Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Thunderbolt

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 211 posts

Re: Thunderbolt

#191

Post by pudquick »

masklinn wrote: post #164
robin_reala wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Display Port has allowed daisy chaining monitors since 1.2 at least, if not earlier back.

Sadly, Thunderbolt only supports 1.1a

This is a bit of a moot point, as far as Apple is concerned.

"[...] It is completely backward compatible with DisplayPort v1.1a and requires no new cables or other equipment [...]" - Bill Lempesis, VESA Executive Director.

A 1.2 device will work as a 1.1a device.

The features that you'll loose out on:

* Driving displays in excess of 2560 x 1600 x 30 bpp @ 60 Hz (Apple LED Cinema Display tops out at 2560 x 1440 currently).

* Multiple display daisy chaining (LED Cinema Displays only have a single Mini DisplayPort jack and as such cannot be daisy chained).

* AUX channel data transport at 720 Mbps (beaten by the PCIe transport layer rates within Thunderbolt, which when driving a LED Cinema Display at full resolution leave about ~2Gbps available for data).

* 3d stereoscopic display support (Aww, no Avatar 3D).

* Additional audio format support (mostly related to Blu-ray, which Macs still don't do).

It's sad, yes - but there's not much incentive for Apple (not sure about Intel) to support 1.2 currently. And since Apple is going to have exclusive use of the Thunderbolt interface until it starts showing up on other PCs in 2012, Intel only really has to meet Apple's requirements while they finish up the rest of the spec (optical cabling, etc).

Maybe they'll find time to add in 1.2 support by then.

Re: Thunderbolt

#192

Post by vacri »

CrLf wrote: post #9

Technically it seems nice, but what's up with reusing the "high voltage" symbol for this? And "thunderbolt" is a very tacky name...

This was the first thing I thought. This is pure and simple bad UI design. UIs should move away from ambiguity, especially around concepts of safety. The high voltage symbol is a safety symbol.

Sure, this very second, there's going to be no confusion between the two symbols, but if this catches on and the symbol becomes ubiquitous, it will muddy the discrimination of the safety logo.

This is simply irresponsible behaviour from a tech giant who intends for this symbol to become ubiquitous. All in the name of "oo, it looks cool!". Bad Apple!

Re: Thunderbolt

#193

Post by wladimir »

pudquick wrote: post #191
masklinn wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly, Thunderbolt only supports 1.1a

This is a bit of a moot point, as far as Apple is concerned. "[...] It is completely backward compatible with DisplayPort v1.1a and requires no new cables or other equipment [...]" - Bill Lempesis, VESA Executive Director. A 1.2 device will work as a 1.1a device. The features that you'll loose out on: * Driving displays in excess of 2560 x 1600 x 30 bpp @ 60 Hz (Apple LED Cinema Display tops out at 2560 x 1440 curren…

Wasn't the original idea of light peak to be optical? Why didn't they deliver on that promise, I want my future back, it's frickin 2011 now and we still don't use optical connectors to connect our devices :)

(I guess they'll have a hard time with the 'Thunderbolt' icon when they go to optical, it makes even less sense for optical than for a low-voltage connector)

Re: Thunderbolt

#194

Post by ComputerGuru »

capstone wrote: post #141
ComputerGuru wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not enough. That's talking about support from developers, not whether hardware vendors need to pay for licensing to include this tech in their hardware. That said, Mini DisplayPort is free of hardware licensing fees... so there's a good chance.

The poster of the question is a developer. I answered to help get the information he asked for, not have my answer graded on completeness or lack thereof with a curt "Not enough".

Yeah, sorry for the confusion. As nl says in the sister-post, that was Intel has released "not enough" info for us to know the full scope of licensing terms.

Re: Thunderbolt

#195

Post by nitrogen »

pmjordan wrote: post #87
jordanroher wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if Apple will eventually replace the dock connector on the iPhone/iPad with Thunderbolt? That would be a compelling reason to upgrade: your music sync time would be freed of another bottleneck. Of course, it kind of messes with the third-party accessory market, but I'm sure they'd love another reason to get people to buy new stuff.

I doubt it, PCIe (apparently the main underlying protocol) isn't a common feature of ARM SoC systems.

Marvell's cores have one lane of PCI express. Check out the OpenRD: http://www.open-rd.org/

Re: Thunderbolt

#196

Post by irfn »

tlrobinson wrote: post #96
sgt wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes.. 50% chance of getting it right every time, even though it feels like less than that! It doesn't help that some motherboards put the USB ports upside-down for some inexplicable reason, and when it's dark you can't see the little USB logo on the cable anyway.

Wait, USB ports have a "correct" orientation? I just assumed it was random...

lol.. it gets more confusing if the USB's are placed vertically

Re: Thunderbolt

#197

Post by nitrogen »

capstone wrote: post #124
zppx wrote: post #11

Two questions: Is it royalty-free? If the answer is negative, what are the licensing terms?

Thunderbolt technology leverages the native PCI Express and DisplayPort device drivers available in many operating systems today. This native software support means no extra software development is required to use a Thunderbolt technology enabled product. http://www.intel.com/technology/io/thunderbolt/325136-001US_...

Has anybody read anything explaining how giving external devices DMA access is or isn't a problem? It seems one could make a Thunderbolt device that silently injects itself into the running system, writes itself to the hard drive, etc. without even touching the CPU.

Re: Thunderbolt

#198

Post by nitrogen »

yread wrote: post #28
hop wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

USB2 and FireWire were close to the same speed. Thunderbolt is twice as fast as USB3 and can push DisplayPorts, so I doubt it will be the same.

Yes, but 1) USB3 has a 1 year lead - check out how many products are out already 2) 5Gbps vs 10Gbps. There are just a couple of SSDs that need SATA III (6Gbps) because the 3Gbps isn't enough. You just don't need the speed for disk I/O. What for then? Current DisplayPorts 1.2 has 17Gbps so I don't really see the Thunderbolt replacing it. also Firewire 800 was substantially faster in theoretical and particularly in pra…

Re #2: higher performance external video cards (think 3D accelerator dongles for laptops), cluster interconnects, RAID arrays of SSDs, RAM-based "disks" for use as another layer of cache, lower-latency ultra-high-channel-count external sound cards, etc.

Re: Thunderbolt

#199

Post by Derbasti »

hallmark wrote: post #81

I am delighted that Thunderbolt isn't reusing the USB plug form-factor. Early rumors showed Light Peak plugs that were the standard rectangular USB shape with fiber optic channels blended in: http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/19/apple-to-introduce-light... The outer rectangular, doubly symmetrical shape of USB is a usability nightmare! You know what I'm talking about. Good riddance.

Although, I still regularly try to plug in my mini DisplayPort connector the wrong way--just like you describe with USB. Apple is using the miniDP connector for Lightpeak/Thunderbolt.

Re: Thunderbolt

#200

Post by nitrogen »

YooLi wrote: post #128
smackfu wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right up until you have nothing to plug it into.

He can plug it into the new Thunderbolt plug with a simple adapter. Thunderbolt is already compatible with USB and Firewire.

It sounds like Thunderbolt is "compatible" with USB and Firewire in the same way ExpressCard and CardBus are -- by putting the host controller that would normally be on a PCI/PCIe card on the bus.
Post reply on HN