Corning's super-strong Thunderbolt and USB 'Optical Cables' deliver data over 100-meter spans

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 39
    poochpooch Posts: 768member
    greg uvan wrote: »
    People have complained about the overly poetic or in this case "snide" writing. But I really like it. It is fun to read, a bit whimsical, and adds some personality from the writer like a blogger would.

    The point is, the guy was more interested in other things than analyzing to death how he could benefit from an, albeit, nifty new cable.

    greg uvan wrote: »
    Well, they can use whatever writing style they want. And, I like it. So, it's too bad that you don't.

    gee, every single post of this user's since joining -- all two of them -- have been in defense of bostic's writing style. perhaps they're also the president of the kevin bostic fan club?
  • Reply 22 of 39


    From reading between the lines, Corning will be offering a combination high-speed data connection and drinking straw...

  • Reply 23 of 39

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Pooch View Post



    gee, every single post of this user's since joining -- all two of them -- have been in defense of bostic's writing style. perhaps they're also the president of the kevin bostic fan club?


     


    I went back and looked at your first two posts on this site...you were having a challenge coloring between the lines then too...

  • Reply 24 of 39
    robmrobm Posts: 1,068member
    OT - but still with Corning

    A Day Made of Glass 2

    You've prolly seen it - but some great tech being developed there.
  • Reply 25 of 39
    poochpooch Posts: 768member
    I went back and looked at your first two posts on this site...you were having a challenge coloring between the lines then too...

    look closer. i'm still no good at it.
  • Reply 26 of 39
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    greg uvan wrote: »
    Well, they can use whatever writing style they want. And, I like it. So, it's too bad that you don't.

    Good for you, that's one vote in favor vs. twenty against.

    Anyway, it's unprofessional, even for Appleinsider. This shouldn't be some teenager's blog from the 90's.
  • Reply 27 of 39
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    100 meters is now valid house wiring length…


     


    But I think I'll wait until the optical, 100Gb/s (both ways) version is released. And until I need it, which is probably later than that.





    Intel initially suggested that as a pretty far off target. They claimed maybe within 10 years and possibly very expensive. I can't find the article where the 10 year mark was mentioned, but consider what ports were like in 2001. You didn't have many high bandwidth options outside of fibre channel. The article jumps around much more than the part I cited below, but I do remember their words. Intel is often overly optimistic when things are further out, yet people on here are sometimes even more optimistic.


     


     


    http://www.macworld.com/article/1162331/intel_thunderbolt_with_fiber_optics_years_away.html


    Quote:


    "It's going to be way out," Perlmutter said. "At the end of the day it's all about how much speed people need versus how much they would be willing to pay."


    The cost of implementing fiber optics is significantly higher than copper, and copper can transfer data at adequate speeds at this stage, Perlmutter said. There is still more room for data transfers to jump on copper.



  • Reply 28 of 39
    But did she buy you lunch?
  • Reply 29 of 39
    k.c.k.c. Posts: 60member
    The 'lunch' comments by the author aren't snide, they're smug. It's a rather juvenile attempt at being clever. And if this entertains you then, like the author, you lack the maturity to realize this.

    Thunderbolt was developed to use optical cables. Corning's offerings will indeed help to broaden the market.
  • Reply 30 of 39
    taddtadd Posts: 132member
    Wifi at 700MB/sec. Not likely. Also. Wifi used for high speed (like HD streaming) fails badly in areas where there are more than a few independent networks all used for this. IMO wifi is being over-sold. A single 100mbit Ethernet beats a wifi LAN and a single gigE beets the bandwidth of the entire wifi spectrum. This is 10x as fast as gigE and you can run a bundle of them up the core of a high rise in the middle of a city with no interference.
    Nice.
  • Reply 31 of 39
    taddtadd Posts: 132member
    Wifi at 700MB/sec. Not likely. Also. Wifi used for high speed (like HD streaming) fails badly in areas where there are more than a few independent networks all used for this. IMO wifi is being over-sold. A single 100mbit Ethernet beats a wifi LAN and a single gigE beets the bandwidth of the entire wifi spectrum. This is 10x as fast as gigE and you can run a bundle of them up the core of a high rise in the middle of a city with no interference.
    Nice.
  • Reply 32 of 39
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,730moderator
    Yes AI editors, please refrain from using any form of humour in articles to make it more entertaining to read about IO cables and printers.

    These editor are wandering around trade shows. looking at pretty mundane product demos and detailing their experiences at length. If using a little creative writing is what stops them from killing themselves, that's ok. It's pretty standard practise with mainstream blogs. A little humour now and again even makes more upmarket news reporting more entertaining:



    I thought it was a pretty concise article. Clear comparisons between USB 3, benefits over copper cabling and reliability, expected shipping dates and example usage scenarios like housing storage far away from a workstation.
  • Reply 33 of 39

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


     


    Ethernet is just a connector.  It's a subset of Thunderbolt now.  


     


    Put a 40 dollar Thunderbolt to Ethernet plug on either end and your done. 



    LOL, $40 + $50 for a 3 meter TB cable.  $10/foot for an ethernet cable, yee-haw!!!!


     


    I can cut an ethernet cable to length off a large spool and install my own connectors for under $10, and that's for a cable well over 3 meters.


     


    TB is going nowhere until cables drop in price significantly.  

  • Reply 34 of 39
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    gazoobee wrote: »
    Ethernet is just a connector.  It's a subset of Thunderbolt now.

    It's a subset as in just about anything with an available PCIe chip is a subset, you need a PCIe to Ethernet chip to do it. That I can tell, that adapter isn't just wiring and passives to an RJ jack.

    Put a 40 dollar Thunderbolt to Ethernet plug on either end and your done. 

    Another problem is a lot of TB devices don't have a downlink port. The machine's TB output jack is very valuable, and way too few devices allow further chaining. A Buffalo TB hard drive's description even touts Thunderbolt's daisy chain capability, while not having the second port needed to let you do just that with their product.
  • Reply 35 of 39
    haarhaar Posts: 563member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by melgross View Post



    What really grabbed me about the article, is how snide the writer is. "I was thinking about lunch". Twice! Was that really necessary?


    i agree!...the author was there "on a job" and it is corning glass fibre... what did you expect? Excitement?... but ironically you did get Excitement... that bending test with the plastic box is amazing... i would not do that with standard optical cables...


     


    further more... why is the author looking at  tech products on an empty stomach? is it a "Litmus test" where if the product distracts the author from the Growling of their stomach then it's worth writing about?...

  • Reply 36 of 39
    If the price isn't a complete stopper, this would be very useful for theatrical applications-- sending multiple channels of HD video from a control area hundreds of feet to the staging area, with precise control over stop, start and pause times (which is why WiFi doesn't work).

    Right now I can use HD over CAT5 or 6 with a balun on each end, but the bandwidth and cabling lengths are limited and start to degrade quickly once you overstep (particularly with HDMI). Plus the quality of the signal is very sensitive to kinking in the cable run.

    A direct, high bandwidth connection to the display device(s) from my laptop would make my life much easier. Of course, if it's $10/ft, not so much.

  • Reply 37 of 39
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    signal1 wrote: »
    If the price isn't a complete stopper, this would be very useful for theatrical applications-- sending multiple channels of HD video from a control area hundreds of feet to the staging area, with precise control over stop, start and pause times (which is why WiFi doesn't work).

    Right now I can use HD over CAT5 or 6 with a balun on each end, but the bandwidth and cabling lengths are limited and start to degrade quickly once you overstep (particularly with HDMI). Plus the quality of the signal is very sensitive to kinking in the cable run.

    A direct, high bandwidth connection to the display device(s) from my laptop would make my life much easier. Of course, if it's $10/ft, not so much.

    How long are your runs? I don't know how well it works, but Monoprice has 100ft HDMI cable for $98. I've never used it, but I have one of their 50ft cables and it works perfectly fine.
  • Reply 38 of 39
    kpluckkpluck Posts: 500member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by melgross View Post



    What really grabbed me about the article, is how snide the writer is. "I was thinking about lunch". Twice! Was that really necessary?


     


    Yeah, I have a feeling the author was trying to come off funny but it just made him sound like a unprofessional d-bag IMHO.


     


    -kpluck

  • Reply 39 of 39

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post





    How long are your runs? I don't know how well it works, but Monoprice has 100ft HDMI cable for $98. I've never used it, but I have one of their 50ft cables and it works perfectly fine.


     


    Typically around 150', which is past HDMI's spec.  I would be wary of 100', even thought the cables are available.

Sign In or Register to comment.