Without major changes, Thunderbolt for PCs is dead in the water(extremetech.com)
extremetech.com
Without major changes, Thunderbolt for PCs is dead in the water
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/129494-without-major-changes-thunderbolt-for-pcs-is-dead-in-the-water
8 comments
Not every standard is targeted to the mass market. TB is a high end niche. Nothing wrong with that. If you need the unique features or capabilities it offers price probably wot be a huge concern. The Mac alone will support this niche. higher end PCs will probably also need to support TB as there really isn't any other high end alternative.
Unfortunately, Apple is trying to force it as a mass market technology. A MacBook Air comes with a Thunderbolt port, but no USB3.
What? No.
Intel doesn't support USB3 yet. USB3 devices aren't even yet widespread. Since space is at a premium in the Airs, Apple obviously doesn't add an extra USB3 chip in them just to support what still is a niche feature.
Ivy Bridge does bring USB3 support. If the next generation of MacBooks (coming this summer) doesn't support USB3 you get to make your claim that Apple is trying to force Thunderbolt as a mass market technology. But no second earlier.
Intel doesn't support USB3 yet. USB3 devices aren't even yet widespread. Since space is at a premium in the Airs, Apple obviously doesn't add an extra USB3 chip in them just to support what still is a niche feature.
Ivy Bridge does bring USB3 support. If the next generation of MacBooks (coming this summer) doesn't support USB3 you get to make your claim that Apple is trying to force Thunderbolt as a mass market technology. But no second earlier.
Thunderbolt also requires additional hardware. When Ivy Bridge brings built-in USB3, Thunderbolt will still require additional hardware. And Thunderbolt devices aren't nearly as widespread as USB3 ones. (I can go to Target and buy a USB3 memory stick right now; it's not certain that Thunderbolt memory sticks will ever exist.) They tend to cost over twice as much, too.
Take a look at the Cinema Display. Thunderbolt is Apple’s docking station replacement. That’s its purpose and it’s awesome. They are pushing Thunderbolt because it’s a perfect solution for a problem Apple has had for a long time. You have to be blind to Apple’s ecosystem to not see that.
They are not pushing it to replace USB3. That doesn’t even make sense. When Ivy Bridge MacBooks ship without USB3 you can claim that. No second earlier.
Yes, Apple is, like Intel, not enthusiastic about USB3. They don’t think it’s so important to move super fast. It’s just not top-priority. They will add it when it doesn’t cost them much and doesn’t add constraints to their design. But they are not stupid enough to believe that Thunderbolt could replace USB. Both technologies complement each other.
They are not pushing it to replace USB3. That doesn’t even make sense. When Ivy Bridge MacBooks ship without USB3 you can claim that. No second earlier.
Yes, Apple is, like Intel, not enthusiastic about USB3. They don’t think it’s so important to move super fast. It’s just not top-priority. They will add it when it doesn’t cost them much and doesn’t add constraints to their design. But they are not stupid enough to believe that Thunderbolt could replace USB. Both technologies complement each other.
I read recently that TB on windows couldn't hot swap yet. Meaning you have to turn off the computer to get something to detect, that's pretty bad. But apparently will be fixed in future software updates.
TB is pretty great, the biggest downside I've seen are the cost and availability of cables ($50 from apple is the cheapest), and that devices are higher priced. However up until recently you couldn't even get the TB interface chips from Intel. Now that more are released and entering mainstream production, we should see a lot more devices, and maybe cheaper ones as well.
TB is pretty great, the biggest downside I've seen are the cost and availability of cables ($50 from apple is the cheapest), and that devices are higher priced. However up until recently you couldn't even get the TB interface chips from Intel. Now that more are released and entering mainstream production, we should see a lot more devices, and maybe cheaper ones as well.
New tech starts out expensive then drops in price after adoption/volume and competition. That seems so obvious, I'm not sure why the article is essentially saying that it's expensive now, so will never go anywhere.
Seriously? Are comments like this necessary? It just shows a lack of understanding (or they're being willfully disingenuous). I don't think anyone is astonished that a niche add-on like a dock isn't selling like gangbusters. And why doesn't Ford sell me a car for $5000? That's all the individual parts are worth if I sold it for scrap! What do you mean engineering costs? What do you mean production costs? What do you mean software development costs?
ExtremeTech has some good nuggets of articles, wrapped in a whole bunch of distasteful, disparaging, and often off-the-mark commentary. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth. This would be a good editorial, almost on par with Ars Technica, if they just threw away the third and fourth paragraphs.
Do the editors force these comments into the articles against the will of the authors, or is it a problem right from the ground up?