Intel’s Thunderbolt in 2014

Published by

Click here to post a comment for Intel’s Thunderbolt in 2014 on our message forum
data/avatar/default/avatar30.webp
Why are we still using bits to advertise speed? It is so misleading...
data/avatar/default/avatar16.webp
Because... ...this is not misleading... ...everything is based on this... ...it's the only appropriate way to represent data volume\speeds... ...it's not hard to convert values to other units... This is not a riddle 🙂
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/239/239932.jpg
Sound good. That bit about power delivery was more interesting to me :P
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/115/115710.jpg
Make it fast enough for external gpu's and things get interesting.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/239/239932.jpg
Make it fast enough for external gpu's and things get interesting.
Wow .. that would be really interesting for laptops!!
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/227/227994.jpg
This is just gonna end up like Firewire.
data/avatar/default/avatar11.webp
Not until all laptops start using 10Gb Ethernet connectors for sure. Thou external storage has soime speed limitations too, if you have NAS especially. And firewire was good at its time vs usb 2.0.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/211/211979.jpg
I'm liking the pc-pc connection that is a great idea. should take all the guesswork out of network shares for people that have trouble with that kind of stuff. I could make a super cheap NAS box too using that. Would also be good for Devices you don't want connected to the internet too. And would elimiate the need for multiple NICs and crossover ethernet cables as well. As far as adoption of Thunderbolt is concerned though it might have a problem since you need an addin card or more expensive motherboards to even use it. Same problem Firewire had in the beginning. Saying that USB 3.1 with its 10GB/s transfer rates looks very exciting. mainly because it would be backwards compatible and it would be more likely to be adopted since usb is a very popular standard already. The future of storage is looking exciting my friends with SATA Express and USB 3.1 on the horizon. :banana:
data/avatar/default/avatar16.webp
Because... ...this is not misleading... ...everything is based on this... ...it's the only appropriate way to represent data volume\speeds... ...it's not hard to convert values to other units... This is not a riddle 🙂
Wrong on most of those. >it isn't misleading Bit was introduced long ago but popularized during a period primarily for marketing purposes founded on a widespread confusion with a less-than-savvy consumer base. And capitalized on it. The same as ISPs later did. They will never stop using it because of it. >...everything is based on this... See above. >...it's the only appropriate way to represent data volume\speeds... My_opinions_are_facts.jpg >...it's not hard to convert values to other units... Nobody said it was. But, of course, for a consumer base that doesn't understand the difference, or is slow to catch on to the difference between bit and byte, it probably is. You're used to knowing the difference. So am I. But we're both irrelevant when it comes to the typical consumer base. Hence why what you're saying isn't really true now is it
data/avatar/default/avatar27.webp
Because... ...this is not misleading... ...everything is based on this... ...it's the only appropriate way to represent data volume\speeds... ...it's not hard to convert values to other units... This is not a riddle 🙂
This comment is so ridiculous. But while everyone uses Bit/s, Byte/s will seem strange, and you have to convert before comparing.