Does USB-C signify the end of ThunderBolt? If so, where does that leave nMP?

[DEMinSoCAL]

In Apple's eyes TB has replaced FW. USB lives alongside TB, just like it lived alongside FW.

When the original Macbook Air was introduced it had the following ports:

1× USB 2.0
1× 3.5 mm headphone jack
1 x Micro-DVI video port
1 x power

Now USB-C allows USB, Video and power, so the new Macbook has:

1 x USB-C
1 x 3.5 mm headphone jack

The original Macbook Air did not kill firewire and the other Macs that came out at the same time, or faster, did not lose FW until it was superseded by TB. TB ports were small enough for the MBA, so TB was included on the MBA.

Did you also make threads in 2008 about how the Macbook Air is going to kill FW?

I (personally) don't have an invested interest in TB products, but many of the Apple loyalists and professionals do, and for Apple to release a major new product without said TB port, is a slap in the face for the loyalists who have invested (greatly) in external drives and other devices with TB ports and now cannot use them on the new device.

I asked earlier if there could be a USB-C to Thunderbolt adapter. If there could then that is somewhat excusable, but if not, I (as an invester in TB equipment) would be somewhat irritated by this, and wondering, at the same time, if future Macbooks would do away with TB and use USB-C only.

 

[fastlanephil]

I thought all of this will become irrelevant once computing moves to the CLOUD. But that's looking more like science fiction to me. What has been promised is blazingly fast speeds. What I'm seeing is not so fast speeds and not much hope for anything better now that the FCC is running things.

A little off topic but relevant.

 

[DonMega]

I (personally) don't have an invested interest in TB products, but many of the Apple loyalists and professionals do, and for Apple to release a major new product without said TB port, is a slap in the face for the loyalists who have invested (greatly) in external drives and other devices with TB ports and now cannot use them on the new device.

I asked earlier if there could be a USB-C to Thunderbolt adapter. If there could then that is somewhat excusable, but if not, I (as an invester in TB equipment) would be somewhat irritated by this, and wondering, at the same time, if future Macbooks would do away with TB and use USB-C only.

How is it a slap in the face? This laptop/netbook is not aimed at the professional. Loyalist = fanboy = Don't care if it has any ports, if Apple built it, it's great ≠ slap in the face either. I don't see this laptop as a "major new product". It is merely a stepping stone platform to incorporate those "new" technologies into the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro lines and to a lesser extent the desktop lines. Thunderbolt isn't going anywhere, anytime soon. All this FUD just makes for more "interesting" forum trash.

 

[slughead]

Since Apple's not endorsing use of TB to its fullest (GPU over TB), it's starting to seem a little redundant. Why have a bus that takes up PCIe lanes when nobody's using them and most of that functionality can carry over USB 3 ?? With Video too, it seems even more redundant.

As far as 5K support.... I think we're a little far away from mass-adoption, getting a video card to drive it is annoying (has to use 2 display ports), that is until DP 1.3 becomes more ubiquitous, but even the new Titan X still has 1.2.....

By the time 1.3 becomes a thing, who's to say USB-C won't have it integrated?

Can OSX even merge 2 display ports?

Also, can TB3 devices work on TB2? Different plug, after all...

 

[thefredelement]

How is it a slap in the face? This laptop/netbook is not aimed at the professional. Loyalist = fanboy = Don't care if it has any ports, if Apple built it, it's great ≠ slap in the face either. I don't see this laptop as a "major new product". It is merely a stepping stone platform to incorporate those "new" technologies into the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro lines and to a lesser extent the desktop lines. Thunderbolt isn't going anywhere, anytime soon. All this FUD just makes for more "interesting" forum trash.

I agree and def. think some of the improvements prototyped in the MacBook will benefit the entire line, to me it really seems an extension of iOS devices still. It probably could have been called iBook.

Now, can they put OS X on an iPad and would that make 'MacBook' redundant?

It really feels like the MacBook is the start of a merging point between OS X and iOS and not just because of the colors, but the battery tech and the miniaturized logic board... if they keep iterating over those technologies it won't be long before an iPad can have a robust Intel chip, 8GB of RAM, a great display, USBC expandability and 256GB of storage.. then why not just put OS X on it? ... then a keyboard, then it's just the Macbook we have today!

Might as well call it a MacPad with a bundled keyboard.

Can they get the battery tech to a point where they can interweave it with the display, to one day have a detachable screen that's an iPad then plug it in to your keyboard, get USBC, more battery life and a keyboard? Is this thing so far form a convertible today?

No one complains that an iDevice doesn't have thunderbolt or real USB support, but a more robust iPad with USBC is really interesting.

Basically, the MacBook doesn't really fit into the Mac lineup, despite it's operating system, it's more of an iDevice than anything so I think it's effect on external bus technology on the desktop / pro laptop market is negligible.

 

[theSeb]

I (personally) don't have an invested interest in TB products, but many of the Apple loyalists and professionals do, and for Apple to release a major new product without said TB port, is a slap in the face for the loyalists who have invested (greatly) in external drives and other devices with TB ports and now cannot use them on the new device.

I asked earlier if there could be a USB-C to Thunderbolt adapter. If there could then that is somewhat excusable, but if not, I (as an invester in TB equipment) would be somewhat irritated by this, and wondering, at the same time, if future Macbooks would do away with TB and use USB-C only.

It is as much a slap in the face as the original Macbook Air without firewire ports was. Not every device made by Apple is made for everyone. Accept it and move on. This is targeted to a specific market - a market that Apple right now feels has no need for Thunderbolt and the TB port will not fit into the design that they feel will sell to this market.

Does any manufacturer make all products that are appropriate for everyone? No, they don't.

Your complaint is like saying that the Toyota Aygo is a slap in the face to the Tundra owners because they have invested thousands in trailers and boats and stuff to tow and now this little Aygo WILL NOT TOW THEIR TRAILERS! CURSE YOU, TOYOTA. I AM SELLING MY TOYOTA SHARES RIGHT NOW BECAUSE IT'S CLEAR THAT TOYOTA WILL NOT MAKE ANY MORE TRUCKS AND THE TOW HITCH IS DEAD.

----------

Since Apple's not endorsing use of TB to its fullest (GPU over TB), i

That has nothing to do with Apple. It is to do with Intel.

 

[theluggage]

Technically, it can't carry a 5k signal as far as I can tell, which is where the goal post is right now.

USB-C supports DisplayPort 1.3, but the implementation on the rMB is only 1.2 (are there any DP 1.3 GPUs around yet?) - in any case, I doubt the rMB has the oomph to drive a 5k display anyway. When USB-C turns up on future higher-end Macs it may well have DP 1.3 capability.

Now I'm wondering if maybe we'll see them combine Thunderbolt and USB-C back into a single connector.

That would make a lot of sense. Presumably, a future USB-C+TB port could sense when a smart TB cable was connected and use some of all of its wires for TB signals. However, ISTR that the reason Intel dropped the USB connector for Thunderbolt was that the USB rightsholders wouldn't let them.

wait, so with a cable that's displayport on one end and usbc on the other you can just plug into a monitor? can you do that while also plugged into power - strange they wouldn't have a displayport and power adapter.

(1) Yes, (2) presumably - with a suitable adapter and (3) I'm wondering if the Apple USB-C VGA and HDMI adapters are just USB video adapters and don't actually make use of the DisplayPort mode of USB-C. They seem to have some odd limitations that don't tally with the rMB specs.

Since USB-C can support DP 1.3, it may become the preferred monitor connection mechanism over Thunderbolt

Well, TB 3 will support DP 1.3 but, if USB-C takes off, I can see USB-C inputs appearing on 3rd party displays fairly rapidly. In that case, an external display could be a display, USB hub, webcam, Ethernet port *and* charge your laptop over a single wire (the last one is a trick that TB can't do).

Normal USB didnt kill FireWire.

USB and Firewire didn't start off as direct competitors. USB replaced RS232, Centronics and ADB (and was in limbo for ages because of poor Windows support). Firewire 400 replaced external SCSI and was also adopted as the standard interface for digital video cameras - USB-1 simply wasn't up to either of those applications. Until USB3 came along, Firewire was still far superior to USB2 for connecting external drives etc. let alone professional audio/video applications. Even so, it stayed a niche market.

TB and USB3 are more direct competitors - USB3 isn't as fast as TB but its faster than any single external drive, and faster than your internet connection. USB-C/3.1 is even closer to TB speeds - but I'm sure that when the real-world benchmarks roll in, TB will still win when it comes to driving superfast SSD RAID setups that can actually push 10+Gbps. If USB-C takes off in consumer PCs, USB-C devices will become cheap while TB devices stay at their present levels. You'll really, really have to need that performance edge to pay the premium for TB.

But USB cant do all the things thunderbolt does. Like PCI-E. The whole thing for external PCI-E Cards is a thunderbolt thing and no USB thing.

Not for long... From Wikipedia on USB-C: As of December 2014, Alt Mode implementations include DisplayPort 1.3 [35] and MHL 3.0;[34][36] other serial protocols like PCI Express and Base-T Ethernet are possible.

 

[MacVidCards]

More adapters and cables coming, that's for sure.

Looks like Apple is finally acknowledging which way the wind is blowing on TB.

 

[theSeb]

More adapters and cables coming, that's for sure.

Looks like Apple is finally acknowledging which way the wind is blowing on TB.

You don't actually read people's replies, do you? You just post hjksldjhkdshjkfdshjk and then pretend that nobody refuted your hjksldjhkdshjkfdshjk. Or it goes like this:

MVC: Hahahahah. A!
Others: No, A blah blah blah blah
MVC: Hahahahah. B and C!

What's the enjoyment in that?

If USB-JSDFJHSHJ reaches TB's speeds and gets all of the functionality eventually, then yes, it will completely replace TB. But that will take quite a lot of time. I have to add though that right now I would not buy any Mac without a USB-C port right now. I am not planning on buying the first gen Macbook either

 

[MacVidCards]

You don't actually read people's replies, do you? You just post hjksldjhkdshjkfdshjk and then pretend that nobody refuted your hjksldjhkdshjkfdshjk. What's the enjoyment in that?

Oh no I read it.

But I see obvious reality and then I see a post that ignores it, like it's full of "hjksldjhkdshjkfdshjk" so I ignore it as it has ignored the obvious reality.

 

[theSeb]

Oh no I read it.

But I see obvious reality and then I see a post that ignores it, like it's full of "hjksldjhkdshjkfdshjk" so I ignore it as it has ignored the obvious reality.

I ignore your reality and substitute it with mine

 

[edanuff]

I'm wondering if the Apple USB-C VGA and HDMI adapters are just USB video adapters and don't actually make use of the DisplayPort mode of USB-C. They seem to have some odd limitations that don't tally with the rMB specs.

Hard to say what's in the Apple adapters until someone does a teardown, but for cost purposes, I'd be surprised if they aren't using the DP mode. Google posted the schematics for their USB-C to HDMI and USB-C to DP adapters for the new Chromebook, which also uses USB-C, so you can see just how simple these are:

USB Type-C to HDMI Adapter

USB Type-C to DP Adapter

Interesting to see the HDMI adapter is HDMI 2.0.

 

[ToomeyND]

I don't think thunderbolt, but I do think Lightning. I posted this in another thread.

I think that the switch will have to be made, simply from a user standpoint. The benefit of USB-C is that it can work both directions. If you continue to have lightning on the iPhone and iPad, it will be the ONLY cable that is not reversible, and you will have almost 0 visible indicator as to why. USB-C and Lightning look darn similar from even a short distance. People will (and reasonably) not look closely at which end can plug into the phone and which end plugs into the plug or laptop. That will get annoying very fast.

Heck, looking at these two photos, and hearing from everyone that the lightning cable is slightly smaller, it seems almost inevitable that people shove the lightning into the USB-C connector and break the small chip inside the female end of USB-C.

They just look too similar.

 

[goMac]

USB-C supports DisplayPort 1.3, but the implementation on the rMB is only 1.2 (are there any DP 1.3 GPUs around yet?) - in any case, I doubt the rMB has the oomph to drive a 5k display anyway. When USB-C turns up on future higher-end Macs it may well have DP 1.3 capability.

Yeah. That's a tough spot there. If USB-C supports DP 1.3 that's going to make Thunderbolt extremely niche. It makes Thunderbolt's usage basically just for PCIe devices, which is a tough spot.

I'm not as familiar with the USB-C implementation details, but I'm assuming it would still fit with the direction Apple went with the nMP. You'd still need to have the GPU built into the box for a "clean" implementation. But you could see most of those ports become USB-C ports, and the Thunderbolt display become the USB display. MHL on USB-C should still free up enough lanes to drive the speakers and webcam and possibly the ethernet in a display as well. And you'd still be able to eliminate the charging cable.

Yeah, not sure it changes any decision Apple made for the Mac Pro, but this could be the end for Thunderbolt.

 

[MacVidCards]

What's interesting is it seems like Apple has decided to only implement parts of the spec.

If they could ditch the "must carry video" part of spec then they could move nMP into a spot between rMP (REAL Mac Pro) and Mini and reintroduce a serious computer with dual CPU and PCIE 3.0, USB3, etc.

I think the fact that 4K and 5K are fast becoming the norm whilst Apple still peddles the ancient TB displays with no hint of a new model is also telling.

I do not, however, have any hope of them doing any such thing. With profit margins on iWatch and the soon to follow iPen, why bother? They are fast becoming a "personal accessory" company.

 

[theSeb]

What's interesting is it seems like Apple has decided to only implement parts of the spec.

If they could ditch the "must carry video" part of spec then they could move nMP into a spot between rMP (REAL Mac Pro) and Mini and reintroduce a serious computer with dual CPU and PCIE 3.0, USB3, etc.

I think the fact that 4K and 5K are fast becoming the norm whilst Apple still peddles the ancient TB displays with no hint of a new model is also telling.

I do not, however, have any hope of them doing any such thing. With profit margins on iWatch and the soon to follow iPen, why bother? They are fast becoming a "personal accessory" company.

Updated Apple displays will come when TB3 is available. One cable. I am willing to bet a lot of money on it. USB-C and TB3 are the last pieces of the missing puzzle for the upgrade that they want. TB3 can drive 2 x 4 K displays, but what throws the theory off is only display port 1.2 support.

 

[mattspace]

Since Apple's not endorsing use of TB to its fullest (GPU over TB), it's starting to seem a little redundant. Why have a bus that takes up PCIe lanes when nobody's using them and most of that functionality can carry over USB 3 ?? With Video too, it seems even more redundant.

My understanding, and someone correct me if Im wrong, is that eGPUs are specifically excluded by the TB spec itself, which is controlled by Intel.

 

[MacVidCards]

My understanding, and someone correct me if Im wrong, is that eGPUs are specifically excluded by the TB spec itself, which is controlled by Intel.

Yes & no.

Intel and Apple have put up a hist of roadblocks to keep them from happening.

But we have been working on them nonetheless.

I can have my nMP boot from (yes, with full boot screens, etc) a GTX780 6GB and run CUDA apps. Same with 2014 Mini, etc. Seems like card is inside for most part.

But you need to do 3 driver hacks and Intel won't license any enclosures worth a darn to do this with.

Apple or Intel could create wonderful ones tomorrow if they wanted to.

They don't want to. They would rather sell you a new computer every year or two.

 

[MMcCraryNJ]

The pro audio and video markets are embracing Thunderbolt for external device connectivity. Since TB is basically external PCIe, and TB2/TB3 carries enough PCIe bandwidth for these peripherals, it is also a good fit for PCIe-based internal peripherals that serve these markets. Whether anybody actually believes it or not, Apple is still the recommended way to go for computers to serve these industries. Put all of that together, and that means TB isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

I know it's probably very hard to believe for someone in the business of selling Mac-centric GPU upgrades, but there are other professional industries and use-cases that rely on TB other than the aftermarket GPU/eGPU crowd. I know, crazy, right?

USB in general, while an option in the pro audio industry, was never truly adopted for higher end equipment due to the inherent latency of the USB protocol (not to mention, slower sustained transfer speeds versus FW400, even though USB 2.0 has a slightly higher peak transfer than FW400). After years of being the standard, there are hardly any USB 3.0 audio interfaces out there...manufacturers have simply kept their USB 2.0 gear around. At the same time, higher end FireWire gear has moved onto Thunderbolt. And TB, with a $30 dongle, is completely backwards compatible with Firewire gear, making for excellent legacy support.

Your comparisons of USB 3.1 to TB are misplaced, pretty much. One is a consumer standard protocol, the other has been adopted in professional markets, as well as moving into the prosumer base (LG's beautiful UltraWide monitors, targeting Mac/Final Cut users, are Thunderbolt. Really nice, fast portable external SSD drives are TB).

It's kinda silly to actually believe USB 3.1 means TB is dead...and I think you know this. You're smarter than that. A lot of your posts on these sorts of topics (anything having to do with either the future of Apple's computers and the design choices of those computers, or the nMP in specific) are simply meant to spin the situation in order to bring yourself more business. "Is Apple abandoning Thunderbolt? Man, you know what's a great option? Buying a 2010 Mac Pro offhand and becoming my customer for your GPU needs!" You are a business man, and that's respectful in its own right. But anyone who keeps up with these forums can kinda see what you're spinning.

----------

I'll also add that USB 3.1 Type-C in specific is a mobile market thing. Smartphones, tablets, ahem, small portable computers). Apple will likely use it to replace the Lightning connector, and on their ultraportables (which the PC market is doing also). The next Nexus device from Google will apparently have it. Pretty sure Samsung is going to be using it on the Note 5.

This is a far cry from what Thunderbolt actually is.

 

[slughead]

The pro audio and video markets are embracing Thunderbolt for external device connectivity. Since TB is basically external PCIe, and TB2/TB3 carries enough PCIe bandwidth for these peripherals, it is also a good fit for PCIe-based internal peripherals that serve these markets. Whether anybody actually believes it or not, Apple is still the recommended way to go for computers to serve these industries. Put all of that together, and that means TB isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

What happens when PCs all start with USB-C with 3.1 - is 10Gbps good enough for most pro-audio/pro uses?

USB-C can also pass two unincapsulated PCIe lanes -- wont this fix latency issues as well and basically be a 2 lane version of TB ?

As with the death of firewire, we found out that it isn't about what's best, it's about what is "good enough." USB 2.0 wasn't better than FW800 but products made for it were not substantively worse, and were a heck of a lot more ubiquitous and cheaper.

Say in 2 years every PC (and every mac) ships with USB-C port running DP 1.3, 2 lanes of PCIe, USB 3.1, etc.... Oh, and the desktops also have PCIe 4.0 16x slots. What need is there really for TB3?

 

[Freyqq]

Eventually, they'll replace every thunderbolt port with USB C. Then, later, they'll replace every USB A with USB C. This is all years out though. If they find a way to do thunderbolt over a USB C connector, that would solve the problem well. I think it's possible with all the alt-mode configurations. Then, you can keep using your thunderbolt devices. All you need is a new cable or adapter.

 

[Pressure]

What happens when PCs all start with USB-C with 3.1 - is 10Gbps good enough for most pro-audio/pro uses?

USB-C can also pass two unincapsulated PCIe lanes -- wont this fix latency issues as well and basically be a 2 lane version of TB ?

As with the death of firewire, we found out that it isn't about what's best, it's about what is "good enough." USB 2.0 wasn't better than FW800 but products made for it were not substantively worse, and were a heck of a lot more ubiquitous and cheaper.

Say in 2 years every PC (and every mac) ships with USB-C port running DP 1.3, 2 lanes of PCIe, USB 3.1, etc.... Oh, and the desktops also have PCIe 4.0 16x slots. What need is there really for TB3?

Have in mind that they don't share the same protocol.

 

[MacVidCards]

Eventually, they'll replace every thunderbolt port with USB C. Then, later, they'll replace every USB A with USB C. This is all years out though. If they find a way to do thunderbolt over a USB C connector, that would solve the problem well. I think it's possible with all the alt-mode configurations. Then, you can keep using your thunderbolt devices. All you need is a new cable or adapter.

Yep, they'll be the thinnest computers on the planet, with the largest bag full of adapters and cables.


Between USB-C, TB2 and TB3 adapters Belkin will need a new factory.

 

[ActionableMango]

The only reason both USB-C and TB ports aren't on the MacBook together is that it was clearly designed for minimalists. If you buy the new MacBook and a bag of adapters, you bought the wrong laptop. OTOH, if your laptop has a plethora of ports that you never use, the new MacBook is just up your alley.

I don't see USB-C replacing Thunderbolt on a desktop like the Mac Pro. I feel that the next Mac Pro will have both USB and TB ports.

Maybe, MAYBE USB-C might replace TB on the iMac, because for some reason Apple thinks those need to be super thin.

 

[haralds]

Since USB-C can support DP 1.3, it may become the preferred monitor connection mechanism over Thunderbolt, especially if Apple wants to supply such monitors because their displays are primarily for their laptops. It will be likely that the next nMP includes USB-c ports.

Both USB-C and Thunderbolt simply tunnel the DP standard (as they do others like ethernet, USB, etc.) DP 1.3 will likely be supported with a Firmware upgrade or on new systems with Thunderbolt.