Thunderbold port (light peak) on new macs

[wgscott]

Will this have a beneficial effect for us, or is it irrelevant? (Steve's BD present to us I guess.)

 

[zerung]

All experts keep on saying no!!

 

But i want some for myself. At 10Gbps, I can stream roll my datas from NAS to computer, do my images, transfer my videos, etc....What an interface!!

 

 

 

[Akapod]

... but I don't think the dramatic increase in bandwidth will have any (direct) effect. USB has problems, but they're not bandwidth-related.

 

Intel, however, says "Thunderbolt technology was specifically designed with professional audio and video applications in mind, where the inherently low latency and highly accurate time synchronization features play a crucial role."

 

That does seem interesting.

 

(The link above also has expressions of interest (if not outright commitments) from some big players in pro audio (Apogee, Universal Audio) and storage (La Cie, Western Digital).)

 

[nigel]

Of course this is beneficial for us. As soon as the first Thunderbolt to USB adapter is available, we will have a whole new category of audiophile tweaks to argue about. I bet someone is designing an audiophile Thunderbolt cable right now.

 

[Lars]

"I bet someone is designing an audiophile Thunderbolt cable right now."

 

I hope its solid silver wire

 

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

I heard the first Thunderbolt implementations will use electrical wires such as copper but the next generations will use optical.

 

Anyone else hear such a thing?

 

[Mister Wednesday]

Chris,

 

Excerpted from the Macworld article today:

 

The technology was specially designed for audio and video enthusiasts, Intel said. Users can get real-time processing by synchronizing high-bandwidth audio and video between PCs and other devices, cutting the lag time that exists with other technologies.

 

Contrary to what Intel said when the company first talked about Thunderbolt in 2009, it will not use light to provide high-bandwidth data transfers between devices, an Intel spokeswoman said in an e-mail, without providing further detail.

 

Initial builds of Thunderbolt will be based on copper, David Perlmutter, executive vice president and general manager of Intel’s Architecture Group said in an interview at CES last month. Optical technology is expensive and will be implemented over time as it gets cheaper, he said.

 

For the majority of user needs today, copper is good, Perlmutter said. But data transmission is much faster over fiber optics, which will increasingly be used by vendors in Thunderbolt implementations.

 

You can view the full article on the Macworld website at:

 

http://www.macworld.com/article/158137/2011/02/thunderbolt_launch.html

 

Regards,

 

Mister Wednesday

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Thanks Mister Wednesday. That's exactly the information I needed.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

It also appears that the maximum length for a Light Peak / Thunderbolt copper cable with be less than 2 meters.

 

[Akapod]

According to Intel's data sheet (attached below).

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Thanks for the datasheet!

 

[PeterSt]

From http://www.apple.com/thunderbolt/

 

Which means you can connect external devices like RAID arrays and video capture solutions directly to MacBook Pro — and get PCI Express performance. That’s a first for notebooks.

 

Oh is it ?

 

How come I have a notebook with PCIe interface for two years or so ?

Ah wait, maybe mine is called a laptop.

 

Ok, sorry.

And no MAC for sure.

 

Peter

 

PS: I will admit that not many people are around who actually know this.

 

[losingmyreligion]

 

 

Very interestingly, the new Macbook Pros have a Firewire 800 port, along with the one port to rule them all - Thunderbolt(aka LightPeak) - but only USB 2.0 ports, NOT 3.0

 

 

Perhaps reports that Apple "pressured" Intel into an early release (i.e., copper instead of fiber) are true, and for probably for purposes of not letting USB 3.0 get too far out in front of LightPeak?

 

 

Apple seems poised to insure that when death of Firewire comes, it is at the hands of LightPeak, rather than USB 3.0.

 

 

 

Clay

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Akapod]

LaCie just announced its first Thunderbolt peripheral, a 500 GB hard drive (using two 250 GB SSDs). They expect to offer it for sale this summer.

 

No word on price. Any guesses?

 

[wgscott]

If I can get the above drive and a mini with this connection option, I would be very happy...

 

... well, after I upgrade DAC, pre-amp, amp, speakers, ...

 

[Akapod]

The unibody Mac Mini was introduced in June 2010, so an upgrade doesn't seem crazy at all.

 

Also, the Mac Mini has been working off of the Intel Core Due processors since 2006, so a product refresh into an i3 chip (or even an i5 -- both are available for iMacs) plus Thunderbolt would be very attractive.

 

[Akapod]

Slashgear enters the fray with:

 

Apple’s confirmation of Thunderbolt on the newly refreshed MacBook Pro range this morning could lend weight to speculation earlier that the new iPad 2 will have a Light Peak connection of its own. Examination of the various batches of leaked iPad 2 cases had led to suggestions that the mysterious opening on the top edge could be for a smaller-than-USB connector; that would certainly fit in with the Mini DisplayPort connection Thunderbolt has been confirmed to use.

 

The adoption of the Light Peak based connection standard would also allow Apple to broaden its peripheral options with the iPad, since Thunderbolt supports gigabit ethernet, DisplayPort/HDMI/DVI/VGA video outputs, storage and more. Of course, Apple would have to add in software support for that in iOS.

 

[Mister Wednesday]

Greetings all,

 

Another new article on the Macworld website with more information on Thunderbolt:

 

http://www.macworld.com/article/158145/2011/02/thunderbolt_what_you_need_to_know.html

 

Regards,

 

Mister Wednesday

 

[audiozorro]

Is Thunderbolt backward-compatible with USB and FireWire?

 

Third-party vendors will sell adapters, available sometime this spring, that let you connect USB, FireWire 400, and FireWire 800 devices to Thunderbolt ports.

 

Will Thunderbolt eventually replace FireWire and USB on Macs?

 

Perhaps, although eventually could be a very long time. Thunderbolt is brand new, and as such it will be a while before it becomes anywhere near as commonplace as USB and FireWire. It’s expected to be widely adopted by vendors and peripheral makers over the next few years, but until most popular peripherals are available with Thunderbolt connections, we don’t expect these legacy connections to disappear entirely from the Mac lines.

 

My question is will using Thunderbolt/Firewire adapters or Thunderbolt/USB adapters have a negative affect on the sound thru USB or FW DACs?

 

[1audio]

The USB interface will use the pciexpress mode of Thunderbolt to connect. A neat trick but not something that did not exist before. The other link is displayport, which is a close cousin to HDMI. I don't recommend HDMI myself since the audio is inserted into video refresh which doesn't line up neatly with audio sample rates.

 

This is the best info I have found so far. Hopefully I will know more next week if NDA's don't muzzle me. http://www.edn.com/blog/Brian_s_Brain/40577-Thunderbolt_With_Light_Peak_Apple_And_Intel_Give_USB_3_A_Jarring_Jolt.php

 

 

[zerung]

Brian Dipart in his article 'Thunderbolt: With Light Peak, Apple And Intel Give USB 3 A Jarring Jolt'

makes a compelling case to some digital direction by Apple.

 

Quote:

Drop integrated support for the floppy drive

Add support for various USB iterations

Add support for 802.11 Wi-Fi (again, in its various iterations)

Migrate from CRTs to LCDs

Migrate from CCFL to LED backlights for those LCDs

Drive Ethernet transitions, most recently to GbE

Adopt IEEE 1394 FireWire

Embrace solid-state drive (SSD) storage, and

Drop the integrated optical drive

Unquote.

I wonder where is Apple heading to, do they have a goal in sight or are they flying by the seat of their pants? I think the latter perhaps?

 

Can we argue that Apple's development are generated by a benign cause, or simply a commercial and aesthetic design development? There have been many cases where better system has failed to take off and history has been written by more less deserving candidates...

 

If read this correctly, one possibility of the thunderbolt development is less cable connection between the systems. Which my wife will welcome....

 

[One and a half]

If 10GB/s transfer speeds between the PC and devices is sustained, the error rates in clock synchronisation is getting to be close to zero.

If that's the case, jitter's effects on PC to say a DAC interface are "gone", the challenge now (apart from a thousand more I guess!) is to make a DAC capable of decoding such a vast amount of throughput.

 

On cables:

 

"Thunderbolt cables may be electrical or optical; both use the same Thunderbolt connector. An active electrical-only cable provides for connections of up to 3 meters in length, and provides for up to 10W of power deliverable to a bus-powered device. And an active optical cable provides for much greater lengths; tens of meters."

 

I hope for remote NAS uses, the tens of meters turns out to be at least 10 tens to emulate Ethernet's maximum limit.

 

[One and a half]

The copper versions will be able to power devices directly up to 10W, anything to get rid of wall warts, I'm all for.

 

http://www.intel.com/technology/io/thunderbolt/325136-001US_secured.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

[labjr]

To me, the only advantage of Thunderbolt has for audiophile DACs, over async USB or Firewire seems to be the optical part of it for galvanic isolation and long runs of cable. As with async USB or Firewire, the DAC would still need to control the clocking to eliminate jitter from the interface.

 

[Codifus]

To me, the only advantage of Thunderbolt has for audiophile DACs, over async USB or Firewire seems to be the optical part of it for galvanic isolation and long runs of cable. As with async USB or Firewire, the DAC would still need to control the clocking to eliminate jitter from the interface.

 

I agree. The Macintosh Computer based music server can now have the Mac remotely located and have a really long optical cable connecting it to the DAC. That DAC will appear in audio midi, unlike the airport express or ATV. Also unlike the AE or ATV, iTunes will "talk" to the remote DAC at speeds up to 24/192 over optical, and probably beyond.

Just think: your Amarra or Pure Music Macintosh server sitting in the other room, away from the stereo. Your stereo's isolation from the computer would be complete.

 

CD