And we don't need ANY differentiation in Thunderbolt at ALL. Thunderbolt exists to kill off every single other port. Let's actually do the sane, morally-correct thing and make Thunderbolt be just ONE type of port. No Mini Thunderbolt.
And if you would want to have high speed sync in your smart phone, but the phone is too thin to accommodate the standard MDP connector ... then you would need a thinner connector. So you buy a different cable ... it would probably come with the new phone. Rant all you want ...
Quoting part of the original article because apparently people have trouble reading it before clicking reply.
They aren't talking about adapters, they are talking about changing port designs so they can be smaller when they are not in use, but still accepting industry standard plugs. Other parts of the article talk about using rounded components within the port to reduce the wear and tear on the plug from repeated insertions, or having the ports made of the same material as the case. In all scenarios, there no discussion of a new plug, just new ports for accepting the existing plugs.
Guilty as charged! I suppose they could have titled the article as - 'Apple patent refines (and thats all it is) connector port designs'. Boring... no clicks for you.
One thing I don't like about the current Alu design of the iMac is that when you reach around behind to plug something in (hello!), the metal on the e.g. USB plug scratches around on the case a little. Some sort of softer connector would be nice.
Scratch proof would be nice. Even with great care taken, the USB ports on the latest gen Macbook were dented and scratched within a few months. Not sure how the aluminum holds up.
And if you would want to have high speed sync in your smart phone, but the phone is too thin to accommodate the standard MDP connector ... then you would need a thinner connector. So you buy a different cable ... it would probably come with the new phone. Rant all you want ...
Why... do you think that the 30-pin connector can't be changed to transport Thunderbolt?
Why... do you think that the 30-pin connector can't be changed to transport Thunderbolt?
Not without changing the receiving end of the device, and so the device itself. Unless you did a Thunderbolt to USB to Apple 30-pin connection. But just changing the cable to thunderbolt wouldn't' magically (heh) make devices compatible.
The solution to your problem? Easy, dump Apple and buy a cheaply made Dell. No more worries about adapters or aethetics. And you can buy all your peripherals at Walmart too. You should know by now that Apple cares about this sort of thing. Fit and finish are important to them and to the majority of Apple customers.
Agreed, but it would be better for consumers if Apple included the adapters with the devices.
This comes as I pay $30 for yet another display adapter to plug my mini/macbook/imac into a standard DVI monitor.
Every hardware refresh, different style ports/new adapter cables to do the same thing as the previous generation did. All for the sake of aesthetics.
What an asinine statement. Name another PMP that has used the same connector type for a decade? I plug an iPod Nano, iPhone, iPod Classic, and IPad into the same cable and it will sync and charge. I?m not seeing any other company do that. I?m also not seeing any other company try to consolidate ports into longterm future-forward interfaces.
Not without changing the receiving end of the device, and so the device itself. Unless you did a Thunderbolt to USB to Apple 30-pin connection. But just changing the cable to thunderbolt wouldn't' magically (heh) make devices compatible.
The pin config can, as far as i know, be changed with a software update, and so, they could add thunderbolt to either unused pins, or repurpose those FireWire pins that most people don't use anymore.
The pin config can, as far as i know, be changed with a software update, and so, they could add thunderbolt to either unused pins, or repurpose those FireWire pins that most people don't use anymore.
And all with zero speed benefit over USB 2. Remind me why they would bother with current mobile devices?
And all with zero speed benefit over USB 2. Remind me why they would bother with current mobile devices?
Because there wouldn't be a zero speed benefit over USB 2. But you're right, thunderbolt isn't really needed in iDevices, however, Apple could easily lead the way by providing a TB cable along with the existing USB cable and become one of the first device manufacturers to support TB. The next iPhone may indeed come with such a cable.
The hardware for the dock connector itself wouldn't magically get the speed boost for thunderbolt. There are chipsets and hardware behind all this you know. Making it compatible with Thunderbolt, even if they could, would not make it faster. The receiving end would be the bottleneck.
Even ignoring all that, not like the flash memory inside iDevices can write faster than the USB 2.0 max.
The hardware for the dock connector itself wouldn't magically get the speed boost for thunderbolt. There are chipsets and hardware behind all this you know. Making it compatible with Thunderbolt, even if they could, would not make it faster.
So you?re saying it?s impossible to use the same physical 30-pin connector design with updated HW to accommodate faster speeds while being backwards compatible?
Quote:
Even ignoring all that, not like the flash memory inside iDevices can write faster than the USB 2.0 max.
Why can newer NAND benefit from 6Gbps SATA III over 3Gbps SATA II but newer NAND built right onto the logic board can?t benefit from more than 480Mbps?
I implore you to look at USB 1.0, USB 2.0 and USB 3.0. I then ask you to look at FireWire 800, FireWire 1600 and FireWire 3200 in regards to ports interfaces looking the same but having an increased functionality.
Your post makes no sense. Would you mind clearing it up and organizing your thoughts better before I rip it apart?
I'm not sure why you couldn't understand my post. Is English your first language?
I made several suggestions relating to the design of ports on 'future' Apple devices.
Other forum members were clearly able to understand my post. Perhaps you would prefer if I tried to emulate your own unique posting style, of vague, unspecific criticism and random hostility?
The hardware for the dock connector itself wouldn't magically get the speed boost for thunderbolt. There are chipsets and hardware behind all this you know. Making it compatible with Thunderbolt, even if they could, would not make it faster. The receiving end would be the bottleneck.
Even ignoring all that, not like the flash memory inside iDevices can write faster than the USB 2.0 max.
There is no way to know how fast the hardware can go since AFAIK the dock connector is capable of maxing out the existing connection types, but yes, 10Gbit is unlikely. Still, a speed improvement is likely.
So you’re saying it’s impossible to use the same physical 30-pin connector design with updated HW to accommodate faster speeds while being backwards compatible?
Oi, just now we were talking about CURRENT hardware being updated for a future Thunderbolt-30 pin cable. Stop changing the goalposts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Why can newer NAND benefit from 6Gbps SATA III over 3Gbps SATA II but newer NAND built right onto the logic board can’t benefit from more than 480Mbps?
I implore you to look at USB 1.0, USB 2.0 and USB 3.0. I then ask you to look at FireWire 800, FireWire 1600 and FireWire 3200 in regards to ports interfaces looking the same but having an increased functionality.
And no, I don't think the flash inside iDevices is as fast as SSD's that costs hundreds or over a thousand dollars, Do YOU? I just ran HD Tune on an iPod Nano (latest gen) for reference sake, and its write speed was 9MB/s (or about 70Mb/s).
Comments
We already have MicroUSB. We don't need NanoUSB.
And we don't need ANY differentiation in Thunderbolt at ALL. Thunderbolt exists to kill off every single other port. Let's actually do the sane, morally-correct thing and make Thunderbolt be just ONE type of port. No Mini Thunderbolt.
And if you would want to have high speed sync in your smart phone, but the phone is too thin to accommodate the standard MDP connector ... then you would need a thinner connector. So you buy a different cable ... it would probably come with the new phone. Rant all you want ...
Does Thunderbolt have a target disk mode? I have not seen anyone mention that feature as yet.
Have you looked?
http://www.google.com/search?client=...f4866b51aaf71c
He meant to answer YES.
++++
Some times I wonder if the reflexively anti-apple trolls on this forum even bother to read the article before trolling about it.
I don't think it would matter ... they just throw out their rants ... taking up reading space ... I am learning to just skip over 'em.
Quoting part of the original article because apparently people have trouble reading it before clicking reply.
They aren't talking about adapters, they are talking about changing port designs so they can be smaller when they are not in use, but still accepting industry standard plugs. Other parts of the article talk about using rounded components within the port to reduce the wear and tear on the plug from repeated insertions, or having the ports made of the same material as the case. In all scenarios, there no discussion of a new plug, just new ports for accepting the existing plugs.
Guilty as charged! I suppose they could have titled the article as - 'Apple patent refines (and thats all it is) connector port designs'. Boring... no clicks for you.
And if you would want to have high speed sync in your smart phone, but the phone is too thin to accommodate the standard MDP connector ... then you would need a thinner connector. So you buy a different cable ... it would probably come with the new phone. Rant all you want ...
Why... do you think that the 30-pin connector can't be changed to transport Thunderbolt?
Does Thunderbolt have a target disk mode? I have not seen anyone mention that feature as yet.
YES
http://www.google.com/search?q=thund...x=&startPage=1
Why... do you think that the 30-pin connector can't be changed to transport Thunderbolt?
Not without changing the receiving end of the device, and so the device itself. Unless you did a Thunderbolt to USB to Apple 30-pin connection. But just changing the cable to thunderbolt wouldn't' magically (heh) make devices compatible.
The solution to your problem? Easy, dump Apple and buy a cheaply made Dell. No more worries about adapters or aethetics. And you can buy all your peripherals at Walmart too. You should know by now that Apple cares about this sort of thing. Fit and finish are important to them and to the majority of Apple customers.
Agreed, but it would be better for consumers if Apple included the adapters with the devices.
This comes as I pay $30 for yet another display adapter to plug my mini/macbook/imac into a standard DVI monitor.
Every hardware refresh, different style ports/new adapter cables to do the same thing as the previous generation did. All for the sake of aesthetics.
What an asinine statement. Name another PMP that has used the same connector type for a decade? I plug an iPod Nano, iPhone, iPod Classic, and IPad into the same cable and it will sync and charge. I?m not seeing any other company do that. I?m also not seeing any other company try to consolidate ports into longterm future-forward interfaces.
Not without changing the receiving end of the device, and so the device itself. Unless you did a Thunderbolt to USB to Apple 30-pin connection. But just changing the cable to thunderbolt wouldn't' magically (heh) make devices compatible.
The pin config can, as far as i know, be changed with a software update, and so, they could add thunderbolt to either unused pins, or repurpose those FireWire pins that most people don't use anymore.
The pin config can, as far as i know, be changed with a software update, and so, they could add thunderbolt to either unused pins, or repurpose those FireWire pins that most people don't use anymore.
And all with zero speed benefit over USB 2. Remind me why they would bother with current mobile devices?
And all with zero speed benefit over USB 2. Remind me why they would bother with current mobile devices?
Because there wouldn't be a zero speed benefit over USB 2.
And all with zero speed benefit over USB 2. Remind me why they would bother with current mobile devices?
Explain how that makes sense.
Explain how that makes sense.
The hardware for the dock connector itself wouldn't magically get the speed boost for thunderbolt. There are chipsets and hardware behind all this you know. Making it compatible with Thunderbolt, even if they could, would not make it faster. The receiving end would be the bottleneck.
Even ignoring all that, not like the flash memory inside iDevices can write faster than the USB 2.0 max.
The hardware for the dock connector itself wouldn't magically get the speed boost for thunderbolt. There are chipsets and hardware behind all this you know. Making it compatible with Thunderbolt, even if they could, would not make it faster.
So you?re saying it?s impossible to use the same physical 30-pin connector design with updated HW to accommodate faster speeds while being backwards compatible?
Even ignoring all that, not like the flash memory inside iDevices can write faster than the USB 2.0 max.
Why can newer NAND benefit from 6Gbps SATA III over 3Gbps SATA II but newer NAND built right onto the logic board can?t benefit from more than 480Mbps?
I implore you to look at USB 1.0, USB 2.0 and USB 3.0. I then ask you to look at FireWire 800, FireWire 1600 and FireWire 3200 in regards to ports interfaces looking the same but having an increased functionality.
Your post makes no sense. Would you mind clearing it up and organizing your thoughts better before I rip it apart?
I'm not sure why you couldn't understand my post. Is English your first language?
I made several suggestions relating to the design of ports on 'future' Apple devices.
Other forum members were clearly able to understand my post. Perhaps you would prefer if I tried to emulate your own unique posting style, of vague, unspecific criticism and random hostility?
The hardware for the dock connector itself wouldn't magically get the speed boost for thunderbolt. There are chipsets and hardware behind all this you know. Making it compatible with Thunderbolt, even if they could, would not make it faster. The receiving end would be the bottleneck.
Even ignoring all that, not like the flash memory inside iDevices can write faster than the USB 2.0 max.
There is no way to know how fast the hardware can go since AFAIK the dock connector is capable of maxing out the existing connection types, but yes, 10Gbit is unlikely. Still, a speed improvement is likely.
So you’re saying it’s impossible to use the same physical 30-pin connector design with updated HW to accommodate faster speeds while being backwards compatible?
Oi, just now we were talking about CURRENT hardware being updated for a future Thunderbolt-30 pin cable. Stop changing the goalposts.
Why can newer NAND benefit from 6Gbps SATA III over 3Gbps SATA II but newer NAND built right onto the logic board can’t benefit from more than 480Mbps?
I implore you to look at USB 1.0, USB 2.0 and USB 3.0. I then ask you to look at FireWire 800, FireWire 1600 and FireWire 3200 in regards to ports interfaces looking the same but having an increased functionality.
And no, I don't think the flash inside iDevices is as fast as SSD's that costs hundreds or over a thousand dollars, Do YOU? I just ran HD Tune on an iPod Nano (latest gen) for reference sake, and its write speed was 9MB/s (or about 70Mb/s).