Thunderbolt Technology: The Fastest Data Connection to Your PC Just Arrived

[Mussels]

That is really, really dumb. I don't wanna connect my mouse to a printer.

you can choose where to chain them. get hubs, etc.



look at it this way: you could have your PC 30 meters away, run a cable through the wall cavitys and have audio, video, input (mouse/KB), network and data connections) all via the one cable.

 

[inferKNOX]

I thought that's supposed to be a "don't open this device or you'll get zapped" symbol that Intel has apparently trademarked there. Intel... you plagiariser!!
Is there a shortage of design ideas for simple logos for connectors? Seriously though, that means something like 'electric shock'.

I wonder how many n00bs are going to get zapped thinking it's "thunderbolt" and how soon after the law suits will come. I mean... if you can sue Nintendo (Wii) for throwing your control through the TV, then Intel is in for some fun with this...

 

[Fourstaff]

I think we will have to wait for 5 years before we know for sure whether Thunderbolt will be a success or not. My definition of successs: Get all the major producers to use Thunderbolt, from AMD to ZTE.

 

[Mussels]

yeah, thunderbolt only wins out if intel lets everyone use it, much like how third party board makers used addon cards for USB 3.0.



i want magic like the following:

PC is connected to HDTV via DP/TB.
TV is connected to speakers, games consoles, and all else shiny via DP/TB.

i want them to link up like HDMI can these days - so that those devices can all control each other. the consoles get internet acess via the networked DP devices (PC, in this case). the PC, TV and consoles can all control the volume on the speakers.


I WANT A MAGIC ALL IN ONE CONNECTION THAT TRULY INTEGRATES DEVICES. If TB doesnt deliver this, i'll just have to wait another 15 years or so, i guess...

 

[SvB4EvA]

I thought that's supposed to be a "don't open this device or you'll get zapped" symbol that Intel has apparently trademarked there. Intel... you plagiariser!!
Is there a shortage of design ideas for simple logos for connectors? Seriously though, that means something like 'electric shock'.
http://www.safety.vanderbilt.edu/training/hazcom/images/symbol_electricshock.gif
I wonder how many n00bs are going to get zapped thinking it's "thunderbolt" and how soon after the law suits will come. I mean... if you can sue Nintendo (Wii) for throwing your control through the TV, then Intel is in for some fun with this...

LOL, so much this...

 

[inferKNOX]

That is really, really dumb. I don't wanna connect my mouse to a printer.

Ports, ports everywhere. The future of computing, from the perspective of Intel, and your future motherboard:

techPowerUp! Forums

Ahhh... ha ha ha ha!! You've given me a good laugh today!
On a serious note though, at least this will help Displayport 'infiltrate' the market at last.
However, if Intel intends to drive this in a direction as to challenge Ethernet, they're going to make Cisco and the like go ballistic!

 

[OneCool]

Screw all this high speed wired shit.


I want high speed WIRELESS connections please!!





The technology is there why their not utilizing it is beyond me

 

[Taer]

Screw all this high speed wired shit.


I want high speed WIRELESS connections please!!


The technology is there why their not utilizing it is beyond me

This is mostly for people who want the extra bandwidth.

The maximum you'd get with wireless is 300-500Mbps. That's slower than USB 2.0.

 

[Fourstaff]

It's called theorizing. Intelligent people can do it.

Its called deluding oneself. Helpless fanboys and lunatics does that all the time.

I want high speed WIRELESS connections please!!

Plenty of reason for that, reliability and convenience being the top 2. And also, we have not found a way to efficiently transmit power wirelessly, even though Tesla once tried to do it.

The maximum you'd get with wireless is 300-500Mbps. That's slower than USB 2.0.

Use MIMO. Your point is invalid.

 

[OneCool]

The maximum you'd get with wireless is 300-500Mbps. That's slower than USB 2.0.

Yeah now. What would happen if Intel would have invested all this "light peak" money into it.

I think we would be a little further along than 300-500Mps

 

[freaksavior]

Hey, I'm new here. I just don't want to get picked on.

Not trying to be a jerk to ya man, and if you thought I was, I really am sorry.Rarely is btarunr, that's all i'm saying.

 

[cdawall]

You are the one who said this


There is no Firewire at 6,400Mbps
We have no idea what possible specs of usb 4 are, don't start talking about it.
Also you confused the shit out of me. Please just stop talking.

btarunr is right, you are wrong just except it.

accept would be the correct word there

This is mostly for people who want the extra bandwidth.

The maximum you'd get with wireless is 300-500Mbps. That's slower than USB 2.0.

well to use your words i theorize i could get 400-700Gbps you know smart people can do that

 

[btarunr]

Okay, I see who I am talking to here.

So do I. So long, weer.

 

[hellrazor]

I wonder if the HTC ThunderBolt will work with this?

 

[TAViX]

Does it have fiber optics cables made with copper wire???

 

[Fourstaff]

Does it have fiber optics cables made with copper wire???

lol, they decided to use copper cables to start with to simplify the adoption. I think they will migrate to fibre once demand starts to kick in.

 

[TAViX]

Demand? lol. Even cheapo USB 3.0 is not even 50% used today, what do you need that extra bandwitht for?? External graphic cards??

Screw all this high speed wired shit.

I want high speed WIRELESS connections please!!

The technology is there why their not utilizing it is beyond me

High speed wireless exist from a long time. Just not for average user. Sure, you can have a 10Gbps wireless router in your house, but in less than 2 year you would develop cancer, leukemia, impotence, hear loss, and other nice "effects" from the nice electromagnetic radiation. Hehe. Trust me, I work in the field and studied all those e.m. effects.
No thanks. I'm not even using a 802.11n router in house, not near the baby anyways.

 

[btarunr]

lol, they decided to use copper cables to start with to simplify the adoption. I think they will migrate to fibre once demand starts to kick in.

The optical and electrical variants are incompatible (because ports on the devices and connectors on the cables have conventional electrical contacts). Once the electrical one is spread across the industry, Intel would have to redo everything all over again to get the optical variant out. Maybe Intel is sand-bagging, maybe the optical variant is better suited for enterprise IO for now, or maybe they got very close to achieving optical-like performance on electrical medium, and opted for electrical since it's more durable.

 

[[H]@RD5TUFF]

I couldn't agree more.

We're going from USB to.. Thunderbolt. Unbelievable.

I'm sure Intel will come up with an acronym for it perhaps LIC (light based interface connector) or some such, which will lead to string of sexual harassment lawsuits in the work place because IT personal will be telling people "hmmmm your LIC port seems to be malfunctioning I will have to play with it a little".

 

[f22a4bandit]

Well, apparently one SSD company is in this game.

Click to read article

 

[Loosenut]

Well, apparently one SSD company is in this game.

Click to read article

For not linking one of Btarunr's news articles

 

[hellrazor]

So we're all agreed that there is no reason for thunderbolt to exist?

 

[btarunr]

I continue to disagree. USB 3.0 is already bottlenecked. The evolution of USB 2.0 to USB 3.0 (10x increase in bandwidth) was way too late, and 10 Gb/s sounds like the ideal device interconnect bandwidth for a 2011~2015 setting.

I also don't buy into the "but USB 3.0 is a familiar-looking port with backwards compatibility" argument. If your devices need 5 Gb/s bandwidth, you're anyway going to create a hardware environment around it (i.e. buy a USB 3.0 controller card and compatible devices). So Thunderbolt is no more "unique" than USB 3.0. Besides having 10x less bandwidth doesn't make backwards compatibility a big factor. So USB 3.0's backwards compatibility isn't a huge plus.

 

[Mussels]

i just look at TB as a replacement for E-sata, and it fits nicely with that idea. the extra stuff is just a nice bonus.

 

[laszlo]

nice tech. but as i see i won't be thunderbolted in the next years...