And where the hell is all that kit I´m waiting for??? It certainly doesnt look good that there are just a few pieces of hardware you can stick to if you want to use this...
Thunderbolt doesn't seem to be getting any momentum. I think it's Apple's fault for not using the USB connector like Sony did.
People who think the connector doesn't matter don't understand what product people want. They want something that goes faster, period. i.e. something exactly the same as what they have now but faster.
They don't want a new concept to learn ("Thunderbolt"). They don't want a new tech mystery for the nerd at the store to make them feel stupid about. They don't want a new connector to learn, another shape to remember. All those things are the WRONG PRODUCT, and if that's the price they have to pay for the speed, they will just leave it on the shelf for as long as possible until the slowness of the solutions they already know becomes unbearable.
Yes, the USB committee objected, but if you're not willing to ignore that you're not going to be successful. As currently implemented, the whole thing is just a waste of everybody's time (which is ironic for high-speed port).
Thunderbolt doesn't seem to be getting any momentum. I think it's Apple's fault for not using the USB connector like Sony did.
People who think the connector doesn't matter don't understand what product people want. They want something that goes faster, period. i.e. something exactly the same as what they have now but faster.
They don't want a new concept to learn ("Thunderbolt"). They don't want a new tech mystery for the nerd at the store to make them feel stupid about. They don't want a new connector to learn, another shape to remember. All those things are the WRONG PRODUCT, and if that's the price they have to pay for the speed, they will just leave it on the shelf for as long as possible until the slowness of the solutions they already know becomes unbearable.
Thunderbolt was only introduced 3 months ago and it?s only on MacBook Pros and iMacs. We still need to see the MacBook, MacBook Air, Mac mini and Mac Pro added to that list, not to mention seeing iDevices and other peripherals support Thunderbolt.
This is Intel?s tech and they reportedly tried to use USB for the port but were denied by the USB-IF despite Intel being the originators of USB. What Sony is doing may be kosher and they may not even be able to call it Thunderbolt even though it could function the same as Intel?s implementation.
Even if Intel could have used USB for the port interface it?s still a new concept to learn. At least there isn?t a new port interface added to Macs. We might even see Thunderbolt on each side of the MBPs once they remove the ODD and they can put ports on each side at the back of the machine.
With any new tech it takes time for adoption to occur but at the same time there can?t be adoption without someone taking that first step. I don?t see how Thunderbolt-based peripherals won?t be commonplace at next year?s CES.
I wouldn?t be surprised to see Apple do what it did with the iPod once it went to USB. IOW, I can see Apple adding Thunderbolt to the iPhone 5. This will allow faster syncing and faster charging over Thunderbolt. The question is does the 30-pin connector need to be changed to do this or can it use the currently free FireWire pins?
What if they can use the current 30-pin setup but have to pull pins from USB to do it; how would someone that doesn?t have a newer MBP sync and charge? They could include a power adapter with Thunderbolt at the end (but the EU wants USB). They could include a USB-to-Thunderbolt adapter and the iPhone.
There is a good case to be made that Apple won?t add support for iDevices until there is more adoption of Thunderbolt, but they can?t get adoption until people buy Macs with Thunderbolt. Either way they have to start somewhere.
I wonder if it will keep the same name when it switches to optical... just doesn't seem right if it does imo
I'd guess that's at least the reason they didn't use Light Peak. No sense calling it Light Peak when it doesn't use light. A Thunderbolt on the other hand is a bolt of illuminating electricity (aka lightning) so covers both scenarios - I actually like it. But I also like the Thundercats:
Feel the magic, hear the roar, Thunderbolt hooooooo.
In a year's time, over 15 million devices will have this technology and manufacturers will have to sit up and take notice. You cannot run a GPU from USB 3 but you can over Thunderbolt - 'nuff said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
They don't want a new concept to learn ("Thunderbolt"). They don't want a new tech mystery for the nerd at the store to make them feel stupid about. They don't want a new connector to learn, another shape to remember.
It's the same shape as Mini displayport so not entirely new. Apple couldn't have feasibly used USB because you'd need a different cable for daisy-chaining. The buck stops with Intel and they picked the Mini-DP port.
In a year's time, over 15 million devices will have this technology and manufacturers will have to sit up and take notice. You cannot run a GPU from USB 3 but you can over Thunderbolt - 'nuff said.
So you could conceivably have an iPad-like device as your sole computer with an external Apple display that houses USB, FireWire and audio jacks, Ethernet, large HDD storage, and a powerful GPU within the monitor casing?
So you could conceivably have an iPad-like device as your sole computer with an external Apple display that houses USB, FireWire and audio jacks, Ethernet, large HDD storage, and a powerful GPU within the monitor casing?
The return of the DuoDock!
Except it would have to be given a Post-Steve name. Let's assume it won't be run by iPads, but by the MacBook family. MacDock, then? iDock just sounds stupid and DockMac sounds too close to .Mac.
Except it would have to be given a Post-Steve name. Let's assume it won't be run by iPads, but by the MacBook family. MacDock, then? iDock just sounds stupid and DockMac sounds too close to .Mac.
You?ve seen the Motorola Atrix. If anyone can pull off dual-UI running on a Darwin OS on ARM it?s Apple.
If they do adapt Mac OS Aqua UI to be available on their iOS-based iDevices I wonder if the analysts would then allow the iPad to be considered a ?PC."
If they do adapt Mac OS Aqua UI to be available on their iOS-based iDevices...
Though I fear the opposite is what will happen. Launchpad (and most of the rest of Lion) virtually proves that, though Lion's Spotlight needs to get ported to iOS posthaste (read: it's unlike iOS, but it's great).
So you could conceivably have an iPad-like device as your sole computer with an external Apple display that houses USB, FireWire and audio jacks, Ethernet, large HDD storage, and a powerful GPU within the monitor casing?
Yes, although they likely wouldn't use the GPU that way because it would need custom drivers and would have limited benefits for the iPad with the software library it has.
The external GPU over Thunderbolt only really benefits the low-end Macs at the moment.
However, with Apple helping to drive Intel's roadmap, I could see a switch from ARM to x86 down the road so that Mac OS and iOS are one and the same. Then you could easily run your entire computing experience from your iPhone, iPod or iPad. By then, the mobile GPUs will probably be fairly quick though so an external would offer little benefit.
The external GPU over Thunderbolt only really benefits the low-end Macs at the moment.
I see a future Mac Mini... 1"x5"x1"... only has room for a CPU and RAM. SSD attached via Thunderbolt, chained to a swappable GPU, chained to a monitor.
Comments
People who think the connector doesn't matter don't understand what product people want. They want something that goes faster, period. i.e. something exactly the same as what they have now but faster.
They don't want a new concept to learn ("Thunderbolt"). They don't want a new tech mystery for the nerd at the store to make them feel stupid about. They don't want a new connector to learn, another shape to remember. All those things are the WRONG PRODUCT, and if that's the price they have to pay for the speed, they will just leave it on the shelf for as long as possible until the slowness of the solutions they already know becomes unbearable.
Yes, the USB committee objected, but if you're not willing to ignore that you're not going to be successful. As currently implemented, the whole thing is just a waste of everybody's time (which is ironic for high-speed port).
Thunderbolt doesn't seem to be getting any momentum. I think it's Apple's fault for not using the USB connector like Sony did.
People who think the connector doesn't matter don't understand what product people want. They want something that goes faster, period. i.e. something exactly the same as what they have now but faster.
They don't want a new concept to learn ("Thunderbolt"). They don't want a new tech mystery for the nerd at the store to make them feel stupid about. They don't want a new connector to learn, another shape to remember. All those things are the WRONG PRODUCT, and if that's the price they have to pay for the speed, they will just leave it on the shelf for as long as possible until the slowness of the solutions they already know becomes unbearable.
Thunderbolt was only introduced 3 months ago and it?s only on MacBook Pros and iMacs. We still need to see the MacBook, MacBook Air, Mac mini and Mac Pro added to that list, not to mention seeing iDevices and other peripherals support Thunderbolt.
This is Intel?s tech and they reportedly tried to use USB for the port but were denied by the USB-IF despite Intel being the originators of USB. What Sony is doing may be kosher and they may not even be able to call it Thunderbolt even though it could function the same as Intel?s implementation.
Even if Intel could have used USB for the port interface it?s still a new concept to learn. At least there isn?t a new port interface added to Macs. We might even see Thunderbolt on each side of the MBPs once they remove the ODD and they can put ports on each side at the back of the machine.
With any new tech it takes time for adoption to occur but at the same time there can?t be adoption without someone taking that first step. I don?t see how Thunderbolt-based peripherals won?t be commonplace at next year?s CES.
I wouldn?t be surprised to see Apple do what it did with the iPod once it went to USB. IOW, I can see Apple adding Thunderbolt to the iPhone 5. This will allow faster syncing and faster charging over Thunderbolt. The question is does the 30-pin connector need to be changed to do this or can it use the currently free FireWire pins?
What if they can use the current 30-pin setup but have to pull pins from USB to do it; how would someone that doesn?t have a newer MBP sync and charge? They could include a power adapter with Thunderbolt at the end (but the EU wants USB). They could include a USB-to-Thunderbolt adapter and the iPhone.
There is a good case to be made that Apple won?t add support for iDevices until there is more adoption of Thunderbolt, but they can?t get adoption until people buy Macs with Thunderbolt. Either way they have to start somewhere.
I wonder if it will keep the same name when it switches to optical... just doesn't seem right if it does imo
I'd guess that's at least the reason they didn't use Light Peak. No sense calling it Light Peak when it doesn't use light. A Thunderbolt on the other hand is a bolt of illuminating electricity (aka lightning) so covers both scenarios - I actually like it. But I also like the Thundercats:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Qd_IsxgAf8
Feel the magic, hear the roar, Thunderbolt hooooooo.
In a year's time, over 15 million devices will have this technology and manufacturers will have to sit up and take notice. You cannot run a GPU from USB 3 but you can over Thunderbolt - 'nuff said.
They don't want a new concept to learn ("Thunderbolt"). They don't want a new tech mystery for the nerd at the store to make them feel stupid about. They don't want a new connector to learn, another shape to remember.
It's the same shape as Mini displayport so not entirely new. Apple couldn't have feasibly used USB because you'd need a different cable for daisy-chaining. The buck stops with Intel and they picked the Mini-DP port.
In a year's time, over 15 million devices will have this technology and manufacturers will have to sit up and take notice. You cannot run a GPU from USB 3 but you can over Thunderbolt - 'nuff said.
So you could conceivably have an iPad-like device as your sole computer with an external Apple display that houses USB, FireWire and audio jacks, Ethernet, large HDD storage, and a powerful GPU within the monitor casing?
So you could conceivably have an iPad-like device as your sole computer with an external Apple display that houses USB, FireWire and audio jacks, Ethernet, large HDD storage, and a powerful GPU within the monitor casing?
The return of the DuoDock!
Except it would have to be given a Post-Steve name. Let's assume it won't be run by iPads, but by the MacBook family. MacDock, then? iDock just sounds stupid and DockMac sounds too close to .Mac.
The return of the DuoDock!
Except it would have to be given a Post-Steve name. Let's assume it won't be run by iPads, but by the MacBook family. MacDock, then? iDock just sounds stupid and DockMac sounds too close to .Mac.
You?ve seen the Motorola Atrix. If anyone can pull off dual-UI running on a Darwin OS on ARM it?s Apple.
If they do adapt Mac OS Aqua UI to be available on their iOS-based iDevices I wonder if the analysts would then allow the iPad to be considered a ?PC."
If they do adapt Mac OS Aqua UI to be available on their iOS-based iDevices...
Though I fear the opposite is what will happen. Launchpad (and most of the rest of Lion) virtually proves that, though Lion's Spotlight needs to get ported to iOS posthaste (read: it's unlike iOS, but it's great).
So you could conceivably have an iPad-like device as your sole computer with an external Apple display that houses USB, FireWire and audio jacks, Ethernet, large HDD storage, and a powerful GPU within the monitor casing?
Yes, although they likely wouldn't use the GPU that way because it would need custom drivers and would have limited benefits for the iPad with the software library it has.
The external GPU over Thunderbolt only really benefits the low-end Macs at the moment.
However, with Apple helping to drive Intel's roadmap, I could see a switch from ARM to x86 down the road so that Mac OS and iOS are one and the same. Then you could easily run your entire computing experience from your iPhone, iPod or iPad. By then, the mobile GPUs will probably be fairly quick though so an external would offer little benefit.
The external GPU over Thunderbolt only really benefits the low-end Macs at the moment.
I see a future Mac Mini... 1"x5"x1"... only has room for a CPU and RAM. SSD attached via Thunderbolt, chained to a swappable GPU, chained to a monitor.