Early Thunderbolt tests find blazing speeds with bootable external drives

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 31
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,742member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by photoeditor View Post


    The pricing is seriously excessive.



    Then don't buy one. Simple.
  • Reply 22 of 31
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,437member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by photoeditor View Post


    The pricing is seriously excessive. Even allowing that Thunderbolt currently means a $100 price premium over conventional interfaces, the price given the included drives is quite simply too much. These are DeskStar, not Ultrastar (enterprise class) drives, and compared to, say, Other World Computing's 4TB RAID 5 DeskStar solution, the Promise R4 is $450 more expensive. It's even $100 more expensive than OWC's Ultrastar RAID 5 array. Heck, it's more than a five-drive Drobo with Deskstar drives.



    Performance always costs more.
  • Reply 23 of 31
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    'Kay, first of all, you have no idea how math works.



    Second, you can use actual formatting instead of underscores.



    My issue was with the _logic_ of the statement and not with the numbers used. _BeAsTMaSteR_ has been much more helpful in his explanation; his approximations and multiplication are right on the money but it's the language (i.e. the logic of the statement) that's wrong.



    If Thunberbolt operates at approx. 8 times the speed (= 7 times faster than) of FW then FW operates at 1/8 of the speed of Thunderbolt. This is a logical statement. There is no measure of slowness, only speed.



    Regarding your teenage, Southpark-esque comment that I have no idea how math works; I have a degree in maths and that's why this kind of thing irks.
  • Reply 24 of 31
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by grangenorman View Post


    My issue was with the _logic_ of the statement and not with the numbers used.



    No, your issue was with the SEMANTICS of the statement, not the logic used.



    Quote:

    If Thunberbolt operates at approx. 8 times the speed (= 7 times faster than) of FW then FW operates at 1/8 of the speed of Thunderbolt. This is a logical statement. There is no measure of slowness, only speed.



    Again, semantics. You're splitting hairs.



    Quote:

    Regarding your teenage, Southpark-esque comment that I have no idea how math works; I have a degree in maths and that's why this kind of thing irks.



    Having never seen the show and not being a teenager, I'd have to say that your obsession with minutia in this case irks more than a comment exposing said obsession.
  • Reply 25 of 31
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    No, your issue was with the SEMANTICS of the statement, not the logic used. :roll eyes:



    Again, semantics. You're splitting hairs.



    Having never seen the show and not being a teenager, I'd have to say that your obsession with minutia in this case irks more than a comment exposing said obsession.



    Semantics is a branch of linguistics -AND- logic that deals with meaning. I believe grangenorman's initial point was accurate.
  • Reply 26 of 31
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Semantics is a branch of linguistics -AND- logic that deals with meaning. I believe grangenorman's initial point was accurate.



    The slower/faster argument is the same as in fluid dynamics between sucks and blows. Just as there's no measure of 'slowness', there's no measure of 'sucking', the (let's say wind) is simply blowing the other way.



    But people use them interchangeably. Everyone (except the people with degrees who've trained for years specifically to NOT do this, for whatever reason) understands a 'slower' connector to be one that operates at a smaller, positive-number speed.
  • Reply 27 of 31
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    edit: I see now. I thought you were referring to _BeAsTMaSteR_'s comment.
  • Reply 28 of 31
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    But people use them interchangeably. Everyone (except the people with degrees who've trained for years specifically to NOT do this, for whatever reason) understands a 'slower' connector to be one that operates at a smaller, positive-number speed.



    Given: speed of USB 2.0 = 29.7 MBps



    7.09 times this speed: 7.09 * 29.7 MBps = 210.573 MBps



    Given: faster = positive, and slower = negative:



    Speed of USB 2.0 is 7.09 times less than speed of Thunderbolt



    => speed of Thunderbolt = (29.7-210.573) MBps = a negative number



    This is impossible.



    It could have been a much friendlier discussion minus the personal digs and eye-rolling, Tallest Skil. Thank you to the others for keeping this above-board.
  • Reply 29 of 31
    Looks like SLP was using the ThunderBolt name way back in 2002:



    http://web.archive.org/web/200206041...erboltLogo.jpg



    http://web.archive.org/web/200206041...bolt/index.htm



    Lawsuit coming?
  • Reply 30 of 31
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by davidfree653 View Post


    I hate that 10 Gbps means 700mbps.



    I hate that you're a worthless spambot who doesn't even type his complaint correctly.



    10 gigabits equals 1.25 gigaBYTES. Not sure where that 700 "megabits" nonsense comes from.
  • Reply 31 of 31
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,742member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post


    Looks like SLP was using the ThunderBolt name way back in 2002:



    http://web.archive.org/web/200206041...erboltLogo.jpg



    http://web.archive.org/web/200206041...bolt/index.htm



    Lawsuit coming?



    Are you sure? It may already be resolved:



    http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.c...hunderbolt.com
Sign In or Register to comment.