What I'd like to ask the great minds at AppleInsider and their very smart readership is WHY, if I use a new Sandisk Extreme Portable SSD https://www.sandisk.com/home/ssd/extreme-portable-ssd configured with a USB 3.1 Gen 2 Type-C connector, connected to a new Macbook Pro's Thunderbolt 3 port, do I ONLY get 550MB/s (4Gbps) instead of 10Gbps (1250MB/s) ?
Seems like I'm chugging at half speed. What am I missing here?
Is this a trick question? The page you linked to states over and over again that the read speeds are up to 550 MB/s.
Ha! The pages states 550 three times by my count, the first two of which are quite prominent.
It’s all just the biggest mess ever. All the reasons listed above and the mixture of the old USB standards based around hub/star topology vs the daisy chaining we see in TB is just going to confuse the crap out of more and more users. Real consultants are going to be needed to guide so many people if it’s something more than a simple drive or printer that is being added. ‘Consultants’ does not include the unskilled staff at dept stores who simply read the box and hope for the best. It’ll be 10 years before we see stability and less confusion in this market. Cheap products with old chipsets that owe the vendor nothing in royalties will continue to spew forth from Asia for a long time... Just put a USB-C connector on it and it looks good. Also, who the f##k was stupid enough to include USB in the name of the new independent plug type? It is only one of the protocols that it supports. Your device’s specs should simply indicate that it supports USB ‘x’, Displayport ‘x’ and/or Thunderbolt ‘x’ using a type C connector.
What mess? I don't understand all the rhetoric going on. The manufacturers may be stepping on each other with specs, but for the end-user, most truly will not care what's going on so long as their cable plugs into a USBc port. If one is buying a TB3 device, it will certainly have that lightning symbol on the plug. People will know that buying into it.
Sure, there are cable lengths, bandwidth differences that perhaps are making tech-savvy folks like us all mixed up, but for most users, they're not even remotely aware whether a USBc device transfers at 500MB/s or 1GB/s. So long as it physically plugs into their computer.
I think you guys are making it sound more complicated than how the rest of the world perceives it.
Thanks for the update, but the article seems a tad more confusing than it needs to be.
Essentially the question I have is this: Does this mean that USB 4 is just Thunderbolt 3 with USB backward compatibility thrown in?
It doesn't sound like any new capabilities have been added, so implementing USB 4 should be a breeze for Apple, right?
Why then, would implementation be "be a long time away" for vendors? For someone like Apple, whose new Mac Pro has a confusing mix of USB-A, USB-C and Thunderbolt 3 ports, would it not be a priority to make the 'switch over' as fast as possible?
USB 4 and Thunderbolt 3 both have the same port, so for backwards compatibility with USB 2, you would still need an adapter. I am curious if a device designed for USB 4 will be 100% compatible with Thunderbolt 3. If that’s the case then Apple won’t have to worry about switching anytime soon. They can just keep using Thunderbolt 3.
...gentlemen (and gentlewomen) start your dongles...
It’s the same port — USB-C.
I guess we'll see and I hope you are correct - the only monitors that would not work with the TB3 macbook pros I bought to test were Apple displays, despite according to the TB3 'standard' to purportedly have legacy compatibility... There is of course a TB3>TB2 Apple dongle available at extra cost, yet even that would not allow mDP, which according to the standard should have been compatible.
“The advantages of the protocol as a whole are constrained somewhat by cabling. The USB-C connector spans a wide variety of speeds and power requirements. There is not yet a labeling standard that the cable manufacturers must abide by, making cable selection by users somewhat problematic.”
This - the current system is a mess. Everyone is all excited about having ‘one connector’ but the connector tells you nothing about the cable, so it’s actually worse than what we had before. Before, if you had a thunderbolt cable, you knew what you had. If you had a USB 3 type A port, you knew what you had. Now you have a USB C port and you have no clue what it can do other than USB. If you have a USB C cable, you are equally clueless about it’s capabilities.
Hopefully this new standard will fix some of these problems. Unfortunately, it looks like it will still be a few years.
...gentlemen (and gentlewomen) start your dongles...
It’s the same port — USB-C.
I guess we'll see and I hope you are correct - the only monitors that would not work with the TB3 macbook pros I bought to test were Apple displays, despite according to the TB3 'standard' to purportedly have legacy compatibility... There is of course a TB3>TB2 Apple dongle available at extra cost, yet even that would not allow mDP, which according to the standard should have been compatible.
There's nothing to wait and see about, USB-C is in the spec linked to in TFA:
I don't know what you're talking about with regard to your displays. I feel like we established before that you were doing it wrong, but I don't recall the details. All of Apple displays going back any reasonable amount of time are backwards compatible with a TB3 Mac. I use two 30" ACDs with mine by way of the dual-DVI to miniDP adapter and a miniDP adapter to the Mac. Not sure what you're doing.
This is very interesting. But it raises questions. The biggest one to me is the specificity of Intel offering TB 3 licensing, rather that just TB licensing for free. Way back, Intel stated that in 10 years time from the first offering if TB, it would be at a speed of 100Gbs. It’s remained at 40 for years. I’m waiting to see if, or even when, we can expect TB 4 at a higher speed. So I’m wondering it this is the first indication, from Intel, that we will see TB 4 sometime in the near future. So allow the slower TB 3 for free, and come out with TB 4 with paid licensing. Maybe late 2020.
the other thing is just how confusing this all is to most people. I just barely have it straight myself. Several flavors of usb along with TB 3. We do have some of that now, of course, but this will be much more complex. People will need to figure out what all the prevailing usb standards that will work on this, and then how long a cable can be for the highest speed for each standard, and what cable will work with each standard. It’s much worse than ever before. People will make lots of mistakes with cabling and peripherals, and then complain that it’s not working the way it was promised.
Good points on both fronts, especially re: USB 3, TB 3, and cables - it's a right bloody mess; I don't think it could be more confusing if you tried! There's a real opportunity here to clean all that up with USB 4 - I hope they are aiming for a single cable standard (not sure if that's even possible? Maybe two standards would be acceptable - active or passive)
At the very least, they need to come up with, and enforce, a clear cable-labelling scheme.
As usual, backward compatibility raises its ugly head. What to do about that? It’s hard to say. We see, in many Windows machines, both usb 2 and usb 3 connectors. Ok, that works, if one knows what connector, and speed their device can use. Then there’s a usb c connector. So that’s three already. The TB connector, while acting similarly, Of course, adds TB to the mix.
apple simplifies these days on its laptops. It still offers usb 3 and TB 3 USB C connectors on its desktops. Still confusing. Things were supposed to be getting simpler, but they’re not.
i have to confess, I much preferred the old days when connectors did one thing only, looked different, and only connected to what they were used for. Things may be simpler on the physical level these days, but are far more complex on the lower software levels. This makes things more confusing, not less.
i hate to say it, but Apple is part of this confusing trend, and has been attempting to make it more confusing by standardizing on one connector as much as possible, to save space. It’s something that nobody really asked for.
It’s all just the biggest mess ever. All the reasons listed above and the mixture of the old USB standards based around hub/star topology vs the daisy chaining we see in TB is just going to confuse the crap out of more and more users. Real consultants are going to be needed to guide so many people if it’s something more than a simple drive or printer that is being added. ‘Consultants’ does not include the unskilled staff at dept stores who simply read the box and hope for the best. It’ll be 10 years before we see stability and less confusion in this market. Cheap products with old chipsets that owe the vendor nothing in royalties will continue to spew forth from Asia for a long time... Just put a USB-C connector on it and it looks good. Also, who the f##k was stupid enough to include USB in the name of the new independent plug type? It is only one of the protocols that it supports. Your device’s specs should simply indicate that it supports USB ‘x’, Displayport ‘x’ and/or Thunderbolt ‘x’ using a type C connector.
What mess? I don't understand all the rhetoric going on. The manufacturers may be stepping on each other with specs, but for the end-user, most truly will not care what's going on so long as their cable plugs into a USBc port. If one is buying a TB3 device, it will certainly have that lightning symbol on the plug. People will know that buying into it.
Sure, there are cable lengths, bandwidth differences that perhaps are making tech-savvy folks like us all mixed up, but for most users, they're not even remotely aware whether a USBc device transfers at 500MB/s or 1GB/s. So long as it physically plugs into their computer.
I think you guys are making it sound more complicated than how the rest of the world perceives it.
The mess that you should understand. The problem is that being able to plug one of a myriad of connectors into a port doesn’t mean that the cable, with that “compatible” connector will even work! even with more basic usb 3 and C connectors, we have the problem of whether the cable will charge at low power, medium power, high power, or whether it will charge at all! It may even destroy the cable and device if you do charge with it. Does the cable state that? Of course not. is it a usb 2, or 3 cable? Some are blue plastic inside if they are 3, but not all. There are usb 3 cables that charge at high power, but just deliver usb 2 data speeds. There are many people who still have usb 1 cables, and do t understand why nothing works when they try to use them. I’ve had to throw away all of my usb 2 cables so I won’t make the mistake and hurriedly use them.
what about USB C? Which standard does your cable support? What length supports the faster speeds? Can you tell by the cable itself? Nope! Many people think that any USB C cable supports TB 2 and 3, simply because TB uses a USB C connector. I’ve gotten into arguments about that a number of times. And will all TB cables support 40Gb/s? No. How about 20Gb/s? No. Will they all even support TB 3? No. Can you tell by looking at them? Sometimes yes, and sometimes no.
and now, coming soon to a store near you, usb 4. Simpler, and yet, more complex.
there’s more, but if that’s not enough for you, nothing will be.
It’s all just the biggest mess ever. All the reasons listed above and the mixture of the old USB standards based around hub/star topology vs the daisy chaining we see in TB is just going to confuse the crap out of more and more users. Real consultants are going to be needed to guide so many people if it’s something more than a simple drive or printer that is being added. ‘Consultants’ does not include the unskilled staff at dept stores who simply read the box and hope for the best. It’ll be 10 years before we see stability and less confusion in this market. Cheap products with old chipsets that owe the vendor nothing in royalties will continue to spew forth from Asia for a long time... Just put a USB-C connector on it and it looks good. Also, who the f##k was stupid enough to include USB in the name of the new independent plug type? It is only one of the protocols that it supports. Your device’s specs should simply indicate that it supports USB ‘x’, Displayport ‘x’ and/or Thunderbolt ‘x’ using a type C connector.
What mess? I don't understand all the rhetoric going on. The manufacturers may be stepping on each other with specs, but for the end-user, most truly will not care what's going on so long as their cable plugs into a USBc port. If one is buying a TB3 device, it will certainly have that lightning symbol on the plug. People will know that buying into it.
Sure, there are cable lengths, bandwidth differences that perhaps are making tech-savvy folks like us all mixed up, but for most users, they're not even remotely aware whether a USBc device transfers at 500MB/s or 1GB/s. So long as it physically plugs into their computer.
I think you guys are making it sound more complicated than how the rest of the world perceives it.
The mess that you should understand. The problem is that being able to plug one of a myriad of connectors into a port doesn’t mean that the cable, with that “compatible” connector will even work! even with more basic usb 3 and C connectors, we have the problem of whether the cable will charge at low power, medium power, high power, or whether it will charge at all! It may even destroy the cable and device if you do charge with it. Does the cable state that? Of course not. is it a usb 2, or 3 cable? Some are blue plastic inside if they are 3, but not all. There are usb 3 cables that charge at high power, but just deliver usb 2 data speeds. There are many people who still have usb 1 cables, and do t understand why nothing works when they try to use them. I’ve had to throw away all of my usb 2 cables so I won’t make the mistake and hurriedly use them.
what about USB C? Which standard does your cable support? What length supports the faster speeds? Can you tell by the cable itself? Nope! Many people think that any USB C cable supports TB 2 and 3, simply because TB uses a USB C connector. I’ve gotten into arguments about that a number of times. And will all TB cables support 40Gb/s? No. How about 20Gb/s? No. Will they all even support TB 3? No. Can you tell by looking at them? Sometimes yes, and sometimes no.
and now, coming soon to a store near you, usb 4. Simpler, and yet, more complex.
there’s more, but if that’s not enough for you, nothing will be.
The USB-C physical layer negotiates this. If a cable or a device is only 15W, it won't get 100W, just because the charger can provide it.
It’s all just the biggest mess ever. All the reasons listed above and the mixture of the old USB standards based around hub/star topology vs the daisy chaining we see in TB is just going to confuse the crap out of more and more users. Real consultants are going to be needed to guide so many people if it’s something more than a simple drive or printer that is being added. ‘Consultants’ does not include the unskilled staff at dept stores who simply read the box and hope for the best. It’ll be 10 years before we see stability and less confusion in this market. Cheap products with old chipsets that owe the vendor nothing in royalties will continue to spew forth from Asia for a long time... Just put a USB-C connector on it and it looks good. Also, who the f##k was stupid enough to include USB in the name of the new independent plug type? It is only one of the protocols that it supports. Your device’s specs should simply indicate that it supports USB ‘x’, Displayport ‘x’ and/or Thunderbolt ‘x’ using a type C connector.
What mess? I don't understand all the rhetoric going on. The manufacturers may be stepping on each other with specs, but for the end-user, most truly will not care what's going on so long as their cable plugs into a USBc port. If one is buying a TB3 device, it will certainly have that lightning symbol on the plug. People will know that buying into it.
Sure, there are cable lengths, bandwidth differences that perhaps are making tech-savvy folks like us all mixed up, but for most users, they're not even remotely aware whether a USBc device transfers at 500MB/s or 1GB/s. So long as it physically plugs into their computer.
I think you guys are making it sound more complicated than how the rest of the world perceives it.
The mess that you should understand. The problem is that being able to plug one of a myriad of connectors into a port doesn’t mean that the cable, with that “compatible” connector will even work! even with more basic usb 3 and C connectors, we have the problem of whether the cable will charge at low power, medium power, high power, or whether it will charge at all! It may even destroy the cable and device if you do charge with it. Does the cable state that? Of course not. is it a usb 2, or 3 cable? Some are blue plastic inside if they are 3, but not all. There are usb 3 cables that charge at high power, but just deliver usb 2 data speeds. There are many people who still have usb 1 cables, and do t understand why nothing works when they try to use them. I’ve had to throw away all of my usb 2 cables so I won’t make the mistake and hurriedly use them.
what about USB C? Which standard does your cable support? What length supports the faster speeds? Can you tell by the cable itself? Nope! Many people think that any USB C cable supports TB 2 and 3, simply because TB uses a USB C connector. I’ve gotten into arguments about that a number of times. And will all TB cables support 40Gb/s? No. How about 20Gb/s? No. Will they all even support TB 3? No. Can you tell by looking at them? Sometimes yes, and sometimes no.
and now, coming soon to a store near you, usb 4. Simpler, and yet, more complex.
there’s more, but if that’s not enough for you, nothing will be.
The USB-C physical layer negotiates this. If a cable or a device is only 15W, it won't get 100W, just because the charger can provide it.
We hope. The problem is that there are a lot of makers of cables out there, and over the years, a number that were rated at certain levels turned out to not meet the standards. People don’t know what they’re getting. So I expect, as always, to see cables labeled as to a particular capacity, either in power transmission, or in data speed, to not meet the specs, with the customer not knowing it.
We hope. The problem is that there are a lot of makers of cables out there, and over the years, a number that were rated at certain levels turned out to not meet the standards. People don’t know what they’re getting. So I expect, as always, to see cables labeled as to a particular capacity, either in power transmission, or in data speed, to not meet the specs, with the customer not knowing it.
Isn't there now a big problem with malware (from both bad actors and government spooks) being embedded in smart cables?
As with Android v iPhone, the masses will buy the cheapest cables with the massive security holes/quality issues, and the discerning customer will pay a bit more for a better experience. Other than sticking to trusted brands, I'm not sure what else could be done here.
Counterfeiters are very sophisticated nowadays, so protecting the retail channel from all rogue cables is going to be hard to do.
We hope. The problem is that there are a lot of makers of cables out there, and over the years, a number that were rated at certain levels turned out to not meet the standards. People don’t know what they’re getting. So I expect, as always, to see cables labeled as to a particular capacity, either in power transmission, or in data speed, to not meet the specs, with the customer not knowing it.
Isn't there now a big problem with malware (from both bad actors and government spooks) being embedded in smart cables?
As with Android v iPhone, the masses will buy the cheapest cables with the massive security holes/quality issues, and the discerning customer will pay a bit more for a better experience. Other than sticking to trusted brands, I'm not sure what else could be done here.
Counterfeiters are very sophisticated nowadays, so protecting the retail channel from all rogue cables is going to be hard to do.
We know that one researcher developed a cable like that, and is actually selling it. To me, that shows more greed that public service as he says it is. It could lead to those who will do this to their cables as a widely sold product to people on that site of fake products, Amazon.
Comments
I think you guys are making it sound more complicated than how the rest of the world perceives it.
This - the current system is a mess. Everyone is all excited about having ‘one connector’ but the connector tells you nothing about the cable, so it’s actually worse than what we had before. Before, if you had a thunderbolt cable, you knew what you had. If you had a USB 3 type A port, you knew what you had. Now you have a USB C port and you have no clue what it can do other than USB. If you have a USB C cable, you are equally clueless about it’s capabilities.
Hopefully this new standard will fix some of these problems. Unfortunately, it looks like it will still be a few years.
I don't know what you're talking about with regard to your displays. I feel like we established before that you were doing it wrong, but I don't recall the details. All of Apple displays going back any reasonable amount of time are backwards compatible with a TB3 Mac. I use two 30" ACDs with mine by way of the dual-DVI to miniDP adapter and a miniDP adapter to the Mac. Not sure what you're doing.
apple simplifies these days on its laptops. It still offers usb 3 and TB 3 USB C connectors on its desktops. Still confusing. Things were supposed to be getting simpler, but they’re not.
i have to confess, I much preferred the old days when connectors did one thing only, looked different, and only connected to what they were used for. Things may be simpler on the physical level these days, but are far more complex on the lower software levels. This makes things more confusing, not less.
i hate to say it, but Apple is part of this confusing trend, and has been attempting to make it more confusing by standardizing on one connector as much as possible, to save space. It’s something that nobody really asked for.
what about USB C? Which standard does your cable support? What length supports the faster speeds? Can you tell by the cable itself? Nope! Many people think that any USB C cable supports TB 2 and 3, simply because TB uses a USB C connector. I’ve gotten into arguments about that a number of times. And will all TB cables support 40Gb/s? No. How about 20Gb/s? No. Will they all even support TB 3? No. Can you tell by looking at them? Sometimes yes, and sometimes no.
and now, coming soon to a store near you, usb 4. Simpler, and yet, more complex.
there’s more, but if that’s not enough for you, nothing will be.
Isn't there now a big problem with malware (from both bad actors and government spooks) being embedded in smart cables?
As with Android v iPhone, the masses will buy the cheapest cables with the massive security holes/quality issues, and the discerning customer will pay a bit more for a better experience. Other than sticking to trusted brands, I'm not sure what else could be done here.
Counterfeiters are very sophisticated nowadays, so protecting the retail channel from all rogue cables is going to be hard to do.