Consumer Beta was a complete failure. i.Link was a joke. The DRM was called ATRAC. Are you going to call that a success?
Yes but Beta was accepted as being technically superior to VHS which is why it stuck around in broadcast circles for years. Also ATRAC wasn't DRM, it was a custom compression system that predated the popularity of MP3. ATRAC was pretty impressive in that it allowed 'on-the-fly' compression by a portable device back in 1993. People complained that it was DRM because if you played an ATRAC compressed audio stream and converted it to ATRAC the quality sucked - guess what, that's true of MP3 too.
ah yes ATRAC, that was a pain in the a** but you forgot the other horrible things done in conjunction with the RIA and other companies such as SCMS, S/PDIF etc.
to be fair BETA was technically better than VHS...
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton
Consumer Beta was a complete failure. i.Link was a joke. The DRM was called ATRAC. Are you going to call that a success?
So it's 13% heavier and 26% thicker than the 13" MBA and while it does offer more total RAM it starts at $2,294 (UK site) and doesn't even include the dock, which is another $640.
Nice machine but I sure hope Sony isn't calling it a MBA killer.
lol -_- does no one look at specs..... i think this Sony sh*t is way to expensive also, but it comes starting with 256GB SSD, 2.70Ghz core i7, you get 3G radio in it, starts with better screen--1600x900 and you can upgrade to 1080p... (ofc i would preffer MBA 13' 16:10 format) than for $3000 you get AMD 6650M and blue ray.
i expect this price will be lower in US..... but unless its halved it won't sell to anyone but people who need mobile broadband, really badly...
is it worth more money than the MBA, yes. It it worth $1,000 over the MBA 13' with 256GB HD.... no, no fucking way.
it caters to a few people, mobile broadband, intense applications (CAD, heavy gaming, etc (but you could get a MBA and a faster desktop than this for under $2000 ))
so its really good if you want thunderbolt and mobile broadband?
iLink was at least just a marketing term; it was fully FireWire. Apple's exclusivity on thunderbolt was just in product lead time; nothing contractual from what previous reports stated.
I want Intel to release a statement that says, "This is not Thunderbolt or Light Peak. Sony is not legally allowed to sell this device under the Thunderbolt or Light Peak names. It does not meet the requirements of our specification in any way."
Quote:
so its really good if you want thunderbolt and mobile broadband?
Except it doesn't work with any Thunderbolt devices whatsoever.
The big evil from Sony was the root kit: People innocently playing store-bought music CDs would, without their knowledge, have a root kit installed on their PCs that would install copy protection for audio CDS. It also accidentally (?) opened up security holes that allowed hackers to take over your system. If an ordinary person had done this it would be certain jail time, but Sony has the lawyers to make law meaningless.
But what I came here to say isn't a reply to you, actually — I think the headline here is wrong. If it doesn't use the MiniDisplayPort cable, it's not Thunderbolt. If it's BASED on Light Peak, but NOT Light Peak, it's not Thunderbolt.
On Sony's own page, they call it a proprietary port that "can also be used to attach regular USB devices to VAIO when it’s not docked," NOT Thunderbolt. The word "Thunderbolt" doesn't even appear anywhere on the page. This isn't a "we're calling it iLink but it's really Firewire" thing; it's a different connector entirely.
Sony isn't really creating any confusion or fragmentation of Thunderbolt here (because it's not Thunderbolt, if I didn't say that enough) — news sites like Apple Insider and PC World doing so are creating the confusion.
Sony isn't really creating any confusion or fragmentation of Thunderbolt here (because it's not Thunderbolt, if I didn't say that enough) ? news sites like Apple Insider and PC World doing so are creating the confusion.
You're confused. Thunderbolt isn't itself a "branch" of what Light Peak was.
Thunderbolt is Light Peak. Light Peak was a code name. Thunderbolt is the real name. Like iTV became Apple TV. There aren't branches of what iTV became.
If it isn't Thunderbolt, it also cannot be called Light Peak at all.
You're confused. Thunderbolt isn't itself a "branch" of what Light Peak was.
Thunderbolt is Light Peak. Light Peak was a code name. Thunderbolt is the real name. Like iTV became Apple TV. There aren't branches of what iTV became.
If it isn't Thunderbolt, it also cannot be called Light Peak at all.
I'm not confused at all. Your reading comprehension is failing you.
I know full well that Light Peak is Thunderbolt, but Sony — NOT ME — described this proprietary port as being "based on the architecture codenamed ‘Light Peak.'"
Also ATRAC wasn't DRM, it was a custom compression system that predated the popularity of MP3. ATRAC was pretty impressive in that it allowed 'on-the-fly' compression by a portable device back in 1993. People complained that it was DRM because if you played an ATRAC compressed audio stream and converted it to ATRAC the quality sucked - guess what, that's true of MP3 too.
Sure, ATRAC itself is simply a way to compress audio. However, it was almost always accompanied by DRM on MiniDisc recorders/players. That, combined with it being completely proprietary, made it near impossible to get the digital version of your recordings off of anything but the very high-end MiniDisc recorders. Pain in the *ss indeed...
You can probably thank Apple for having a one year exclusive rights to Thunderbolt for why Sony is having to go the USB-like route.
Apple don't have exclusive rights to the format, they just got the spec before everyone else, which Intel said gave them an effective 12 month start - it was closer to 6 months though.
If I recall, Intel tried to build Thunderbolt using the USB port but were declined by the USB-IF because the port wasn't designed for this.
Whether Sony got a mixed message or decided to go their own way isn't clear but IMO, they went the correct route.
This design allows you to connect data ports and items like Blu-Ray directly to the USB 3 port while passing full TB bandwidth to a GPU. With the design that Intel/Apple went with, that other channel is reserved for a display, which you might not even have connected and to be perfectly honest, I don't like the idea of having a display daisy chained off something like a Blu-Ray drive anyway.
If I have a portable drive, I don't want to have to disconnect my screen to plug it in (the screen has to be the last in the chain). To put this into an example:
Sony's laptop has HDMI output even without the dock so if I plug it into a display, I still have the option to fully utilise both the USB 3 and the Thunderbolt.
Apple's Macbook Pro has a single port so if I plug in a monitor and I have a Thunderbolt portable drive, then I have to unplug the monitor before I can use it and even then, I'm a port down vs Sony.
That's even before the cost comes into it.
You now have to consider that if Sony can do this, what's to stop every PC manufacturer and device manufacturer from following Sony and using the USB port? They would be able to make portable USB 3 drives that operate over either USB 3 or TB with a single port. They also manage to make Apple's entire product line almost obsolete because few devices would work with it. All they'd have to worry about is incompatible marketing.
The big question I'd have is if Sony's design entirely prevents them from using devices like the Pegasus RAID systems and Lacie drive along with other products at NAB. If so, it's a bit of a fail. If it just needs a cable that costs less than $50, probably not.
Sure, ATRAC itself is simply a way to compress audio. However, it was almost always accompanied by DRM on MiniDisc recorders/players. That, combined with it being completely proprietary, made it near impossible to get the digital version of your recordings off of anything but the very high-end MiniDisc recorders. Pain in the *ss indeed...
You mean the way that AAC was often combined with Fairplay back in the day? Or for that matter the way that iTunes video still is?
People freaked about ATRAC DRM but really it was fine - I loved my little MDisc player before I got my iPod-2gen. It was far less aggressive and evil than blu-ray's DRM is.
You mean the way that AAC was often combined with Fairplay back in the day? Or for that matter the way that iTunes video still is?
People freaked about ATRAC DRM but really it was fine - I loved my little MDisc player before I got my iPod-2gen. It was far less aggressive and evil than blu-ray's DRM is.
But the thing is, iPods and Blu-Ray players are intended simply for content playback. Many MiniDisc players also had digital recording capabilities (and were marketed as such), which is what got prosumers who couldn't afford DAT equipment so excited about them.
Unfortunately, Sony didn't make it well known that even if you recorded your own material onto a blank MiniDisc (not talking about pirating commercial content), you'd have a h*ll of a time getting at the original (digital) copy due to the DRM which was stupidly added and the lack of anything else which could read ATRAC data. That's what really chafed many people (including myself) about ATRAC.
They also manage to make Apple's entire product line almost obsolete because few devices would work with it.
And what would stop Apple from releasing an adapter cable? The key isn't the USB port... it's that Sony appears to be using optical instead of electrical connections. There's apparently an optical terminal inside the USB port (so I've read). That means at the very least an adapter box to convert the electrical signal to optical, and is probably why Sony is saying it won't work with normal thunderbolt peripherals.
This thicker, heavier device from Sony is just double the price of a MacBook Air. Imagine if they had used a licensed TB port!
Yeah, I guess the cost of Sony's laptop pretty much outweighs the cost of USB 3 devices vs Thunderbolt ones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by infinitespecter
The key isn't the USB port... it's that Sony appears to be using optical instead of electrical connections.
I read that today, I wonder if it offers a higher bandwidth or if it's still running at 10Gbps. Intel supposedly won't have the 50Gbps optical Thunderbolt successor out until 2015.
This thicker, heavier device from Sony is just double the price of a MacBook Air. Imagine if they had used a licensed TB port!
its not licensed last time i checked-- hopefully so it doesn't end up like firewire? sorry if i am wrong.
but yeah lol-- so with dock starting price of $3,000 (assuming 1080p screen)
well, you get better PPI (128 vs 166) times the pixels (vs base MBA 13') better graphics (1-2.5 times the power, maybe more) a lot faster CPU.... but overly fast for anything buy gaming. same GB SSD. Blu ray player (who cares)-- oh and its larger-- gets 14 battery life---if u make it ever larger
all told-- if it wasn't for the fact that Sony knew it couldn't make something sub 1,500 (and make margins it wants) that competes, and makes $, so instead it made something that costs twice as much-- with probably a hugeass margin (parts cost, 85$ ram, $100 screen, ~250$ cpu, 150$ gpu, about $100 blu-ray (probably a lot less)..)
Comments
Consumer Beta was a complete failure. i.Link was a joke. The DRM was called ATRAC. Are you going to call that a success?
Yes but Beta was accepted as being technically superior to VHS which is why it stuck around in broadcast circles for years. Also ATRAC wasn't DRM, it was a custom compression system that predated the popularity of MP3. ATRAC was pretty impressive in that it allowed 'on-the-fly' compression by a portable device back in 1993. People complained that it was DRM because if you played an ATRAC compressed audio stream and converted it to ATRAC the quality sucked - guess what, that's true of MP3 too.
to be fair BETA was technically better than VHS...
Consumer Beta was a complete failure. i.Link was a joke. The DRM was called ATRAC. Are you going to call that a success?
So it's 13% heavier and 26% thicker than the 13" MBA and while it does offer more total RAM it starts at $2,294 (UK site) and doesn't even include the dock, which is another $640.
Nice machine but I sure hope Sony isn't calling it a MBA killer.
lol -_- does no one look at specs..... i think this Sony sh*t is way to expensive also, but it comes starting with 256GB SSD, 2.70Ghz core i7, you get 3G radio in it, starts with better screen--1600x900 and you can upgrade to 1080p... (ofc i would preffer MBA 13' 16:10 format) than for $3000 you get AMD 6650M and blue ray.
i expect this price will be lower in US..... but unless its halved it won't sell to anyone but people who need mobile broadband, really badly...
is it worth more money than the MBA, yes. It it worth $1,000 over the MBA 13' with 256GB HD.... no, no fucking way.
it caters to a few people, mobile broadband, intense applications (CAD, heavy gaming, etc (but you could get a MBA and a faster desktop than this for under $2000
so its really good if you want thunderbolt and mobile broadband?
so its really good if you want thunderbolt and mobile broadband?
Except it doesn't work with any Thunderbolt devices whatsoever.
post
Is it just me or is there nothing to plug into the thunderbolt port at the mo? Seems funny there are updates, lol... c'mon itz too long already...
You can plug any MiniDisplayPort monitor already.
Also, these just came out today: http://www.tuaw.com/2011/06/28/apple...00-raid-array/
But what I came here to say isn't a reply to you, actually — I think the headline here is wrong. If it doesn't use the MiniDisplayPort cable, it's not Thunderbolt. If it's BASED on Light Peak, but NOT Light Peak, it's not Thunderbolt.
On Sony's own page, they call it a proprietary port that "can also be used to attach regular USB devices to VAIO when it’s not docked," NOT Thunderbolt. The word "Thunderbolt" doesn't even appear anywhere on the page. This isn't a "we're calling it iLink but it's really Firewire" thing; it's a different connector entirely.
http://presscentre.sony.eu/content/d...6&NewsAreaId=2
Sony isn't really creating any confusion or fragmentation of Thunderbolt here (because it's not Thunderbolt, if I didn't say that enough) — news sites like Apple Insider and PC World doing so are creating the confusion.
Sony isn't really creating any confusion or fragmentation of Thunderbolt here (because it's not Thunderbolt, if I didn't say that enough) ? news sites like Apple Insider and PC World doing so are creating the confusion.
You're confused. Thunderbolt isn't itself a "branch" of what Light Peak was.
Thunderbolt is Light Peak. Light Peak was a code name. Thunderbolt is the real name. Like iTV became Apple TV. There aren't branches of what iTV became.
If it isn't Thunderbolt, it also cannot be called Light Peak at all.
You're confused. Thunderbolt isn't itself a "branch" of what Light Peak was.
Thunderbolt is Light Peak. Light Peak was a code name. Thunderbolt is the real name. Like iTV became Apple TV. There aren't branches of what iTV became.
If it isn't Thunderbolt, it also cannot be called Light Peak at all.
I'm not confused at all. Your reading comprehension is failing you.
I know full well that Light Peak is Thunderbolt, but Sony — NOT ME — described this proprietary port as being "based on the architecture codenamed ‘Light Peak.'"
Also ATRAC wasn't DRM, it was a custom compression system that predated the popularity of MP3. ATRAC was pretty impressive in that it allowed 'on-the-fly' compression by a portable device back in 1993. People complained that it was DRM because if you played an ATRAC compressed audio stream and converted it to ATRAC the quality sucked - guess what, that's true of MP3 too.
Sure, ATRAC itself is simply a way to compress audio. However, it was almost always accompanied by DRM on MiniDisc recorders/players. That, combined with it being completely proprietary, made it near impossible to get the digital version of your recordings off of anything but the very high-end MiniDisc recorders. Pain in the *ss indeed...
A couple of relevant URLs for those interested:
Is getting a MiniDisc player a good idea? (3rd post)
So long ATRAC, thanks for nothing
You can probably thank Apple for having a one year exclusive rights to Thunderbolt for why Sony is having to go the USB-like route.
Apple don't have exclusive rights to the format, they just got the spec before everyone else, which Intel said gave them an effective 12 month start - it was closer to 6 months though.
If I recall, Intel tried to build Thunderbolt using the USB port but were declined by the USB-IF because the port wasn't designed for this.
Whether Sony got a mixed message or decided to go their own way isn't clear but IMO, they went the correct route.
This design allows you to connect data ports and items like Blu-Ray directly to the USB 3 port while passing full TB bandwidth to a GPU. With the design that Intel/Apple went with, that other channel is reserved for a display, which you might not even have connected and to be perfectly honest, I don't like the idea of having a display daisy chained off something like a Blu-Ray drive anyway.
If I have a portable drive, I don't want to have to disconnect my screen to plug it in (the screen has to be the last in the chain). To put this into an example:
Sony's laptop has HDMI output even without the dock so if I plug it into a display, I still have the option to fully utilise both the USB 3 and the Thunderbolt.
Apple's Macbook Pro has a single port so if I plug in a monitor and I have a Thunderbolt portable drive, then I have to unplug the monitor before I can use it and even then, I'm a port down vs Sony.
That's even before the cost comes into it.
You now have to consider that if Sony can do this, what's to stop every PC manufacturer and device manufacturer from following Sony and using the USB port? They would be able to make portable USB 3 drives that operate over either USB 3 or TB with a single port. They also manage to make Apple's entire product line almost obsolete because few devices would work with it. All they'd have to worry about is incompatible marketing.
The big question I'd have is if Sony's design entirely prevents them from using devices like the Pegasus RAID systems and Lacie drive along with other products at NAB. If so, it's a bit of a fail. If it just needs a cable that costs less than $50, probably not.
Consumer Beta was a complete failure. i.Link was a joke. The DRM was called ATRAC. Are you going to call that a success?
iLink is firewire, as a technology it was far from a failure.
Who said anything about consumer beta, only Beta was mentioned, and Beta was a huge success.
And Atrac is a codec, not DRM
what's to stop every PC manufacturer and device manufacturer from following Sony and using the USB port?
Intel, hopefully.
That's even before the cost comes into it.
Yes, do tell us ablout cost, Marvin.
This thicker, heavier device from Sony is just double the price of a MacBook Air. Imagine if they had used a licensed TB port!
Sure, ATRAC itself is simply a way to compress audio. However, it was almost always accompanied by DRM on MiniDisc recorders/players. That, combined with it being completely proprietary, made it near impossible to get the digital version of your recordings off of anything but the very high-end MiniDisc recorders. Pain in the *ss indeed...
You mean the way that AAC was often combined with Fairplay back in the day? Or for that matter the way that iTunes video still is?
People freaked about ATRAC DRM but really it was fine - I loved my little MDisc player before I got my iPod-2gen. It was far less aggressive and evil than blu-ray's DRM is.
You mean the way that AAC was often combined with Fairplay back in the day? Or for that matter the way that iTunes video still is?
People freaked about ATRAC DRM but really it was fine - I loved my little MDisc player before I got my iPod-2gen. It was far less aggressive and evil than blu-ray's DRM is.
But the thing is, iPods and Blu-Ray players are intended simply for content playback. Many MiniDisc players also had digital recording capabilities (and were marketed as such), which is what got prosumers who couldn't afford DAT equipment so excited about them.
Unfortunately, Sony didn't make it well known that even if you recorded your own material onto a blank MiniDisc (not talking about pirating commercial content), you'd have a h*ll of a time getting at the original (digital) copy due to the DRM which was stupidly added and the lack of anything else which could read ATRAC data. That's what really chafed many people (including myself) about ATRAC.
They also manage to make Apple's entire product line almost obsolete because few devices would work with it.
And what would stop Apple from releasing an adapter cable? The key isn't the USB port... it's that Sony appears to be using optical instead of electrical connections. There's apparently an optical terminal inside the USB port (so I've read). That means at the very least an adapter box to convert the electrical signal to optical, and is probably why Sony is saying it won't work with normal thunderbolt peripherals.
Yes, do tell us ablout cost, Marvin.
This thicker, heavier device from Sony is just double the price of a MacBook Air. Imagine if they had used a licensed TB port!
Yeah, I guess the cost of Sony's laptop pretty much outweighs the cost of USB 3 devices vs Thunderbolt ones.
The key isn't the USB port... it's that Sony appears to be using optical instead of electrical connections.
I read that today, I wonder if it offers a higher bandwidth or if it's still running at 10Gbps. Intel supposedly won't have the 50Gbps optical Thunderbolt successor out until 2015.
Yes, do tell us ablout cost, Marvin.
This thicker, heavier device from Sony is just double the price of a MacBook Air. Imagine if they had used a licensed TB port!
its not licensed last time i checked-- hopefully so it doesn't end up like firewire? sorry if i am wrong.
but yeah lol-- so with dock starting price of $3,000 (assuming 1080p screen)
well, you get better PPI (128 vs 166) times the pixels (vs base MBA 13') better graphics (1-2.5 times the power, maybe more) a lot faster CPU.... but overly fast for anything buy gaming. same GB SSD. Blu ray player (who cares)-- oh and its larger-- gets 14 battery life---if u make it ever larger
all told-- if it wasn't for the fact that Sony knew it couldn't make something sub 1,500 (and make margins it wants) that competes, and makes $, so instead it made something that costs twice as much-- with probably a hugeass margin (parts cost, 85$ ram, $100 screen, ~250$ cpu, 150$ gpu, about $100 blu-ray (probably a lot less)..)
so anyone see this profit margin? rofl