This is about as complete as it would be to satisfy me. I'm surprised it took this long to include a USBc port on front and an SD-card slot. I would buy this. If I had one small gripe, it's that they didn't include additional USBc ports on the back. I understand that TB3 is also USBc, but there will come a day where our cables will all be USBc and it would be nice if this could accommodate that. It's nitpicking though.
It's not a nitpick. We are in the situation where dock makers don't provide sufficient USB-C ports because there aren't enough devices in the wild using USB-C and people aren't buying USB-C devices because there aren't enough available ports. A few months ago I looked for a 4 port USB-C replicator/splitter/dock/whatever and could find absolutely zero that provided it -- except the MBP.
This dock technically has 3 USB-C ports. But the thing is, there really aren't many USB devices that can saturate USB 3.1 Gen1 (625 MB/sec) much less a USB 3.1 Gen 2 (1250 MB/s). It's not so much the number of USB devices out there either, it's just that the vast majority of people simply don't need that many high-end ports. Two Thunderbolt ports and maybe 2 USB-C ports will cover about 99% of the people out there. This is why all these docks still come with so many USB-A ports. Besides, you can use USB-C devices on a USB-A port by simply buying a USB-C to USB-A cable for $6; no dongle or converter required.
I only buy USB-C devices now. Not because I need the speed, I'm just future proofing my gear.
A dual SSD raid using newer drives can easily over drive 10Gbs ports. Some new drives can do that with a single drive, offering 2,000Mbs in serial read and writes.
In addition, most usb controllers control 2 ports, giving just half speed to each port if both are used at the same time. The 2013 Mac Pro had similar problems with its Thunderbolt ports. Some were faster than others. I wonder what the situation is with the new Mac Mini’s 4 TB ports?
If I had a dual SSD raid and I needed that kind of speed I'd use Thunderbolt (40Gbps), since USB-3 GEN 2 cannot max out the drive. Who needs that kind of speed via a hub? Maybe 0.1 of the population? They're simply aren't that many real world situations where you'd need a drive like that, much less two drives like that connected to the same computer that need to operate at full speed for a sustained period of time. These are real niche requirements. This is why these hubs come with at most, 2 Thunderbolt, two USB-C and a bunch of USB-3 ports. Even if you had a 4-port USB-C hub, the primary port to the computer would have to be Thunderbolt to handle the bandwidth.
The Mac Mini has 4-ports with 2-controllers (period), because INTEL doesn't make 4-port Thunderbolt interfaces with one controller, it's not an option. The issue is not the number of ports or controllers, it's the PCI Express bandwidth allocated to the controllers.
I'm sure they'll be some 4-port USB-C hubs in the future, considering that almost every new computer comes with USB-C and/or Thunderbolt. To me all of this is a non-issue.
Titan Ridge does allow for one controller and four ports. However, you are right, there are two controllers. We got given bad info. It appears that there is a x4 PCI-E channel allocated to EACH controller.
This is about as complete as it would be to satisfy me. I'm surprised it took this long to include a USBc port on front and an SD-card slot. I would buy this. If I had one small gripe, it's that they didn't include additional USBc ports on the back. I understand that TB3 is also USBc, but there will come a day where our cables will all be USBc and it would be nice if this could accommodate that. It's nitpicking though.
It's not a nitpick. We are in the situation where dock makers don't provide sufficient USB-C ports because there aren't enough devices in the wild using USB-C and people aren't buying USB-C devices because there aren't enough available ports. A few months ago I looked for a 4 port USB-C replicator/splitter/dock/whatever and could find absolutely zero that provided it -- except the MBP.
This dock technically has 3 USB-C ports. But the thing is, there really aren't many USB devices that can saturate USB 3.1 Gen1 (625 MB/sec) much less a USB 3.1 Gen 2 (1250 MB/s). It's not so much the number of USB devices out there either, it's just that the vast majority of people simply don't need that many high-end ports. Two Thunderbolt ports and maybe 2 USB-C ports will cover about 99% of the people out there. This is why all these docks still come with so many USB-A ports. Besides, you can use USB-C devices on a USB-A port by simply buying a USB-C to USB-A cable for $6; no dongle or converter required.
I only buy USB-C devices now. Not because I need the speed, I'm just future proofing my gear.
A dual SSD raid using newer drives can easily over drive 10Gbs ports. Some new drives can do that with a single drive, offering 2,000Mbs in serial read and writes.
In addition, most usb controllers control 2 ports, giving just half speed to each port if both are used at the same time. The 2013 Mac Pro had similar problems with its Thunderbolt ports. Some were faster than others. I wonder what the situation is with the new Mac Mini’s 4 TB ports?
If I had a dual SSD raid and I needed that kind of speed I'd use Thunderbolt (40Gbps), since USB-3 GEN 2 cannot max out the drive. Who needs that kind of speed via a hub? Maybe 0.1 of the population? They're simply aren't that many real world situations where you'd need a drive like that, much less two drives like that connected to the same computer that need to operate at full speed for a sustained period of time. These are real niche requirements. This is why these hubs come with at most, 2 Thunderbolt, two USB-C and a bunch of USB-3 ports. Even if you had a 4-port USB-C hub, the primary port to the computer would have to be Thunderbolt to handle the bandwidth.
The Mac Mini has 4-ports with 2-controllers (period), because INTEL doesn't make 4-port Thunderbolt interfaces with one controller, it's not an option. The issue is not the number of ports or controllers, it's the PCI Express bandwidth allocated to the controllers.
I'm sure they'll be some 4-port USB-C hubs in the future, considering that almost every new computer comes with USB-C and/or Thunderbolt. To me all of this is a non-issue.
Titan Ridge does allow for one controller and four ports. However, you are right, there are two controllers. We got given bad info. It appears that there is a x4 PCI-E channel allocated to EACH controller.
The Titan Ridge Thunderbolt-3 controller has one (1) or two (2) ports. Is there some other controller I don't know about?
This is about as complete as it would be to satisfy me. I'm surprised it took this long to include a USBc port on front and an SD-card slot. I would buy this. If I had one small gripe, it's that they didn't include additional USBc ports on the back. I understand that TB3 is also USBc, but there will come a day where our cables will all be USBc and it would be nice if this could accommodate that. It's nitpicking though.
It's not a nitpick. We are in the situation where dock makers don't provide sufficient USB-C ports because there aren't enough devices in the wild using USB-C and people aren't buying USB-C devices because there aren't enough available ports. A few months ago I looked for a 4 port USB-C replicator/splitter/dock/whatever and could find absolutely zero that provided it -- except the MBP.
This dock technically has 3 USB-C ports. But the thing is, there really aren't many USB devices that can saturate USB 3.1 Gen1 (625 MB/sec) much less a USB 3.1 Gen 2 (1250 MB/s). It's not so much the number of USB devices out there either, it's just that the vast majority of people simply don't need that many high-end ports. Two Thunderbolt ports and maybe 2 USB-C ports will cover about 99% of the people out there. This is why all these docks still come with so many USB-A ports. Besides, you can use USB-C devices on a USB-A port by simply buying a USB-C to USB-A cable for $6; no dongle or converter required.
I only buy USB-C devices now. Not because I need the speed, I'm just future proofing my gear.
A dual SSD raid using newer drives can easily over drive 10Gbs ports. Some new drives can do that with a single drive, offering 2,000Mbs in serial read and writes.
In addition, most usb controllers control 2 ports, giving just half speed to each port if both are used at the same time. The 2013 Mac Pro had similar problems with its Thunderbolt ports. Some were faster than others. I wonder what the situation is with the new Mac Mini’s 4 TB ports?
If I had a dual SSD raid and I needed that kind of speed I'd use Thunderbolt (40Gbps), since USB-3 GEN 2 cannot max out the drive. Who needs that kind of speed via a hub? Maybe 0.1% of the population? They're simply aren't that many real world situations where you'd need a drive like that, much less two drives like that connected to the same computer that need to operate at full speed for a sustained period of time. These are real niche requirements. This is why these hubs come with at most, 2 Thunderbolt, two USB-C and a bunch of USB-3 ports. Even if you had a 4-port USB-C hub, the primary port to the computer would have to be Thunderbolt to handle the bandwidth.
The Mac Mini has 4-ports with 2-controllers (period), because INTEL doesn't make 4-port Thunderbolt interfaces with one controller, it's not an option. The issue is not the number of ports or controllers, it's the PCI Express bandwidth allocated to the controllers.
I'm sure they'll be some 4-port USB-C hubs in the future, considering that almost every new computer comes with USB-C and/or Thunderbolt. To me all of this is a non-issue.
Talking about the cabling and the port speed. There are a lot of USB C 3.1 gen 2 ports at 10Gbs that don’t have TB. The point about TB has been that both ports couldn’t have full speed at once. It’s not just the buss speed.
in addition, currently TB drives cost a lot more than USB C drives. A lot of people buy the USB C drives instead.
This is about as complete as it would be to satisfy me. I'm surprised it took this long to include a USBc port on front and an SD-card slot. I would buy this. If I had one small gripe, it's that they didn't include additional USBc ports on the back. I understand that TB3 is also USBc, but there will come a day where our cables will all be USBc and it would be nice if this could accommodate that. It's nitpicking though.
It's not a nitpick. We are in the situation where dock makers don't provide sufficient USB-C ports because there aren't enough devices in the wild using USB-C and people aren't buying USB-C devices because there aren't enough available ports. A few months ago I looked for a 4 port USB-C replicator/splitter/dock/whatever and could find absolutely zero that provided it -- except the MBP.
This dock technically has 3 USB-C ports. But the thing is, there really aren't many USB devices that can saturate USB 3.1 Gen1 (625 MB/sec) much less a USB 3.1 Gen 2 (1250 MB/s). It's not so much the number of USB devices out there either, it's just that the vast majority of people simply don't need that many high-end ports. Two Thunderbolt ports and maybe 2 USB-C ports will cover about 99% of the people out there. This is why all these docks still come with so many USB-A ports. Besides, you can use USB-C devices on a USB-A port by simply buying a USB-C to USB-A cable for $6; no dongle or converter required.
I only buy USB-C devices now. Not because I need the speed, I'm just future proofing my gear.
A dual SSD raid using newer drives can easily over drive 10Gbs ports. Some new drives can do that with a single drive, offering 2,000Mbs in serial read and writes.
In addition, most usb controllers control 2 ports, giving just half speed to each port if both are used at the same time. The 2013 Mac Pro had similar problems with its Thunderbolt ports. Some were faster than others. I wonder what the situation is with the new Mac Mini’s 4 TB ports?
If I had a dual SSD raid and I needed that kind of speed I'd use Thunderbolt (40Gbps), since USB-3 GEN 2 cannot max out the drive. Who needs that kind of speed via a hub? Maybe 0.1% of the population? They're simply aren't that many real world situations where you'd need a drive like that, much less two drives like that connected to the same computer that need to operate at full speed for a sustained period of time. These are real niche requirements. This is why these hubs come with at most, 2 Thunderbolt, two USB-C and a bunch of USB-3 ports. Even if you had a 4-port USB-C hub, the primary port to the computer would have to be Thunderbolt to handle the bandwidth.
The Mac Mini has 4-ports with 2-controllers (period), because INTEL doesn't make 4-port Thunderbolt interfaces with one controller, it's not an option. The issue is not the number of ports or controllers, it's the PCI Express bandwidth allocated to the controllers.
I'm sure they'll be some 4-port USB-C hubs in the future, considering that almost every new computer comes with USB-C and/or Thunderbolt. To me all of this is a non-issue.
Talking about the cabling and the port speed. There are a lot of USB C 3.1 gen 2 ports at 10Gbs that don’t have TB. The point about TB has been that both ports couldn’t have full speed at once. It’s not just the buss speed.
in addition, currently TB drives cost a lot more than USB C drives. A lot of people buy the USB C drives instead.
I just don't get what you're arguing about.
1. Sure, two (2) TB ports on a single controller can't have full speed, which is why Apple includes 2-controllers with 4-ports total on the Pro models like the MacMini and MacBook Pro. On newer Pro models both controllers are full speed, 80Gbps total.
2. A USB port/hub of any kind also has to divide its bandwidth per controller, just like TB.
3. You can just plug your USB-3 drive into the Thunderbolt or USB-C port. As a USB-C port Thunderbolt is backward compatible with USB-3 and USB-2.
4. You can plug a USB-C drive into USB-A port. I have two USB-C raid drives and neither can max out the USB-A port since they are not SSDs.
I'm surprised that TB cables longer than 0.5m (around 20 inches) don't generally support USB Type C 3.1, but luckily I haven't needed anything longer than that so far. I hope manufacturers will start making cables for both USB-C and TB3 that support at least the USB Type C 3.2 standard so that no matter what kind of cable you buy, you're getting at least the full 10Gbps of USB-C 3.1 most recent computer users have. There's really no excuse for TB-compatible cables not to support full USB-C specs.
The TB-3 cable difference is simple, passive vs. active cables.
Passive cables .5 meter supports TB-3 (40Gbps) and USB Passive cables > .5 meters support TB-3 (20Gbps) and USB Active cables of any length only support TB-3 (40Gbps)
* This is a technological limitation that 3rd party manufactures do not control.
USB cables only support USB, even if it has a type C connector.
Part of the confusion is that USB-C is just a port type (connector), like USB-A and USB-B.
A USB-C port can carry Thunderbolt, USB-3 Gen 1 and Gen 2, and USB-2 in addition to Display Port, Ethernet and PCI-E.
I have a TB-1 port, connected to a TB-2 adapter that is connected to a TB-3 RAID/HUB.
The RAID/HUB has an internal RAID.
The RAID/HUB has one USB-C (3.1 GEN-2) drive connected to a USB-C (3.1 GEN-2) port and one USB-C (3.1 GEN-2) drive connected to a USB-A (3.1 GEN-1) port.
The RAID/HUB is also carrying my Ethernet and DisplayPort.
All that through one TB-1 cable connected to a 2013 MBP. The cable is 1-meter (3-feet).
TB-1 technically has 20Gbps like TB-2, the difference is that TB-1 has the up/down channels split with 10Gbps each.
This is about as complete as it would be to satisfy me. I'm surprised it took this long to include a USBc port on front and an SD-card slot. I would buy this. If I had one small gripe, it's that they didn't include additional USBc ports on the back. I understand that TB3 is also USBc, but there will come a day where our cables will all be USBc and it would be nice if this could accommodate that. It's nitpicking though.
It's not a nitpick. We are in the situation where dock makers don't provide sufficient USB-C ports because there aren't enough devices in the wild using USB-C and people aren't buying USB-C devices because there aren't enough available ports. A few months ago I looked for a 4 port USB-C replicator/splitter/dock/whatever and could find absolutely zero that provided it -- except the MBP.
This dock technically has 3 USB-C ports. But the thing is, there really aren't many USB devices that can saturate USB 3.1 Gen1 (625 MB/sec) much less a USB 3.1 Gen 2 (1250 MB/s). It's not so much the number of USB devices out there either, it's just that the vast majority of people simply don't need that many high-end ports. Two Thunderbolt ports and maybe 2 USB-C ports will cover about 99% of the people out there. This is why all these docks still come with so many USB-A ports. Besides, you can use USB-C devices on a USB-A port by simply buying a USB-C to USB-A cable for $6; no dongle or converter required.
I only buy USB-C devices now. Not because I need the speed, I'm just future proofing my gear.
A dual SSD raid using newer drives can easily over drive 10Gbs ports. Some new drives can do that with a single drive, offering 2,000Mbs in serial read and writes.
In addition, most usb controllers control 2 ports, giving just half speed to each port if both are used at the same time. The 2013 Mac Pro had similar problems with its Thunderbolt ports. Some were faster than others. I wonder what the situation is with the new Mac Mini’s 4 TB ports?
If I had a dual SSD raid and I needed that kind of speed I'd use Thunderbolt (40Gbps), since USB-3 GEN 2 cannot max out the drive. Who needs that kind of speed via a hub? Maybe 0.1% of the population? They're simply aren't that many real world situations where you'd need a drive like that, much less two drives like that connected to the same computer that need to operate at full speed for a sustained period of time. These are real niche requirements. This is why these hubs come with at most, 2 Thunderbolt, two USB-C and a bunch of USB-3 ports. Even if you had a 4-port USB-C hub, the primary port to the computer would have to be Thunderbolt to handle the bandwidth.
The Mac Mini has 4-ports with 2-controllers (period), because INTEL doesn't make 4-port Thunderbolt interfaces with one controller, it's not an option. The issue is not the number of ports or controllers, it's the PCI Express bandwidth allocated to the controllers.
I'm sure they'll be some 4-port USB-C hubs in the future, considering that almost every new computer comes with USB-C and/or Thunderbolt. To me all of this is a non-issue.
Talking about the cabling and the port speed. There are a lot of USB C 3.1 gen 2 ports at 10Gbs that don’t have TB. The point about TB has been that both ports couldn’t have full speed at once. It’s not just the buss speed.
in addition, currently TB drives cost a lot more than USB C drives. A lot of people buy the USB C drives instead.
I just don't get what you're arguing about.
1. Sure, two (2) TB ports on a single controller can't have full speed, which is why Apple includes 2-controllers with 4-ports total on the Pro models like the MacMini and MacBook Pro. On newer Pro models both controllers are full speed, 80Gbps total.
2. A USB port/hub of any kind also has to divide its bandwidth per controller, just like TB.
3. You can just plug your USB-3 drive into the Thunderbolt or USB-C port. As a USB-C port Thunderbolt is backward compatible with USB-3 and USB-2.
4. You can plug a USB-C drive into USB-A port. I have two USB-C raid drives and neither can max out the USB-A port since they are not SSDs.
Apple used to have one controller chip per USB port. It’s more expensive that way, but you got full performance. There is no requirement to use both ports per controller.
This is about as complete as it would be to satisfy me. I'm surprised it took this long to include a USBc port on front and an SD-card slot. I would buy this. If I had one small gripe, it's that they didn't include additional USBc ports on the back. I understand that TB3 is also USBc, but there will come a day where our cables will all be USBc and it would be nice if this could accommodate that. It's nitpicking though.
It's not a nitpick. We are in the situation where dock makers don't provide sufficient USB-C ports because there aren't enough devices in the wild using USB-C and people aren't buying USB-C devices because there aren't enough available ports. A few months ago I looked for a 4 port USB-C replicator/splitter/dock/whatever and could find absolutely zero that provided it -- except the MBP.
This dock technically has 3 USB-C ports. But the thing is, there really aren't many USB devices that can saturate USB 3.1 Gen1 (625 MB/sec) much less a USB 3.1 Gen 2 (1250 MB/s). It's not so much the number of USB devices out there either, it's just that the vast majority of people simply don't need that many high-end ports. Two Thunderbolt ports and maybe 2 USB-C ports will cover about 99% of the people out there. This is why all these docks still come with so many USB-A ports. Besides, you can use USB-C devices on a USB-A port by simply buying a USB-C to USB-A cable for $6; no dongle or converter required.
I only buy USB-C devices now. Not because I need the speed, I'm just future proofing my gear.
A dual SSD raid using newer drives can easily over drive 10Gbs ports. Some new drives can do that with a single drive, offering 2,000Mbs in serial read and writes.
In addition, most usb controllers control 2 ports, giving just half speed to each port if both are used at the same time. The 2013 Mac Pro had similar problems with its Thunderbolt ports. Some were faster than others. I wonder what the situation is with the new Mac Mini’s 4 TB ports?
If I had a dual SSD raid and I needed that kind of speed I'd use Thunderbolt (40Gbps), since USB-3 GEN 2 cannot max out the drive. Who needs that kind of speed via a hub? Maybe 0.1% of the population? They're simply aren't that many real world situations where you'd need a drive like that, much less two drives like that connected to the same computer that need to operate at full speed for a sustained period of time. These are real niche requirements. This is why these hubs come with at most, 2 Thunderbolt, two USB-C and a bunch of USB-3 ports. Even if you had a 4-port USB-C hub, the primary port to the computer would have to be Thunderbolt to handle the bandwidth.
The Mac Mini has 4-ports with 2-controllers (period), because INTEL doesn't make 4-port Thunderbolt interfaces with one controller, it's not an option. The issue is not the number of ports or controllers, it's the PCI Express bandwidth allocated to the controllers.
I'm sure they'll be some 4-port USB-C hubs in the future, considering that almost every new computer comes with USB-C and/or Thunderbolt. To me all of this is a non-issue.
Talking about the cabling and the port speed. There are a lot of USB C 3.1 gen 2 ports at 10Gbs that don’t have TB. The point about TB has been that both ports couldn’t have full speed at once. It’s not just the buss speed.
in addition, currently TB drives cost a lot more than USB C drives. A lot of people buy the USB C drives instead.
I just don't get what you're arguing about.
1. Sure, two (2) TB ports on a single controller can't have full speed, which is why Apple includes 2-controllers with 4-ports total on the Pro models like the MacMini and MacBook Pro. On newer Pro models both controllers are full speed, 80Gbps total.
2. A USB port/hub of any kind also has to divide its bandwidth per controller, just like TB.
3. You can just plug your USB-3 drive into the Thunderbolt or USB-C port. As a USB-C port Thunderbolt is backward compatible with USB-3 and USB-2.
4. You can plug a USB-C drive into USB-A port. I have two USB-C raid drives and neither can max out the USB-A port since they are not SSDs.
Apple used to have one controller chip per USB port. It’s more expensive that way, but you got full performance. There is no requirement to use both ports per controller.
Just seems like overkill, besides, Thunderbolt seems to be their standard now. None of their new computers are USB only. The only hold out is the 12" MacBook but I suspect that's going TB too unless they kill off the line. For most people, 2-4 TB ports with 1-2 Controllers is more than enough on a portable. The desktops obviously have room for more. New PCs seem to be following this lead too.
As a high-end user I'm pretty happy with the direction Apple has taken. The port labelling and cabling is a bit of a pain but going TB only simplifies a lot of that on the USB-C side, since TB-3 is all-in-one.
Not saying there is, as I haven’t used it. But I’ve thrown away literally hundreds of cables of various types over the years. Mostly they work for a while, and then don’t. As you should know, trusting reviews on a sellers site is a waste of time, unless there are hundreds, at a minimum, and even there, given that most of what you see are really cables made in China with various branding, a cable that gets excellent ratings may be changed out for something worse at any point in time.
another problem is that, as Apple found out a year, or so ago, you can’t even trust brand name products on Amazon, eBay and others as actually being that product, as Apple found that 90% of Apple branded accessories were fake.
while too many people are cheap these days, and don’t remember when cables were expensive, buying cables is difficult. Looking for the cheapest cable with 50 great reviews is possbly a waste of time.
That’s why I’ll only buy the Amazon Basics line of cables from Amazon. That way at least I have some confidence in the quality control aspect. The Amazon Basics cabkes I’ve purchased so far have been excellent quality and a great value.
Not saying there is, as I haven’t used it. But I’ve thrown away literally hundreds of cables of various types over the years. Mostly they work for a while, and then don’t. As you should know, trusting reviews on a sellers site is a waste of time, unless there are hundreds, at a minimum, and even there, given that most of what you see are really cables made in China with various branding, a cable that gets excellent ratings may be changed out for something worse at any point in time.
another problem is that, as Apple found out a year, or so ago, you can’t even trust brand name products on Amazon, eBay and others as actually being that product, as Apple found that 90% of Apple branded accessories were fake.
while too many people are cheap these days, and don’t remember when cables were expensive, buying cables is difficult. Looking for the cheapest cable with 50 great reviews is possbly a waste of time.
That’s why I’ll only buy the Amazon Basics line of cables from Amazon. That way at least I have some confidence in the quality control aspect. The Amazon Basics cabkes I’ve purchased so far have been excellent quality and a great value.
We don’t always know, for certain, what they are. Hopefully, with their name on it they may be good, and Anker has a very good rep, which are the cables that Amazon sometimes labels as Amazon Basics.
but I do think we’re too concerned with how low a price we can buy a cable for. If you insert it and leave it alone, without moving it around, they should last. But inserting and removing them while bending them a lot causes failure.
This is about as complete as it would be to satisfy me. I'm surprised it took this long to include a USBc port on front and an SD-card slot. I would buy this. If I had one small gripe, it's that they didn't include additional USBc ports on the back. I understand that TB3 is also USBc, but there will come a day where our cables will all be USBc and it would be nice if this could accommodate that. It's nitpicking though.
It's not a nitpick. We are in the situation where dock makers don't provide sufficient USB-C ports because there aren't enough devices in the wild using USB-C and people aren't buying USB-C devices because there aren't enough available ports. A few months ago I looked for a 4 port USB-C replicator/splitter/dock/whatever and could find absolutely zero that provided it -- except the MBP.
This dock technically has 3 USB-C ports. But the thing is, there really aren't many USB devices that can saturate USB 3.1 Gen1 (625 MB/sec) much less a USB 3.1 Gen 2 (1250 MB/s). It's not so much the number of USB devices out there either, it's just that the vast majority of people simply don't need that many high-end ports. Two Thunderbolt ports and maybe 2 USB-C ports will cover about 99% of the people out there. This is why all these docks still come with so many USB-A ports. Besides, you can use USB-C devices on a USB-A port by simply buying a USB-C to USB-A cable for $6; no dongle or converter required.
I only buy USB-C devices now. Not because I need the speed, I'm just future proofing my gear.
A dual SSD raid using newer drives can easily over drive 10Gbs ports. Some new drives can do that with a single drive, offering 2,000Mbs in serial read and writes.
In addition, most usb controllers control 2 ports, giving just half speed to each port if both are used at the same time. The 2013 Mac Pro had similar problems with its Thunderbolt ports. Some were faster than others. I wonder what the situation is with the new Mac Mini’s 4 TB ports?
If I had a dual SSD raid and I needed that kind of speed I'd use Thunderbolt (40Gbps), since USB-3 GEN 2 cannot max out the drive. Who needs that kind of speed via a hub? Maybe 0.1% of the population? They're simply aren't that many real world situations where you'd need a drive like that, much less two drives like that connected to the same computer that need to operate at full speed for a sustained period of time. These are real niche requirements. This is why these hubs come with at most, 2 Thunderbolt, two USB-C and a bunch of USB-3 ports. Even if you had a 4-port USB-C hub, the primary port to the computer would have to be Thunderbolt to handle the bandwidth.
The Mac Mini has 4-ports with 2-controllers (period), because INTEL doesn't make 4-port Thunderbolt interfaces with one controller, it's not an option. The issue is not the number of ports or controllers, it's the PCI Express bandwidth allocated to the controllers.
I'm sure they'll be some 4-port USB-C hubs in the future, considering that almost every new computer comes with USB-C and/or Thunderbolt. To me all of this is a non-issue.
Talking about the cabling and the port speed. There are a lot of USB C 3.1 gen 2 ports at 10Gbs that don’t have TB. The point about TB has been that both ports couldn’t have full speed at once. It’s not just the buss speed.
in addition, currently TB drives cost a lot more than USB C drives. A lot of people buy the USB C drives instead.
I just don't get what you're arguing about.
1. Sure, two (2) TB ports on a single controller can't have full speed, which is why Apple includes 2-controllers with 4-ports total on the Pro models like the MacMini and MacBook Pro. On newer Pro models both controllers are full speed, 80Gbps total.
2. A USB port/hub of any kind also has to divide its bandwidth per controller, just like TB.
3. You can just plug your USB-3 drive into the Thunderbolt or USB-C port. As a USB-C port Thunderbolt is backward compatible with USB-3 and USB-2.
4. You can plug a USB-C drive into USB-A port. I have two USB-C raid drives and neither can max out the USB-A port since they are not SSDs.
Apple used to have one controller chip per USB port. It’s more expensive that way, but you got full performance. There is no requirement to use both ports per controller.
Just seems like overkill, besides, Thunderbolt seems to be their standard now. None of their new computers are USB only. The only hold out is the 12" MacBook but I suspect that's going TB too unless they kill off the line. For most people, 2-4 TB ports with 1-2 Controllers is more than enough on a portable. The desktops obviously have room for more. New PCs seem to be following this lead too.
As a high-end user I'm pretty happy with the direction Apple has taken. The port labelling and cabling is a bit of a pain but going TB only simplifies a lot of that on the USB-C side, since TB-3 is all-in-one.
A lot of this discussion also involves the iPad Pro, which uses USB C. That’s not Thunderbolt, and it’s not certain whether that could be used with Apple’s A series chips and boards. Apple sells a lot more iPads than Macs, and while most iPad sales aren’t the big Pro models, that’s still a lot of iPad Pros. I’ve seen estimates that Apple might sell 5-8 million iPad Pros this year by the time the new models come out. That’s a big chunk of Mac sales. So it’s important to consider that. And if Apple makes some of the changes to iOS we think they may, that chunk could get larger, particularly if Apple also makes next year’s A series even stronger.
This is about as complete as it would be to satisfy me. I'm surprised it took this long to include a USBc port on front and an SD-card slot. I would buy this. If I had one small gripe, it's that they didn't include additional USBc ports on the back. I understand that TB3 is also USBc, but there will come a day where our cables will all be USBc and it would be nice if this could accommodate that. It's nitpicking though.
It's not a nitpick. We are in the situation where dock makers don't provide sufficient USB-C ports because there aren't enough devices in the wild using USB-C and people aren't buying USB-C devices because there aren't enough available ports. A few months ago I looked for a 4 port USB-C replicator/splitter/dock/whatever and could find absolutely zero that provided it -- except the MBP.
This dock technically has 3 USB-C ports. But the thing is, there really aren't many USB devices that can saturate USB 3.1 Gen1 (625 MB/sec) much less a USB 3.1 Gen 2 (1250 MB/s). It's not so much the number of USB devices out there either, it's just that the vast majority of people simply don't need that many high-end ports. Two Thunderbolt ports and maybe 2 USB-C ports will cover about 99% of the people out there. This is why all these docks still come with so many USB-A ports. Besides, you can use USB-C devices on a USB-A port by simply buying a USB-C to USB-A cable for $6; no dongle or converter required.
I only buy USB-C devices now. Not because I need the speed, I'm just future proofing my gear.
A dual SSD raid using newer drives can easily over drive 10Gbs ports. Some new drives can do that with a single drive, offering 2,000Mbs in serial read and writes.
In addition, most usb controllers control 2 ports, giving just half speed to each port if both are used at the same time. The 2013 Mac Pro had similar problems with its Thunderbolt ports. Some were faster than others. I wonder what the situation is with the new Mac Mini’s 4 TB ports?
If I had a dual SSD raid and I needed that kind of speed I'd use Thunderbolt (40Gbps), since USB-3 GEN 2 cannot max out the drive. Who needs that kind of speed via a hub? Maybe 0.1% of the population? They're simply aren't that many real world situations where you'd need a drive like that, much less two drives like that connected to the same computer that need to operate at full speed for a sustained period of time. These are real niche requirements. This is why these hubs come with at most, 2 Thunderbolt, two USB-C and a bunch of USB-3 ports. Even if you had a 4-port USB-C hub, the primary port to the computer would have to be Thunderbolt to handle the bandwidth.
The Mac Mini has 4-ports with 2-controllers (period), because INTEL doesn't make 4-port Thunderbolt interfaces with one controller, it's not an option. The issue is not the number of ports or controllers, it's the PCI Express bandwidth allocated to the controllers.
I'm sure they'll be some 4-port USB-C hubs in the future, considering that almost every new computer comes with USB-C and/or Thunderbolt. To me all of this is a non-issue.
Talking about the cabling and the port speed. There are a lot of USB C 3.1 gen 2 ports at 10Gbs that don’t have TB. The point about TB has been that both ports couldn’t have full speed at once. It’s not just the buss speed.
in addition, currently TB drives cost a lot more than USB C drives. A lot of people buy the USB C drives instead.
I just don't get what you're arguing about.
1. Sure, two (2) TB ports on a single controller can't have full speed, which is why Apple includes 2-controllers with 4-ports total on the Pro models like the MacMini and MacBook Pro. On newer Pro models both controllers are full speed, 80Gbps total.
2. A USB port/hub of any kind also has to divide its bandwidth per controller, just like TB.
3. You can just plug your USB-3 drive into the Thunderbolt or USB-C port. As a USB-C port Thunderbolt is backward compatible with USB-3 and USB-2.
4. You can plug a USB-C drive into USB-A port. I have two USB-C raid drives and neither can max out the USB-A port since they are not SSDs.
Apple used to have one controller chip per USB port. It’s more expensive that way, but you got full performance. There is no requirement to use both ports per controller.
Just seems like overkill, besides, Thunderbolt seems to be their standard now. None of their new computers are USB only. The only hold out is the 12" MacBook but I suspect that's going TB too unless they kill off the line. For most people, 2-4 TB ports with 1-2 Controllers is more than enough on a portable. The desktops obviously have room for more. New PCs seem to be following this lead too.
As a high-end user I'm pretty happy with the direction Apple has taken. The port labelling and cabling is a bit of a pain but going TB only simplifies a lot of that on the USB-C side, since TB-3 is all-in-one.
A lot of this discussion also involves the iPad Pro, which uses USB C. That’s not Thunderbolt, and it’s not certain whether that could be used with Apple’s A series chips and boards. Apple sells a lot more iPads than Macs, and while most iPad sales aren’t the big Pro models, that’s still a lot of iPad Pros. I’ve seen estimates that Apple might sell 5-8 million iPad Pros this year by the time the new models come out. That’s a big chunk of Mac sales. So it’s important to consider that. And if Apple makes some of the changes to iOS we think they may, that chunk could get larger, particularly if Apple also makes next year’s A series even stronger.
Thunderbolt is an alt-mode of USB-C. Don't see any reason why it wouldn't work on an iPad. If the rumours are true, Apple will be moving Macs from INTEL to ARM and I'm pretty sure they're not going to do that unless it works with Thunderbolt. Without Thunderbolt, they lose too much bandwidth.
This is about as complete as it would be to satisfy me. I'm surprised it took this long to include a USBc port on front and an SD-card slot. I would buy this. If I had one small gripe, it's that they didn't include additional USBc ports on the back. I understand that TB3 is also USBc, but there will come a day where our cables will all be USBc and it would be nice if this could accommodate that. It's nitpicking though.
It's not a nitpick. We are in the situation where dock makers don't provide sufficient USB-C ports because there aren't enough devices in the wild using USB-C and people aren't buying USB-C devices because there aren't enough available ports. A few months ago I looked for a 4 port USB-C replicator/splitter/dock/whatever and could find absolutely zero that provided it -- except the MBP.
This dock technically has 3 USB-C ports. But the thing is, there really aren't many USB devices that can saturate USB 3.1 Gen1 (625 MB/sec) much less a USB 3.1 Gen 2 (1250 MB/s). It's not so much the number of USB devices out there either, it's just that the vast majority of people simply don't need that many high-end ports. Two Thunderbolt ports and maybe 2 USB-C ports will cover about 99% of the people out there. This is why all these docks still come with so many USB-A ports. Besides, you can use USB-C devices on a USB-A port by simply buying a USB-C to USB-A cable for $6; no dongle or converter required.
I only buy USB-C devices now. Not because I need the speed, I'm just future proofing my gear.
A dual SSD raid using newer drives can easily over drive 10Gbs ports. Some new drives can do that with a single drive, offering 2,000Mbs in serial read and writes.
In addition, most usb controllers control 2 ports, giving just half speed to each port if both are used at the same time. The 2013 Mac Pro had similar problems with its Thunderbolt ports. Some were faster than others. I wonder what the situation is with the new Mac Mini’s 4 TB ports?
If I had a dual SSD raid and I needed that kind of speed I'd use Thunderbolt (40Gbps), since USB-3 GEN 2 cannot max out the drive. Who needs that kind of speed via a hub? Maybe 0.1% of the population? They're simply aren't that many real world situations where you'd need a drive like that, much less two drives like that connected to the same computer that need to operate at full speed for a sustained period of time. These are real niche requirements. This is why these hubs come with at most, 2 Thunderbolt, two USB-C and a bunch of USB-3 ports. Even if you had a 4-port USB-C hub, the primary port to the computer would have to be Thunderbolt to handle the bandwidth.
The Mac Mini has 4-ports with 2-controllers (period), because INTEL doesn't make 4-port Thunderbolt interfaces with one controller, it's not an option. The issue is not the number of ports or controllers, it's the PCI Express bandwidth allocated to the controllers.
I'm sure they'll be some 4-port USB-C hubs in the future, considering that almost every new computer comes with USB-C and/or Thunderbolt. To me all of this is a non-issue.
Talking about the cabling and the port speed. There are a lot of USB C 3.1 gen 2 ports at 10Gbs that don’t have TB. The point about TB has been that both ports couldn’t have full speed at once. It’s not just the buss speed.
in addition, currently TB drives cost a lot more than USB C drives. A lot of people buy the USB C drives instead.
I just don't get what you're arguing about.
1. Sure, two (2) TB ports on a single controller can't have full speed, which is why Apple includes 2-controllers with 4-ports total on the Pro models like the MacMini and MacBook Pro. On newer Pro models both controllers are full speed, 80Gbps total.
2. A USB port/hub of any kind also has to divide its bandwidth per controller, just like TB.
3. You can just plug your USB-3 drive into the Thunderbolt or USB-C port. As a USB-C port Thunderbolt is backward compatible with USB-3 and USB-2.
4. You can plug a USB-C drive into USB-A port. I have two USB-C raid drives and neither can max out the USB-A port since they are not SSDs.
Apple used to have one controller chip per USB port. It’s more expensive that way, but you got full performance. There is no requirement to use both ports per controller.
Just seems like overkill, besides, Thunderbolt seems to be their standard now. None of their new computers are USB only. The only hold out is the 12" MacBook but I suspect that's going TB too unless they kill off the line. For most people, 2-4 TB ports with 1-2 Controllers is more than enough on a portable. The desktops obviously have room for more. New PCs seem to be following this lead too.
As a high-end user I'm pretty happy with the direction Apple has taken. The port labelling and cabling is a bit of a pain but going TB only simplifies a lot of that on the USB-C side, since TB-3 is all-in-one.
A lot of this discussion also involves the iPad Pro, which uses USB C. That’s not Thunderbolt, and it’s not certain whether that could be used with Apple’s A series chips and boards. Apple sells a lot more iPads than Macs, and while most iPad sales aren’t the big Pro models, that’s still a lot of iPad Pros. I’ve seen estimates that Apple might sell 5-8 million iPad Pros this year by the time the new models come out. That’s a big chunk of Mac sales. So it’s important to consider that. And if Apple makes some of the changes to iOS we think they may, that chunk could get larger, particularly if Apple also makes next year’s A series even stronger.
Thunderbolt is an alt-mode of USB-C. Don't see any reason why it wouldn't work on an iPad. If the rumours are true, Apple will be moving Macs from INTEL to ARM and I'm pretty sure they're not going to do that unless it works with Thunderbolt. Without Thunderbolt, they lose too much bandwidth.
TB has nothing to do with usb other than the connector.
Comments
The Titan Ridge Thunderbolt-3 controller has one (1) or two (2) ports. Is there some other controller I don't know about?
Dual Port
https://ark.intel.com/products/97401/Intel-JHL7440-Thunderbolt-3-Controller
Dual Port
https://ark.intel.com/products/97400/Intel-JHL7540-Thunderbolt-3-Controller
in addition, currently TB drives cost a lot more than USB C drives. A lot of people buy the USB C drives instead.
1. Sure, two (2) TB ports on a single controller can't have full speed, which is why Apple includes 2-controllers with 4-ports total on the Pro models like the MacMini and MacBook Pro. On newer Pro models both controllers are full speed, 80Gbps total.
2. A USB port/hub of any kind also has to divide its bandwidth per controller, just like TB.
3. You can just plug your USB-3 drive into the Thunderbolt or USB-C port. As a USB-C port Thunderbolt is backward compatible with USB-3 and USB-2.
4. You can plug a USB-C drive into USB-A port. I have two USB-C raid drives and neither can max out the USB-A port since they are not SSDs.
The TB-3 cable difference is simple, passive vs. active cables.
Passive cables .5 meter supports TB-3 (40Gbps) and USB
Passive cables > .5 meters support TB-3 (20Gbps) and USB
Active cables of any length only support TB-3 (40Gbps)
* This is a technological limitation that 3rd party manufactures do not control.
USB cables only support USB, even if it has a type C connector.
Part of the confusion is that USB-C is just a port type (connector), like USB-A and USB-B.
A USB-C port can carry Thunderbolt, USB-3 Gen 1 and Gen 2, and USB-2 in addition to Display Port, Ethernet and PCI-E.
I have a TB-1 port, connected to a TB-2 adapter that is connected to a TB-3 RAID/HUB.
The RAID/HUB has an internal RAID.
The RAID/HUB has one USB-C (3.1 GEN-2) drive connected to a USB-C (3.1 GEN-2) port and one USB-C (3.1 GEN-2) drive connected to a USB-A (3.1 GEN-1) port.
The RAID/HUB is also carrying my Ethernet and DisplayPort.
All that through one TB-1 cable connected to a 2013 MBP. The cable is 1-meter (3-feet).
TB-1 technically has 20Gbps like TB-2, the difference is that TB-1 has the up/down channels split with 10Gbps each.
but I do think we’re too concerned with how low a price we can buy a cable for. If you insert it and leave it alone, without moving it around, they should last. But inserting and removing them while bending them a lot causes failure.
A lot of this discussion also involves the iPad Pro, which uses USB C. That’s not Thunderbolt, and it’s not certain whether that could be used with Apple’s A series chips and boards. Apple sells a lot more iPads than Macs, and while most iPad sales aren’t the big Pro models, that’s still a lot of iPad Pros. I’ve seen estimates that Apple might sell 5-8 million iPad Pros this year by the time the new models come out. That’s a big chunk of Mac sales. So it’s important to consider that. And if Apple makes some of the changes to iOS we think they may, that chunk could get larger, particularly if Apple also makes next year’s A series even stronger.