Good Night USB 3.0. HELLO "Thunderbolt"!

SittingElf · February 24, 2011

Apple is pretty much putting the kabash on USB 3.0 today with the introduction of their new MacBook Pro's. In addition to quad-core i7 processors, they have introduced Intel's new Light Peak technology that is called "Thunderbolt". Throughput speeds of up to 10GB/second over multiple protocols (Display, Peripherals, Hard Drives, etc...) puts the proposed USB 3.0 to shame. In the new MacBook Pro's, the technology is being placed in a hybrid mini-display port.

The new Apple MacBook Pro's look like they are going to be priced almost identically to similar models they are replacing. These are going to be significant improvements for those of us who are Appleholic Photographers! New graphic processors as well.

LR3, PS CS5, and Aperture will all take advantage of multi-cores, so these new laptops should show a really nice increase in processing speed, while transfer rates using new Thunderbolt capable external HD's will eliminate the long waits! AWESOME!

Sam · February 25, 2011

I would be interested in knowing when using a USB 2 cable or a firewire 800 plugged in to this "thunderbolt" port what the speeds would be.

Interesting to me was a comment somewhere about a 10 MB per second speed, then the statement that they watched as a 5MB file downloaded in seconds. Hummm...shouldn't that 5MB file take a half second?

Sam

aquaticvideographer · February 25, 2011

Sam wrote: »

I would be interested in knowing when using a USB 2 cable or a firewire 800 plugged in to this "thunderbolt" port what the speeds would be.

From what MacWorld has said, you will need an adapter, and the practical limit of the device + the slower interface is what is likely to limit the speeds you will get.

http://www.macworld.com/article/158145/2011/02/thunderbolt_what_you_need_to_know.html

W.W. Webster · February 25, 2011

Now for the release of external disk drives supporting Thunderbolt, including Drobo, etc. USB 3 is effectively dead on arrival!

Ric Grupe · February 25, 2011

SittingElf wrote: »

...while transfer rates using new Thunderbolt capable external HD's will eliminate the long waits! AWESOME!

AFAIK there are none yet.:cry

Richard · February 25, 2011

W.W. Webster wrote: »

Now for the release of external disk drives supporting Thunderbolt, including Drobo, etc. USB 3 is effectively dead on arrival!

:bigbs That's simply untrue. Light Peak (AKA Thunderbolt) is no more going to supplant USB 3 than Firewire supplanted USB. Each will have its place. Light Peak's first use will probably be to interface very high end monitors and graphics cards, where it will enable a higher refresh rate than is currently possible. Great for professional video editors, but irrelevant for still photography or people on a budget. At some point, it will also be useful for connecting external solid state storage. But there's this little matter of the speed of the system bus and memory that will take a number of years to get into the Light Peak range. In the meantime, there are many, many USB 3 products in the pipeline and Light Peak is not going to derail them. I applaud Apple for being the first to deploy this technology, and have no doubt that it is in my future. But I rather doubt it will be in my next computer--which will have USB 3. Maybe in the one after that.

VA64Skyhawk · February 25, 2011

A question. Is this technology proprietary to Apple, like its iPAD/iPod/iPhone connectors as well as many other items? (Disclaimer..I own nothing but Apple products, Mac Pro, MacBook Air, iPhone, ipad and 2 Minis.) Just curious.

Thanks, Rich

W.W. Webster · February 25, 2011

Richard wrote: »

That's simply untrue.

We'll see. But BS? - that's a big call!

Apple has drawn its line in the sand is delivering Thunderbolt in a commercial product. I'm certain my next desktop will be Thunderbolt-enabled, and sooner rather than later. Bring it on!

VA64Skyhawk wrote: »

A question. Is this technology proprietary to Apple ...?

Absolutely not!

In fact Intel is reported to have slowed development to support USB3 to get behind Thunderbolt, earlier code-named Light Peak.

Richard · February 25, 2011

VA64Skyhawk wrote: »

A question. Is this technology proprietary to Apple, like its iPAD/iPod/iPhone connectors as well as many other items? (Disclaimer..I own nothing but Apple products, Mac Pro, MacBook Air, iPhone, ipad and 2 Minis.) Just curious.

Thanks, Rich

No. Light Peak was developed by Intel. My understanding is that Apple got Intel to agree to a one-year exclusive deployment. I believe the connectors are part of Intel's product. What's proprietary to Apple is the Thunderbolt name. I have little doubt they're trying to get a trademark on Thor for the controller as well.

Edit: I was wrong about Thunderbolt--the trademark belongs to Intel, not Apple. Light Peak was the development code name, but Thunderbolt is the official product name. Sorry about that.

Richard · February 25, 2011

W.W. Webster wrote: »

We'll see. But BS? - that's a big call! .

Sorry, Ross, but you made a big claim:

USB 3 is effectively dead on arrival!

I don't buy it.

W.W. Webster · February 25, 2011

Richard wrote: »

Sorry, Ross...

I've got no problem with robust debate!

ThatCanonGuy · February 25, 2011

Well, I guess since I'm a PC this happens.

And since I'm a Canonian, this happens.

No, I will not be switching to Mac or Nikon!

pathfinder · February 25, 2011

Whatever happened to eSata connections in laptop?. My external drives on my desktop are all eSata connected, and blow FireWire etal into the weeds. ESata adapters are here, and now!

racer · February 25, 2011

This is all a bunch of marketing crap, just to try to lure people into buying the newest and latest technology. The reality is that the 10gb/s looks good on paper, but there isnt a current product that is even close to producing that kind of transfer rate, and your not going to see those type of increases in the near future.
The USB specs are designed to be realistic, and are initially designed with way more bandwidth then is needed inorder to be ahead of the rest of technology. USB 3 is rated at a top of 5gb/s, and there isnt any single consumer product that is even close to using that much bandwidth.

"thunderbolt" is only better then USB3 on paper (that is if you even believe the specs), no one will currently see any real life speed differences between them, and most likely wont even 3 years into the future. They could come out with a 50gb/s spec tomorrow, you would still see the same transfer rates as with USB3

Richard · February 26, 2011

pathfinder wrote: »

Whatever happened to eSata connections in laptop?. My external drives on my desktop are all eSata connected, and blow FireWire etal into the weeds. ESata adapters are here, and now!

Good question, Jim. eSATA seems perfect for external storage and it surprises me that it hasn't really taken off. As you said, it's here now and you can buy external drives that support it. But it's still hard to find laptops that have an eSATA port.

Light Peak has the advantage that it can run multiple protocols simultaneously, which simplifies system board design some. One controller can handle I/O for disks, video, sound, whatever, simultaneously. It also has the potential to reach very high throughput levels. But I think it's safe to assume that it's going to take years before all that potential is put to use.

colourbox · February 26, 2011

Richard wrote: »

Light Peak (AKA Thunderbolt) is no more going to supplant USB 3 than Firewire supplanted USB. Each will have its place.

This is correct. Thunderbolt is not going to kill USB 3 any more than Firewire or eSATA killed USB 2 or TV killed radio. Even if Thunderbolt took over the world (which it probably won't, except for pro users), USB would still be cheaper to implement for things like mice, keyboards, and external drives where high throughput is not a critical need. Thunderbolt is clearly about performance, and I fully expect to use it, whether for multiple monitors, multiple drives, or anything else where I would prefer not to deal with USB's idiosyncrasies.

pathfinder wrote: »

Whatever happened to eSata connections in laptop?. My external drives on my desktop are all eSata connected, and blow FireWire etal into the weeds. ESata adapters are here, and now!

eSATA has a couple of problems like no bus power (indispensible for compact bus-powered backup drives on the road) and no daisy chaining. Many implementations are also non-bootable from what I understand. Other protocols beat that, and now that new protocols beat the speed too, eSATA is going to start fading. Don't misunderstand...I'm backing up my images over eSATA as I write this, but I'm a lot more excited about Thunderbolt and its daisy-chainability, its ability to carry many different types of protocols (no dead end), and its 10 watts of bus power. And the DisplayPort socket is genius...even if you don't need Thunderbolt, you can still use the socket as DisplayPort for your Apple, Dell, NEC etc. 10-bit DisplayPort monitor. Thunderbolt really looks a lot more flexible than most of the new standards that have been thrown at our feet over the years. And USB 3 is said to have no display support.

racer wrote: »

The reality is that the 10gb/s looks good on paper, but there isnt a current product that is even close to producing that kind of transfer rate

That is the wrong way to perceive it. The issue is not having one product reach the transfer rate, because one of the points of Thunderbolt is the ability to carry multiple streams of high-bandwidth data of different protocols. Assuming 10Gb/sec is theoretical and the actual number will be lower (yet still higher than whatever real world USB 3 bandwidth is), you can fill it up by doing things like having a 30" monitor or two and running backups and a A/V scratch RAID running simultaneously off the one Thunderbolt port. Thunderbolt is a "bus" technology in more than one sense of the word, in that all kinds of data are going to get on and ride together...

chrisjohnson · February 26, 2011

This link to a new LaCie product tells where they see the first benefits - video editing.

racer · February 26, 2011

colourbox wrote: »

That is the wrong way to perceive it. The issue is not having one product reach the transfer rate, because one of the points of Thunderbolt is the ability to carry multiple streams of high-bandwidth data of different protocols. Assuming 10Gb/sec is theoretical and the actual number will be lower (yet still higher than whatever real world USB 3 bandwidth is), you can fill it up by doing things like having a 30" monitor or two and running backups and a A/V scratch RAID running simultaneously off the one Thunderbolt port. Thunderbolt is a "bus" technology in more than one sense of the word, in that all kinds of data are going to get on and ride together...

I understand that, but does one really want to get this technology just so they can plug 20 things into one port. The reality is that USB3 is still fast enough to handle a bunch of electronics into one port. I am sure you can reach the limit of both of them pretty fast by plugging in a bunch of fast SSD drives, but I wouldnt consider that "consumer" use. I think advertising 10gb/s as replacing and being better then USB3 to be a marketing gimic that for 90% wont see any advantage over USB3

Richard · February 26, 2011

racer wrote: »

I think advertising 10gb/s as replacing and being better then USB3 to be a marketing gimic that for 90% wont see any advantage over USB3

I think it's targeted at the other 10%, who do have very high bandwidth needs that are not being met today.

Pupator · February 26, 2011

No way Lightpeak/Thunderbolt kills USB 3.

How many Thunderbolt devices are available at the moment? None.
What needs to happen for Thunderbolt to achieve that amazing theoretical throughput? Replace copper wire with fiber. Not a quick industry change.
What cables and devices are Thunderbolt backwards compatible with? None. (USB 3 is backwards with USB 2)

The only useful purpose for Thunderbolt currently is in video editing where you can process and output video from the same port (concurrent HD streams). This isn't something normal people do, nor will they in the near future (think years). So why replace a technology that's fast-enough, backwards compatible with devices I already have, and doesn't require the industry to change the way they make cables with Thunderbolt? Here me clearly - it's not going to happen.

Also, when was the last time Apple successfully "pushed" an I/O standard into wide adoption? How's Firewire doing these days? Display port? Mini-display port?

0% chance Thunderbolt has any impact on the adoption rate of USB 3. Now, it might kill USB 4, but that's a ways off.

edit: Oh, and I forgot to mention that because of the nature of what Thunderbolt does (video and bandwidth), it's not something you could simply add to an existing PC with a dongle or simple adapter. For upgrading existing computers it requires at least PCI-e cards that Intel hasn't even announced will be produced yet.

aquaticvideographer · February 26, 2011

Pupator wrote: »

...
Also, when was the last time Apple successfully "pushed" an I/O standard into wide adoption?

While I agree with a lot of what you've written, I feel compelled to point out that Apple was the first company to go all-USB, with the original iMac. (I guess that computer had FW ports, too, IIRC.)

I wouldn't give them SOLE credit for the widespread adoption of USB but they were way ahead of that curve. Just sayin'.

colourbox · February 27, 2011

Pupator wrote: »

Also, when was the last time Apple successfully "pushed" an I/O standard into wide adoption?

DisplayPort was initially pushed by Apple, and is now on Dell, NEC, and Eizo monitors (probably more by now). You can't get more mainstream than Dell...

AirPort was the first widescale application of 802.11 wi-fi.

That, of course, was after Apple jump-started the adoption of USB 1.0 by putting it on the wildly successful iMac 1.0.

How is FireWire doing these days? It is still in wide use. Maybe not for consumers, but for example my friend took a video editing class and a FireWire drive is a requirement for the class. Why wouldn't it be? USB 2.0 is too damn slow for that purpose. USB 2.0 is also a joke as a Photoshop scratch disk. Remember...we are all editing HD now (even the iPhone is up to 720p, and snapshot cameras are up to 1080p).

Richard · February 27, 2011

Pupator wrote: »

edit: Oh, and I forgot to mention that because of the nature of what Thunderbolt does (video and bandwidth), it's not something you could simply add to an existing PC with a dongle or simple adapter. For upgrading existing computers it requires at least PCI-e cards that Intel hasn't even announced will be produced yet.

I think there's little point to upgrading existing machines. The real benefit of Thunderbolt will only be realized when the internal bus speeds of systems are higher than they are today. Which will happen, no doubt, in the next few years--one never has enough cycles, memory, storage and bandwidth, at least not for very long. There will probably be some new product announcements soon from Apple and others touting "revolutionary" performance, but actually only showing modest improvements. As I understand it, the Apple implementation still uses copper, not fiber. Think of this as the hardware beta release. But give it a few years and Thunderbolt will become mainstream and all that power will be put to good use. I still maintain that it will in no way diminish the adoption of USB 3, which will be mainstream in the course of the next 12 months, and will be a vast improvement for many I/O tasks.

colourbox · February 27, 2011

Even Intel wanted to do a copper implementation, because if you do optical, you cannot provide that 10 watts of bus power that you get with the copper Thunderbolt on these machines. On a desktop, where everything can just be plugged into the nearest power strip, there's little doubt they'll go optical. But on a laptop, bus power is incredibly useful.

Richard · February 27, 2011

colourbox wrote: »

Even Intel wanted to do a copper implementation, because if you do optical, you cannot provide that 10 watts of bus power that you get with the copper Thunderbolt on these machines. On a desktop, where everything can just be plugged into the nearest power strip, there's little doubt they'll go optical. But on a laptop, bus power is incredibly useful.

I think the decision was based on cost--optical is more expensive to implement. But in order to move it to even higher data rates and, importantly, longer cables, they'll probably eventually go optical. I imagine it would be possible to have a hybrid cable that would have copper for power and fiber for data. Dunno.

ziggy53 · February 27, 2011

It kinda sounds like Thunderbolt will be a very nice "docking" communication line. Would you be able to basically embellish a laptop into a sizable desktop configuration using Thunderbolt as the bus/connector?

Pupator · February 27, 2011

ziggy53 wrote: »

It kinda sounds like Thunderbolt will be a very nice "docking" communication line. Would you be able to basically embellish a laptop into a sizable desktop configuration using Thunderbolt as the bus/connector?

Thunderbolt doesn't add performance - it's just an I/O line with tremendous bandwidth. So the laptop would still need to have some serious firepower on its own. Theoretically, the advantage in that situation would be that with only one cable you could provide the input to several different devices (and types of devices).

Richard · February 28, 2011

ziggy53 wrote: »

It kinda sounds like Thunderbolt will be a very nice "docking" communication line. Would you be able to basically embellish a laptop into a sizable desktop configuration using Thunderbolt as the bus/connector?

Interesting idea. I would guess that Thunderbolt would have sufficient bandwidth to handle disks, monitor and keyboard easily. The really appealing thing here is that it has the potential to work generically--all current docking solutions that I know of use proprietary connectors. It would probably require a cable, though, as you would never get manufacturers to agree on a standard location for the connector. So it would be a little less convenient than the usual docking port. OTOH, it might actually give Apple users a docking option, something that has been strangely absent from their product line.

pathfinder · February 28, 2011

colourbox wrote: »

eSATA has a couple of problems like no bus power (indispensible for compact bus-powered backup drives on the road) and no daisy chaining. Many implementations are also non-bootable from what I understand. Other protocols beat that, and now that new protocols beat the speed too, eSATA is going to start fading. Don't misunderstand...I'm backing up my images over eSATA as I write this, but I'm a lot more excited about Thunderbolt and its daisy-chainability, its ability to carry many different types of protocols (no dead end), and its 10 watts of bus power.

Good point, my Raid is externally powered, but if your external drive is SSD, then you really don't need Bus power, do you?

Good Night USB 3.0. HELLO "Thunderbolt"!

Comments