I dont have a problem with rumors closer to the announcement or more realistic ones. The problem I have is bigger sites like Engadget even publishing rumors about iPad 3 because some dick said it will happen.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Light Peak in mac pro
- Thread starter allupons
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I dont have a problem with rumors closer to the announcement or more realistic ones. The problem I have is bigger sites like Engadget even publishing rumors about iPad 3 because some dick said it will happen.
I was talking about Light Peak, but yes, I'm also pretty sure the March 3rd event is for iPad...
Do you think it is possible to put a light-peak PCIe card if and when they are released into the 2008,2009 mac pros and the last version the August 2010 mac pros?
Or does light peak only work with the new processors the Sandy Bridge processors?
Or is there another current factor that limits the 2008,2009 and 2010 mac pros from not being able to add light peak?
For streaming how would light Peak work?
Up to 10 gig of information in and out, to and from any device so streaming/reading from a hard drive up to 10 gig is this correct?
So to understand there is maximum of 10 gig and all devices connected share the pool of this 10 gig bus?
Instead of current read speeds such as 355MB/s, one is able to get 8,9 or even 10 gig speed a second is this correct, is this what is possible through light peak? How would they handle internal hard drives, would internal hard drives be possible? Or is light peak strictly for external connecting?
Have I understood light peak correctly, have I associated it correctly? I perhaps may not have.
Or does light peak only work with the new processors the Sandy Bridge processors?
Or is there another current factor that limits the 2008,2009 and 2010 mac pros from not being able to add light peak?
For streaming how would light Peak work?
Up to 10 gig of information in and out, to and from any device so streaming/reading from a hard drive up to 10 gig is this correct?
So to understand there is maximum of 10 gig and all devices connected share the pool of this 10 gig bus?
Instead of current read speeds such as 355MB/s, one is able to get 8,9 or even 10 gig speed a second is this correct, is this what is possible through light peak? How would they handle internal hard drives, would internal hard drives be possible? Or is light peak strictly for external connecting?
Have I understood light peak correctly, have I associated it correctly? I perhaps may not have.
Yep- waiting for apple to get a move on with peripherals- i.e. cinema display.
Need to get a new mac pro with two new apple displays and I just want one cable for each thing. Not seven different connectors.
Need to get a new mac pro with two new apple displays and I just want one cable for each thing. Not seven different connectors.
This is the Promise Pegasus one Apple is using in their Pics.
http://www.promise.com/storage/raid_series.aspx?region=en-global&m=192&rsn1=40&rsn3=47
http://www.promise.com/storage/raid_series.aspx?region=en-global&m=192&rsn1=40&rsn3=47
They've said that there will be adaptors coming, but these are only for connectivity, it won't make the machine go faster as the technology of FW400/FW800 is built completely different.
Personally I'd wait for the next generation, once any issues have been smoothed out, I think it's still too early days, I've seen it before.
As was reported here this morning, seems pretty clear:
- CNet's live coverage reveals that there are no plans to offer Thunderbolt PCIe cards. In fact, Intel says that you will need a new computer/motherboard to get Thunderbolt. That means Mac Pro owners won't be able to add it on to their systems.
10:25 a.m. (Dong Ngo) : There won't be TB PCIe cards it seems. You'll need a new computer.
10:34 a.m. (Dong Ngo) : There won't be add-in TB adapters, you'll need a new computer/motherboard that supports TB.
- CNet's live coverage reveals that there are no plans to offer Thunderbolt PCIe cards. In fact, Intel says that you will need a new computer/motherboard to get Thunderbolt. That means Mac Pro owners won't be able to add it on to their systems.
10:25 a.m. (Dong Ngo) : There won't be TB PCIe cards it seems. You'll need a new computer.
10:34 a.m. (Dong Ngo) : There won't be add-in TB adapters, you'll need a new computer/motherboard that supports TB.
Talk about a horrible decision. I guess Thunderbolt won't be coming to my house for a while. I would imagine that (and I'm assuming here that adapter cards are indeed possible; I've heard it both ways at this point) making that decision will really hurt adoption of the Thunderbolt data bus. It's a shame really, I thought that it was some pretty cool tech.
That's terrible news. So the existing Mac Pros, not to mention the hundreds of millions of existing Windows PCs, won't be able to add lightpeak.
Intel I'm sure has patents, so no third party adapters without their approval.
Intel I'm sure has patents, so no third party adapters without their approval.
No, but making the FW drives go faster isn't the point of the adaptors...
LP is basically adding 50 more USB2 ports to your Mac. You can now connect a dozen Firewire devices to a Macbook Pro with no speed issues.
THAT is a big deal.
And how many MacBookPro users need to do that? Four? Fourteen? Even four hundred? That's a big deal to virtually nobody, percentage-wise.
It is my understanding that it wasn't a decision as much as it was a requirement. I've heard that Thunderbolt requires direct access to the motherboard. Where did you hear otherwise?
How many Macbook Pro users would like USB3? eSATA? Macbook Pro can do all that now.
Basically the "I wish my Macbook Pro had port X" days are over. Light Peak can talk to any device.
From the technical documents I've seen, it doesn't. It requires direct memory access and possibly graphics, neither of which requires it to be on the motherboard.
As I mentioned, Intel has demoed it running on PCI-E many times.
I have a feeling the chip Intel is using is directly tied to Sandy Bridge's integrated graphics, possibly something custom on the Macbook Pro. Given that Intel mentioned that Light Peak didn't require Sandy Bridge and was open for competitors platforms., this implies that it's not fundamentally tied to Sandy Bridge motherboards, rather that Intel's implementation is.
After looking through the tech brief, I'm not really sure either way. Intel doesn't give a firm answer. Let's hope this isn't a play to sell more mobos.
http://www.intel.com/technology/io/thunderbolt/325136-001US_secured.pdf
The bigger issue is this means TB would be impossible to implement with anything other than integrated graphics...
I HIGHLY doubt that is the case considering how much Intel was talking about this being very adaptable to other architectures.
TB will be out for for PCI slots
you guys all panic way to quickly
by the end of this year you will see cards with out video support
Intel will not design something that big just one use, it may be limited to the mac just for start but will be open to PC soon
you guys all panic way to quickly
by the end of this year you will see cards with out video support
Intel will not design something that big just one use, it may be limited to the mac just for start but will be open to PC soon
First of all, what the hell is up with calling it "thunderbolt" instead of lightpeak?And what are we basing this "lightpeak will never be available through PCI slots" off of?
That sounds awful....
That sounds awful....
Lightpeak was the code name. Thunderbolt is the actual brand.
According to stuff I've read, Intel appears very focused on leveraging the integration of both display and data protocols with Thunderbolt... and doesn't appear interested in supporting a data-only protocol implementation. However, since the license is free, I suppose this shouldn't stop anyone from developing a PCIe Thunderbolt card that only does data. I could easily see someone like Lacie coming out with a card like they did with USB 3.0.
According to stuff I've read, Intel appears very focused on leveraging the integration of both display and data protocols with Thunderbolt... and doesn't appear interested in supporting a data-only protocol implementation. However, since the license is free, I suppose this shouldn't stop anyone from developing a PCIe Thunderbolt card that only does data. I could easily see someone like Lacie coming out with a card like they did with USB 3.0.
I'm surprised too... I liked Light Peak, although that makes more sense if the conductor is optical. However, even though the initial implementation is electrical only, that wouldn't preclude them from using that name especially since it already had some mindshare amongst tech followers.
A name like LighteningBolt would have made more sense since lightening is associated with both light and electricity. Given the icon, I have to assume this what they were actually aiming for. I can only guess that LighteningBolt was considered too much of a mouthful or, more likely, already trademarked.
Keep in mind that branding these days is a nightmare and only getting worse as every combination of english words (include mis-spelled derivatives) has long since been trademarked by someone for something.
EDIT: How long before someone comes out with a Thunderbolt peripheral called "Zeus"
A name like LighteningBolt would have made more sense since lightening is associated with both light and electricity. Given the icon, I have to assume this what they were actually aiming for. I can only guess that LighteningBolt was considered too much of a mouthful or, more likely, already trademarked.
Keep in mind that branding these days is a nightmare and only getting worse as every combination of english words (include mis-spelled derivatives) has long since been trademarked by someone for something.
EDIT: How long before someone comes out with a Thunderbolt peripheral called "Zeus"
Isn't Lightpeak basically PCIex4 technology with Display port built in? I'm guessing you'll be able to take the Display Port out of the equation and make a PCIe card and then run what ever cards possibly.
Apple don't have a monopoly on the technology, they're merely the manufacturer bringing out the product first.
Apple don't have a monopoly on the technology, they're merely the manufacturer bringing out the product first.