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.
iPod Thunderbolt For Next-Gen Ipods
- Thread starter Ryan Of Seattle
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Every thunderbolt design except one at the very end needs both input and output. For example, if you have a monitor connected, and you want to add an external hard drive, you unplug the monitor from the Mac, plug the hard drive into the Mac, plug the monitor into the hard drive. If you want to remove the external hard drive, you unplug the hard drive from the Mac, unplug the monitor from the hard drive, plug the monitor into the Mac. That's fine for a hard drive that is plugged in once and stays there. It is even better with monitor and external drive at my desk permanently, and when I move the MBP to the desk, I just plug in one connector.
But for an iPod it would be awful; three times as much work as USB.
"Standard" is 2.5 Watt only; 0.5 Ampere at 5 Volt.
These are actually good, original points instead of just shooting down the idea because of bandwidth. However, your first argument is also true for firewire (it too had a daisy-chain topology) yet Apple never had two ports for that. If it somehow mandated for TB to have two ports, the original firewire/USB to 30-pin cable had both firewire and USB. There's no reason a 30-pin to TB cable couldn't have two ends. It would be more expensive to make but when have Apple cables ever been cheap?
It's nice to think about, and even dream about, but I think that's about it. At least till about 2012 or later.
Well with Apple's new patent it certainly seems like it will be coming sooner than later. USB 2.0, 3.0, and TB seems like a winning combo!
(yes, I realize the patent technically described dual-channel display port, but I believe it is either the same thing or will make the iPods/Pad/Phone effectively compatible)
Yeah, I get it - we all want "faster."
Consider USB3 and wireless AC as far more likely than TB. TB costs quite a bit more as both ends of the cable need some "smarts" to do the negotiation. USB 3 is a simpler solution and certainly fast enough and when AC wireless is available, you wont even bother doing cable as it will be faster than what most need.
Just more peanuts from the gallery.
Consider USB3 and wireless AC as far more likely than TB. TB costs quite a bit more as both ends of the cable need some "smarts" to do the negotiation. USB 3 is a simpler solution and certainly fast enough and when AC wireless is available, you wont even bother doing cable as it will be faster than what most need.
Just more peanuts from the gallery.
I can easily see them going with USB 3.0 instead of Thunderbolt.
In fact, I think I'd prefer USB 3.0 to Thunderbolt and I don't even have an USB 3.0-compatible MacBook Pro... Speed-wise either one will be fine. The device will always be the bottleneck regardless of I/O bus.
In fact, I think I'd prefer USB 3.0 to Thunderbolt and I don't even have an USB 3.0-compatible MacBook Pro... Speed-wise either one will be fine. The device will always be the bottleneck regardless of I/O bus.