Apple exploring USB 3.0, DisplayPort combo in new mini connector

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 75
    woodewoode Posts: 67member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gotApple View Post


    Instead of being able to plug two devices (a monitor and a USB 3.0 device) to your Mac at the same time, with this you can plug only one!



    No thank you.



    No where does it say that there is ONLY this new connector on the desktop.



    If it was, that would be stupid, like Apple's old ADC which was quite similar. On the other hand, if there's still a complete compliment of USB 3.0 ports on the machine, and an adapter IN THE BOX with the desktop (like the VGA adapter that used to come with Mac minis), then I'm all for it. I'd be even more for it if they license this connector to VESA so it becomes standard.



    Honestly, I think Apple learned it's lesson after ADC. And this is only a patent filing, so I wouldn't get my kickers in too much of a twist.
  • Reply 42 of 75
    gmcalpingmcalpin Posts: 266member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by msantti View Post


    I would rather see "Light Peak".



    Same here.
  • Reply 43 of 75
    naboozlenaboozle Posts: 213member
    Just a patent. For all we know, Apple may try to push for a standard. One would hope they learned their lesson with ADC. I know I did.
  • Reply 44 of 75
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by msantti View Post


    I would rather see "Light Peak".



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gmcalpin View Post


    Same here.



    I don't get these posts. Why is it 'rather' and not 'as well as'. LightPeak can't replace USB3.0 out of the gate. When it's finally finished and included on devices it will be in addition to USB, likely USB3.0 for most machines by that time.



    In regards to the patent, replacing USB3.0 in DP with LightPeak doesn't make since as one is cooper and the other optical. On top of that, any LightPeak port will be able to send/recieve DisplayPort port signaling, but you''ll need an expensive optical to cooper convertor to utilize it at this point. So again it makes no sense.
  • Reply 45 of 75
    isaidsoisaidso Posts: 750member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Josh.B. View Post


    Standard connectors should be used. This reeks of trying to lock their users into buying Apple-manufactured or Apple-licensed cables.



    Already Apple sells cables at crazy-high prices. If they get this patent and implement the scheme, folks will have no choice but to get their cables from Apple.



    This sucks. Big time.



    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)
  • Reply 46 of 75
    adamiigsadamiigs Posts: 355member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by haruhiko View Post


    Another $50 for a stupid cable. That's really great!



    Cool it's going to be 50 bucks?



    How about the fact that as you buy new items they will come with the cable needed? I think the point is you can have 6 connections on your mac and have them do multiple things, not be restricted on what can be plugged in where... oh wait... trolling?
  • Reply 47 of 75
    justflybobjustflybob Posts: 1,337member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dahacouk View Post


    Steve! Greenpeace is just a phone call away. Don't tempt me! ;-/



    Let us know the results.
  • Reply 48 of 75
    justflybobjustflybob Posts: 1,337member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hezetation View Post


    Man people get worked up. Calm down for a minute & consider the real implications of this. This isn't necessarily a replacement of individual ports, could be more a design for a Docking port? Hmmmm? For a long time Apple has been dodging the Dock because current docking ports & designs are bulky & unreliable. However, with the throughput that USB 3 will bring & the daisy-chain capabilities of display port it makes a lot of sense for a design of a Dock port based on those 2 technologies. It would provide all the connections needed to connect a Dock device that would support Video, Audio, Drives, Gig Ethernet, so on & so-forth.



    I may be way out here but this to me smells of Dock.



    I think you may have nailed this one.
  • Reply 49 of 75
    justflybobjustflybob Posts: 1,337member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rob55 View Post


    Come on, seriously?



    Easy there, big fella. Not everyone's as smart as you claim to be, OK?
  • Reply 50 of 75
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,408moderator
    Although the patent mentions desktop/laptop, this looks more like a replacement for the iPod/iPhone 30-pin port. The Mac laptops would simply have the Mini-DP port + USB3 ports and you'd have a cable to connect each one. This way you could get Mini-DP output to play on the iMac from an iPod/iPhone and sync over standard USB 3.



    This is the same idea the current 30-pin port has in that you can plug a number of different leads into it for various uses. The patented one would just be much faster and more versatile.



    It's time we had universal ports though. You shouldn't need ethernet + firewire + display ports + eSATA + USB, all data should go over one standard connection. This way if Apple give you 5 ports, you can use all 5 for whatever you want.



    The problem Apple faces is that few people adopt their standards willingly.
  • Reply 51 of 75
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kedmond View Post


    I just hope they don't make the same mistake they made back in 2000, with the ADC (Apple Display Connector). It only worked between an Apple ADC display and an Apple ADC computer. They never provided an adapter to be used with VGA or DVI. Really dumb move...



    Sure they did... and if I'm not mistaken Geffen did too...



    It was called the DVI to ADC adapter but since ADC carried both video signal AND power from the Mac to the Display the display didn't have any power cord of its own (the purpose of ADC was to remove the need for a power cord -- and usb I think).



    So the DVI to ADC adapter wasn't what anyone would consider an adapter...



    It was a 'power brick' (with a plug that went to an electrical outlet) that the monitor couldn't operate without as well as ports from ADC on one end and DVI on the other. It was $199 or maybe $149?? I don't think it was $99.00 but it was somewhere in that 99-199 price range.



    But yea this idea seems like a solution to a problem that simply doesn't exist and as some posters already point out... A way for Apple to make extra money on their own 'special' cables AND locking users into buying Apple Displays OR even more expensive 'adapters' that give you back normal mini-dp + usb....



    No thanks...
  • Reply 52 of 75
    aurchonaurchon Posts: 18member
    Apple does one thing consistently. Innovate.



    They find new ways to bring new ideas to the table. This means they create great ideas and some don't work so well. When they created Displayport they patented it. However they wanted to make it a standard so they, like the article clearly says if everyone read it, made it free and pushed VESA to make it a standard.



    Apple also could be looking for easy ways to make ports for future devices. How long till Sony or Toshiba or anyone else, creates a new standard and HDMI goes out the window? USB3.0 and Display port could handle bandwidths and with a simple little converter you could have an easy way to connect to other devices.



    Everyone is complaining about buying adapters, but look at it this way, so many people have S-video, Composite, DVI, VGA, HDMI etc that do you want to see all these ports on your Macbook? Apple made it so that one adapter for each person and everyone is happy. Apple is not Sony, and you can find lots of 3rd party devices for Apple connectors (especially with Display port cause Apple licensed it for free ) really cheap.



    So lets not count the chickens before they hatch and look at this as Apple innovating as usual and working to bring us more new ideas and pushing the industry once again.
  • Reply 53 of 75
    m01etym01ety Posts: 278member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Josh.B. View Post


    Ummmm...yes. Seriously. I was unaware that Apple neglected to include eSATA.



    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.



    Anything else you want to throw in WRT eSATA vs. USB 3.0 vs. wireless n NAS?



    Advantages and disadvantages to any or all?





    The word "neglected" is loaded, and I'm not sure it's the word choice you oughta be using. In that sense, they also "neglected" to include a replaceable battery. It's not neglect, it's a design choice.



    Now, I'm not just talking out of my ass here, as I'm one of the few Mac users who actually purchased and uses an eSata ExpressCard. Makes my backups from my 500GB internal drive nice and speedy! But that's just it: I'm one of the few. One of the few who even know what eSata is. Just because it's semi-prevalent on PC laptops doesn't mean that most buyers won't know what it is, let alone use it.



    Same apparently goes for ExpressCard. Apple said that its customers who used it were in the single-digits, hence why it only remains on the 17" MBP. I'm part of that single digit, and I was royally pissed when the ExpressCard was removed from the 15" MBP. Of course, I also understand market realities and Apple's design philosophy. Their strive for minimalism isn't exactly new. If it doesn't need to be there, it's not. It would appear that ExpressCard "doesn't" need to be there. So it's not. Such is life, and I'm free to go elsewhere for my next laptop.



    Personally, I'm waiting for Light Peak. I really really hope that Apple bypasses USB 3 altogether and just goes balls-to-the-walls crazy with Light Peak...



    You're right about USB 3 having the power/charging advantage over eSata. What it still doesn't do is provide SMART data. That's why I prefer eSATA even to FireWire800. As I understand it, since Light Peak is protocol agnostic, it would be able to channel SATA data, so you'd still get SMART passed. I guess we'll find out!
  • Reply 54 of 75
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    It's time we had universal ports though. You shouldn't need ethernet + firewire + display ports + eSATA + USB, all data should go over one standard connection. This way if Apple give you 5 ports, you can use all 5 for whatever you want.



    Unfortunately each unique technology (USB, eSATA, FW, DP, ENET, ETC) all have different kinds of signaling requirements as well as power providing properties. Finally it seems some groups might have a vested interest in the unique design of its cable/connector. The computing world has come a long way in 'downsizing' the number of different ports but some groups remain quite powerful and will linger for many more years before finally being replaced.



    It seems pretty clear that "Light Peak" has been designed as a total solution... however do we really think the USB and SATA and FW and Ethernet groups are all gonna just call it quits and let INTEL (or even a neutral LP standards group) have that kind of control? I don't see it happening... People don't usually give up power without a fight.
  • Reply 55 of 75
    rhyderhyde Posts: 294member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rob55 View Post


    You know any Macs with eSATA?



    My PowerMac Quad G5 and my Mac Book Pro both have eSata. All it takes is a PCI card or an express card.



    Now what would really be cherry is a Mac Mini with eSata and HDMI (true HDMI, with audio).
  • Reply 56 of 75
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rokken View Post


    ... or rather than having only two USB ports and one display port that one doesn't use most of the time, you can then have three USB ports while retaining the ability to connect to external monitor just in case?



    It doesn't look like it would work that way. The connector looks to be larger than a USB 3 + minidisplayport combined.



    Besides, with the LED Cinema Display, Apple could have set their mDP to put the audio & USB through the mDP cable using the existing standard rather than through what seems to be a superfluous USB cable.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Josh.B. View Post


    Oops!



    I just assumed that Macs came equipped with them. I learn more and more all the time.



    Why don't Macs come with eSATA ports? Is there anything better that is currently available?



    Something I didn't see mentioned is that the eSATA connector doesn't seem so positive to me. It feels like it's less likely to stay in the jack than USB or Firewire.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AdamIIGS View Post


    You realize of course that having "1 cable to connect them all" (sorry couldn't resist) is actually better for the environment due to less manufacturing of various cables, retooling machines, etc.,



    Having another type of port that 1:1 replaces plugs that *already exist* doesn't sound sane to me. All this means for me is another cable that I need to buy when I probably didn't need to buy it in the first place if they used already existing connectors. With a regular USB 3 cable, when I buy them, it should work with most other USB 3 jacks. With this thing, if it's not just for a dock, then that means a cable that I'm probably only going to use for that particular device and that's it. I recall having a hard time finding an adapter I needed for ADC a few years after Apple abandoned them, Dr. Bott quit selling them too. I felt lucky digging one up on Amazon Marketplace.
  • Reply 57 of 75
    unicronunicron Posts: 154member
    No no no! The world does not need ADC v2.



    Keep with the standard ports, Apple. I don't need some funky adaptor to work with the rest of the world.
  • Reply 58 of 75
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,759member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post


    I hope this is soon. I've decided that I'm not going to buy another iMac to replace my 2007 model until there's a faster external interface.



    FireWire 800 which your iMac has now?
  • Reply 59 of 75
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,759member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rob55 View Post


    You know any Macs with eSATA?



    My 15" MacBook Pro with an express card adaptor? My Mac Pro with a card? True, iMac's don't have an option for eSATA (nor the new MacBook Pro's with Apples stupid move to SD card readers) but FW800 is already faster than USB2 and most Mac's already have it.



    EDIT: And I think Apple has skipped eSATA since the connectors are pretty fragile, and my experience on Windows has been pretty unforgiving if the cable comes out. Removing drives has been an iffy experience as well. I'm used to eSATA's quirks by now, but it's not exactly the level of polish that Apple strives for and It think that's why you have seen them shy away from it.



    Still, I wouldn't mind seeing an eSATA port with port multiplyer support on the Mac Mini for a killer HTPC
  • Reply 60 of 75
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,759member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Josh.B. View Post


    Thanks. I just skimmed some info on USB 3.0. Amazing throughput.



    On paper, USB 2 had amazing throughput for it's time too. Unfortunately the implementation was lacking and FireWire was still far superior. I think USB 3 can finally do DMA and some of the other things that currently give FW the edge, so maybe it will finally be the one universal interface we can standardize on while we wait for lightpeak to truly unify everything.
Sign In or Register to comment.