101–110 of 198 posts
Can someone explain whether I should care that they are still using DP 1.2 rather than 1.3? I had thought 1.3 was needed for non stitched 4k 60hz, but this should have plenty of bandwidth, so I'm now not sure what the issue with 1.2 vs 1.3 is.
One port to rule em all
Considering the DMA vulnerabilities of thunderbolt, that's not too far off. At least until we have some sort of IOMMU-based hotplug device firewalls in our operating systems.
I'm kinda disapointed about the whole Type-C scenario. Now when you've got a Type-C Port, you just don't know what it can do. It could be anything from a USB 2 Port, up to a USB 3.1 + 20A Power + Thunderbolt Port. You can't see this from looking at it, and Spec Sheets today have a problem of listing the version numbers of HDMI and DisplayPort Ports, I don't see them suddenly becoming very concise about this. The prom…
So now you can't even put glue in the thunderbolt port anymore to prevent DMA attacks? I don't think DMA attacks have been fully solved yet via software, or am I not up to date here? I guess you could blacklist the driver.
Just glue over your USB-C ports with tinfoil.
Do you also think people who use screenlocks are tinfoil hatters?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple using a standard connector, dream on. Apple is clearly pushing heavily behind the scenes in both the USB-IF and with Intel/Thunderbolt to drive USB Type C ports. Reportedly their engineers did much of the work designing the port. Looking at their one-port Macbook, they’re obviously heavily invested in USB Type C’s success. I assume every future Mac is going to be mostly USB Type C ports. Can you clarify what…
I just want to thank you for qualifying your description of Apple's contribution to USB-C in a correct manner, as opposed to perpetuating the myth that Apple invented USB-C. It's initial conception having come out of the USB 3.1 development by AMD, HP, Intel, and Microsoft. It is refreshing to see someone not spreading the revisionist history that has been popular on this subject.
Apple certainly isn’t the only party (or even the main party) responsible for the new connector, but from what I’ve read they do deserve some applause for putting their resources in and making sure the new connector is the best it can be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
from FW 400 -> 800 you could use an adaptor, but for Thunderbolt you're out of luck completely No you aren't: http://www.amazon.com/Apple-Thunderbolt-to-FireWire-Adapter/...
That only works in one direction. You can use it to connect FireWire devices to a computer with Thunderbolt, but you can't use it to connect Thunderbolt devices to a computer with FireWire. Contrast with USB. I can go out and buy a USB storage device brand new off the shelf in 2015, plug it into an iMac from 1998, and it will work. It will be slow but it will work out of the box.
So, will Apple finally be able to refresh the Thunderbolt Display? I got an old one I want to sell before it gets obsolete. I guess the time is now. Edit: "Thunderbolt 3 integrates USB 3.1, optional 100W power delivery, 5K @ 60Hz display." Optional power delivery? Optional nowadays just mean "will be removed before even reaching production"
I think Roritharr is right, this is the beginning of the end for the great era of standardization that USB brought. If there was a port and a cable, you pretty much knew it would work for everything the port should do.
DisplayPort and HDMI port/cable versioning have been a colossal pain for me. GPU spec lists on shopping sites don't even list what version they support, so you have to constantly cross reference things to manufacturer datasheets.
http://i.imgur.com/ffMR5gj.png
What's sad is that we had the same sorts of differentiations in the past, like with DVI-I (digital and analog) and DVI-D (digital only) and Dual-link DVI (for big screens). So what did we do? We called them different things and then actually advertised what it was capable of.
But apparently saying "DisplayPort 1.2" is too complicated now or something? Maybe there are too many different optional features that may or may not be supported by a GPU or the cable or the display, so they just assume none of them will work? I don't even know.
That screenshot isn't an old graphics card either, it's a GTX 970.
Not looking forward to USB turning into the same mess.
EDIT: This isn't all new, I recall seeing some laptops with strange things like yellow USB ports that were still powered for charging when the computer is sleeping. But that's a minor feature that most people wouldn't even notice. Major capabilities missing from some ports is different, and can get more confusing than "the blue ports are faster but all of them will work".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just want to thank you for qualifying your description of Apple's contribution to USB-C in a correct manner, as opposed to perpetuating the myth that Apple invented USB-C. It's initial conception having come out of the USB 3.1 development by AMD, HP, Intel, and Microsoft. It is refreshing to see someone not spreading the revisionist history that has been popular on this subject.
My external non-expert impression (which could be totally off-base; I don’t have inside sources) is that folks making devices like phones and tablets were jealous of the reversibility, faster battery charging, and size advantage Apple could obtain with Lightning jacks, compared to the ridiculous extended USB 3.1 Micro-B jack, and started clamoring for a better connector sometime in ~2012. Once Apple realized such a n…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple using a standard connector, dream on.
> Apple using a standard connector, dream on. Apple is clearly pushing heavily behind the scenes in both the USB-IF and with Intel/Thunderbolt to drive USB Type C ports. Reportedly their engineers did much of the work designing the port. Looking at their one-port Macbook, they’re obviously heavily invested in USB Type C’s success. I assume every future Mac is going to be mostly USB Type C ports. Can you clarify what…
For several years Apple has been the one phone company using a non-standard connector on their phones. I mean, if they switch to USB-C then great - but it's worth saying that Apple is already the one problem company in this area. Everyone else has switched to standard USB and got on with it.
Seems to be trading all our different ports with the problem of having all levels of different cables? This port is going to be very expensive for the manufactures. If it does everything I'm going to need a bunch. Does anything stop OEMs making a row of identical ports that only 1 charges my laptop, only a couple take can use the fastest cable and I'm sure all sorts of potential shenanigans,
This already happens. My laptop has three USB ports. One with just the USB symbol, one with the superspeed USB symbol ("SS") and one with the superspeed symbol and a lightening bolt. I'm not sure exactly what that lightning bolt... Who knows what that means - maybe support for the Battery Charging Specification (5V, 1.5A)? We'll just have to get used to ports having a load of obscure symbols next to them.
And yes the lightning bolt will charge things without powering your laptop on. Very handy.
