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

201–210 of 211 posts

Re: Thunderbolt

#201

Post by nitrogen »

icarus_drowning wrote: post #149
__david__ wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, my experience is the opposite--FireWire drivers are generally very DMA oriented and require little to no CPU at all, while USB drivers tend to need more CPU for the protocol overhead. This is because FireWire is an address oriented bus and the hardware can map FireWire addresses to CPU addresses and DMA in and out with (literally) zero CPU overhead. A driver write would really have to go out of their way to ma…

Yeah, this has been my experience as well. Even cheap Firewire audio interfaces are light-years better than their USB counterparts. I still use a USB 2.0 MIDI controller and the latency is absolutely killer . Press a key, a beat later, see the note appear on piano roll...

That's interesting. I've had no problems with USB MIDI adapters. As long as I have less than 5ms latency in my audio path, I'm able to play comfortably over the cheapest USB-MIDI adapter on Amazon. I've also had reasonable success with USB audio interfaces, with latency around 5ms (IIRC - I switched back to my ancient emu10k1 card because of the DSP).

Re: Thunderbolt

#202

Post by mambodog »

jordanroher wrote: post #44
sandipc wrote: post #4

So I guess the official branding of Lightpeak is Thunderbolt, even from Intel? And the standard connector (even outside of Apple products) is essentially Mini-Displayport?

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'm pretty sure the dock connector isn't going anywhere anytime soon, though I could see a Dock-to-Thunderbolt cable optionally replacing the Dock-to-USB cable.

Re: Thunderbolt

#203

Post by mambodog »

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...

Of all logos for connectors that I have seen in a long while, this is the first where the logo actually evokes the imagery of the name/vice-versa.

Re: Thunderbolt

#204

Post by kayoone »

whyleyc wrote: post #165
kayoone wrote: post #98

i sense multiple external screens on a MBP :D

That's already been possible for a few years - http://daggle.com/macbook-pro-multimonitor-4-monitors-at-onc...

i know, but the Matrox Solutions make your external monitors into one big monitor, so the dock and basically every new window that pops up will be in the middle and split between to monitors. Its not really that convenient.

USB2DVI is nice but USB 2.0 is too slow. USB 3.0 is solving that problem already and thunderbolt will too, i am sure. DisplayLink is already working on USB2DVI for USB3.0 which makes stutter free 1080p playback etc over USB possible and thunderbolt is alot faster.

Re: Thunderbolt

#205

Post by electromagnetic »

StavrosK wrote: post #95
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.

It's actually more like 33% chance. "Oh, wrong side. flip over Wrong again? Oh, I had it right the first time!"

The bigger problem isn't so much that you've got a 50/50 chance just blindly plugging it in. With all considerations, 50% probability of connecting a device by just sticking your hand under your desk and jabbing randomly with a USB cord is actually fantastic compared to every other connection on a PC.

However, the problem is that the USB ports have no guide to lead the USB in so they stick on the edge and no matter how hard you push it just sits on the edge and makes you think you have it upside down. You would improve usability greatly if the ports just readily allowed the plug to slide in.

I've never had to make an effort to plug in a 3.5mm as the plug design complements the port design. You either miss or it's in.

Re: Thunderbolt

#206

Post by gnaffle »

tommi wrote: post #99
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.

Too bad they didn't make the plug really usable: connect it anyway you want to. There are probably many ways to implement that. An USB concept for it: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/01/double-usb-plug-conce...

One obvious way to implement that would be the MagSafe connector. Indeed, Apple has some patents relating to data-enabled MagSafe connectors.

Re: Thunderbolt

#207

Post by xuki »

wladimir wrote: post #193
pudquick wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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)

Because optical is expensive, less flexible, does not provide enough power for devices (think portable HDD) and not many people use long cable.

Once the technology is widely used, the name doesn't matter anymore I guess.

Re: Thunderbolt

#208

Post by lean »

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.

http://www.overcompensating.com/posts/20100412.html

Re: Thunderbolt

#209

Post by v21 »

tygorius wrote: post #113
Pulpertank wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple seems to be targetting a whole different sector with this technology. See Cringley's take on this ( http://www.cringely.com/2011/02/attack-of-the-minis/ ) about how this technology could go into data centers. Interesting move by Apple.

Oh, that's just Crazy Bob talking. If that had really been Apple's strategy, they wouldn't have alienated so many customers in the way they killed the xServe line last year. If they had really wanted to keep their toe-hold in that market, they wouldn't have said, "Let them eat mini Macs." I think it's simply the case that Apple's signature advantages in the consumer space don't translate into a 1U world, and they rec…

But on the other hand, it does work as a move by Intel...

Re: Thunderbolt

#210

Post by bugsy »

maggit wrote: post #54
bugsy wrote: post #50

It really seems to me a lot of this is about making your current peripherals obsolete so they can sell you new ones.

In the long run, Thunderbolt aims to replace USB, FireWire, Ethernet, DisplayPort/HDMI/etc, eSATA and be considered an external variant of PCIe. This is feasible and would be a good future, just like the future we live in now where USB has replaced serial ports, parallel ports and PS/2.

Yes, this is what they say about every new standard. And once you have thrown out all your working peripherals and bought all new ones, then LightningBlast is released, not compatible with Thunderbolt. This has been going on as long as I have been alive.

I know, I know: Thunderbolt is the last time people will have to throw out all their things and start over. This time really will be the last time because it is a new standard to rule over all, just like NuBus was.

And it's definitely not going to be dead on arrival like PCI-X, or not supported by drivers on the Mac for most peripherals like PCI-e. No, Thunderbolt is going to be truly universal and forever lasting world without end. If only you believe, amen.

Post reply on HN