Firewire never really took off. I do not see why apple is so kean to release there own protocol that has massive patents on, so hardly any pc manufactures add this to there products and falls down just like firewire.
I understant there are advantages of having a totally hardware based system however it is twice the speed of usb 3.0 at ten gig per second. but usb 3.0 is 4.8 gig. so a 50 gig music collection will take ten seconds to transfer but with thunderbolt it will take 5. Who needs that speed on there laptop.
I cannot see people like dell and hp going for this when usb 3.0 is somthing the average consumer will understand. I think this is a big waste of money for apple and intel.
Could be usefull for video mixing with a box like a sound card that did all the processing and took the strain off the laptop. However usb 3.0 would be quick enuf. 0.2 seconds to load up an entire film in .avi format about the same for a hd music vid
im sure their using the macbooks to introduce it. see how it goes, they have nothing to lose really. and im sure its also going to go on the big boy tower and their desktops too
yea they have just added it to the new macbooks. It will of cost a shed load of cash to develope. Just seems a waste of money when usb 3.0 is out and usb 4.0 will have the same speeds when they use fibre optics its just the cost atm. That is probly why apple didnt use fibre optic for the 1st gen of thunderbolt aswell
The technology was created by Intel, and it IS the peripheral bus of the future.
It supports all display standards (..like HDMI) it supports USB 3.0, FireWire, 10Gbps Ethernet, eSATA and many more.
It is being introduced at 10Gbps transfer rate over the “Light Peak” bus.
It is a hybrid optical/copper wire cable that will support AC power to fully power peripheral devices from the on-board power supply.
(i.e. No more need for external power adapters for large peripheral devices like monitors and large DJ controllers)
Being an optical cable its maximum run distance is somewhere around 300 meters!!! Thats compared to the maximum run distance of 5 meters with copper wire.
The fact that you think this is some apple proprietary technology is absolutely hilarious.
All they have a patent on is their “ThunderBolt” moniker that they are going to be producing this bus under.
It will be fully compatible with the Intel iteration of Light Peak, witch can already be used in a desktop with a PCI-Express card adapter.
So Intel released it into the market first as well.
To follow up:
Light Peak will scale up to 100Gbps, and WILL SUPPORT USB4.0.
AND, the only reason apple is releasing the first iteration of ThunderBolt as a copper only cable is the first generation of Light Peak is a copper only cable.
Intel says it will not affect the throughput of the bus, but the cable length advantages of optical wont be realized until the copper/optical hybrid comes out.
Why don’t you actually try researching something before you go making ridiculously uniformed claims about a technology you obviously don’t understand.
So in response to the thread titles question:
“How long till apples thunderbolt fails”
Is actually more like:
“How long till intels Light Peak is the standard peripheral bus on all computing devices”
And the answer to that question is probably not more than 2 or 3 years.
LOL I am fully aware it is a version of light peak. Thunderbolt is just apples version. Look at how many of this gens motherboards have it compared to usb 3.0. Where are you getting ur distances from usb 2.0 is rated at 10meters and can actually function without a repeater up2 about 100 meters
The version that apple is using is not a hybrid. it is a copper cable plain and simple. Apple thunderbolt is a unquie connector for light peak. So yes it is. Oh yea you can buy adapters so its a bit pointless.
You obviously have no ability to apply any type of deductive reasoning to ANYTHING you experience in your life.
What I AM saying is:
This ISN’T Apple technology, its Intel technology.
Apple ISN’T the first to release it, PCI-Epress card with “Light Peak” buses have been out for about 6 months for desktop PC’s.
Apple IS the FIRST to manufacture this bus into a laptop.
Apple IS using the FIRST generation of Light Peak that is a copper only wire.
This peripheral BUS technology…
(Yes, Light Peak is a “BUS” technology, not an “Interface” technology like say, USB, or MIDI, or FireWire, all of witch are translated over the “PCI BUS” on your computing device)
…is going to be capable of supporting ALL types of peripheral devices, including LAN connections, and all types of external storage technology.
The way this BUS is going, in the very near future the only plug besides the one for you power adapter on your laptop will be Light Peak/ Thunderbolt plugs.
Thats fucking awesome!
No more “I cant buy that model cause it doesn’t have FireWire, or it doesn’t have HDMI.”
And no more “I’m not going to buy that model because I don’t need FireWire.”
But go ahead, go on and display you utter lack of intelligence and retort away.
2 to 3 years till light peak is standard do you work in IT cuz the product development lifecycle is about 2 to 3 years before we see anything else with it. Wow it supports all those technologies. The have to pay for them and people have to buy adapters aswell.
Apple dont develope much hardware in there laptops anymore, just like they didnt make firewire as such it is actually IEEE 1394 just like thunderbolt is light peak.
Look at what went wrong with firewire and see they are making alot of the same mistakes. So i am not the one, not doing there research here.
firewire never really took off? I wouldnt say that. Firewire is highly used in the highend photography and music world. Some of the best soundcards are on firewire. Its just happens to be that USB is more popular in consumer products.
If you guys are just going to turn this into another PC Vs Mac thread were just gonna close it. Next months PCvsMac topics are going to be on the iPad 2, watch.
very true theory28 some people are getting very angry here
Im not saying its not better than usb3.0 just like firewire was better. or IEEE 1394 and light peak. Look at product licencing it is just too expensive.
The other big big factor that you probably have not taken into consideration is developing drivers. It is harder for a hardware based protocol and people know how to develope usb drivers for cross platforms.
Employing people to write drivers is often hard enough for alot of manufactures. drivers are not easy or often quick things to write. I am a fairly good programmer however I would not attempt to write a driver.
Nothing to do with PC vs MAC a mac is a PC. Just like linux is. Linux is best lol, no good dj software tho and issues running stuff in wine.
Again proving the absurdity of your original point.
IEEE 1394 IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS FIREWIRE.
Exactly the same.
The difference is FireWire is an Apple brand name.
Apple calls it FireWire.
Texas Instruments calls it Lynx.
Sony calls it i.LINK.
“IEEE 1394 is the High-Definition Audio-Video Network Alliance (HANA) standard connection interface for A/V (audio/visual) component communication and control.[1] FireWire is also available in wireless, fiber optic, and coaxial versions using the isochronous protocols.”
Intel calls it Light Peak.
Apple calls it ThunderBolt.
They are exactly the same.
"Thunderbolt (originally codenamed Light Peak) is an interface for connecting peripheral devices to a computer via a peripheral bus. Thunderbolt was developed by Intel and brought to market with technical collaboration from Apple Inc. It was introduced commercially on Apple’s updated MacBook Pro lineup on 24 February 2011, using the same port and connector as Apple’s Mini DisplayPort.
Intended to replace many or all of the high-speed buses in modern PCs, just as USB replaced many lower-speed ports, Thunderbolt is meant to have the bandwidth and low latency to support high-performance systems such as eSATA and FireWire, as well as DisplayPort v1.1a through an implementation on its driver chip.
A single Thunderbolt port supports a daisy chain of up to seven Thunderbolt devices; up to two of these devices may be high-resolution displays.
The interface was originally designed to use flexible optical fiber cables, but a version using conventional copper wiring was also developed to furnish the desired 10 Gb/s bandwidth at less cost. This also allowed the system to drive other copper-based ports, and was combined with the DisplayPort plug to allow a single expansion port to drive any external device. Thunderbolt essentially combines PCI Express and DisplayPort into a new serial data interface that can be carried over longer and less costly cables. Because PCI Express is widely supported by device vendors and built into most of Intel’s modern chipsets, Thunderbolt can be added to existing products with relative ease. Intel’s implementation of the port adaptor folds Thunderbolt and DisplayPort data together, allowing both to be carried over the same cable at the same time."
in thoery light peak is better. however implimentation and development costs are too high. it is a shame usb 3.0 they didnt go with fibre optics at the higher price like originally proposed. else we would be looking at 100gig per second.
