep cable sale commissions were the highest. Better to sell a few monster cables than a huge TV and a lot quicker to make the sale, too. I still can't believe Apple was so stupid as to invent all these custom connectors. I thought they learned their friggin' lesson with ADB and NuBus and crap. I guess not. At least we have x86 anyway. Their nuts expensive adapters are pure profit for AAPL but I wonder how much less business and pro sales they're making because of stupid product design decisions like this. Non-standard stuff doesn't do too well in business. It's sad because Macs could be great work computers. But unless they drop this "cool" shtick and silly designs such as these silly adapters that unclutter precious Steve Jobs' desk, most businesses just aren't going to get Macs.
Look all I know is they sell MDP -> DVI and Mini DVI-> DVI for $30. But you can get the same exact thing at any other seller as a generic cable for $4. (Google Shopping) Apple rips us off with accessories and has been since...at least since I can remember in the early 90s. Do I care? Nope. I'll just buy cheapo adapters and cables.
What you're saying isn't necessarily true. There are bad cables and good cables. The truth is that there are brands that do cost far too much, and there are brands that are priced properly. I can usually tell if a cable is junk or not.
To me the ultimate connector design would be a 3.5mm barrel, with power carried on the inside and outside cylinders, and an optical fiber in the center, like a coaxial cable. Small, rugged, and NO polarization/insertion hassles.
But...does anyone know if a single fiber can carry data in both directions at once? or is there too much reflection from the fiber endpoints?
Light Peak appears to be an attempt to replace a huge assortment of connector formats with a new standard. Unfortunately it looks like they will use the same crappy connector design as USB, with no discernible polarization.
To me the ultimate connector design would be a 3.5mm barrel, with power carried on the inside and outside cylinders, and an optical fiber in the center, like a coaxial cable. Small, rugged, and NO polarization/insertion hassles.
But...does anyone know if a single fiber can carry data in both directions at once? or is there too much reflection from the fiber endpoints?
Fiber these days is multi-modal. It can carry many signals at once in both directions, as light won't intefere with itself if it's on different frequencies. That's the way communications fiber optics work now.
Fiber these days is multi-modal. It can carry many signals at once in both directions, as light won't intefere with itself if it's on different frequencies. That's the way communications fiber optics work now.
OK Apple, make it so!
OK Apple, make it so!
That should be; "Ok Intel, make it so." Until they get it finished, by the end of the year, hopefully, we ain't gonna see it.