Thunderbolt but no USB3. iMac.

condra

Hello all.

Considering buying a new iMac. I've a few questions. If anyone can answer any of them, that would be extremely helpful.

Is the omission of USB 3 in the new iMacs something stressing over?

Is a Thunderbolt to USB3 adapter possible/likely in the future?

Is it likely that Apple will include USB3 in the next update to the iMac?

Portable Firewire hard-drives were almost non-existent as far as I know. Will Thunderbolt be widely supported and will there be portable thunderbolt hard-drives?

Thanks in advance for any thoughts.

psycjay

You'll be fine cas all the hardware you'll buy will be white with an apple on it

melekalikimaka

thunderbold will be widely supported imo very soon

whiterebel

condra wrote: »

Hello all.

Considering buying a new iMac. I've a few questions. If anyone can answer any of them, that would be extremely helpful.

Is the omission of USB 3 in the new iMacs something stressing over?

Is a Thunderbolt to USB3 adapter possible/likely in the future?

Is it likely that Apple will include USB3 in the next update to the iMac?

Portable Firewire hard-drives were almost non-existent as far as I know. Will Thunderbolt be widely supported and will there be portable thunderbolt hard-drives?

Thanks in advance for any thoughts.

I never had a problem gettIng portable FW drives

stimpson

I would imagine there will be TB -> USB3 adaptors in the future. LaCie have announced a TB drive http://www.lacie.com/us/products/product.htm?id=10549 , but it has no USB. There is bound to be TB/USB3 drives available in the future (if you need USB connectivity).

If HD bandwidth is important to you it's not a great time ot be buying (until Thunderbolt is fleshed out a little.) Personally, I rely on a modded Mac Mini with the Airport card replaced with a SATA card and a 4 bay eSATA JBOD setup (up to 16TB @ 3GB/s ) It will probably keep me ticking over for a while.

Kinky Slinky

Apple have exclusivity of thunderbolt until 2012 so it can't really go mainstream until 2012 if it were to go mainstream.
Thunderbolt is an apple and Intel creation, two heavyweight in the computer industry .
Thunderbolt offers twice the peak speed of USB 3.0
USB 3.0 is now being installed in most new computers this year
USB 3.0 is backward compatible with USB 2.0
There are a lot more USB 3.0 peripherals out there

Johnmb

condra wrote: »

Hello all.

Considering buying a new iMac. I've a few questions. If anyone can answer any of them, that would be extremely helpful.

Is the omission of USB 3 in the new iMacs something stressing over?

No, TB will be the main way to connect devices going forward. At the moment there's not that many devices using it because it is brand new, but USB3 is in a similar boat.

Is a Thunderbolt to USB3 adapter possible/likely in the future?

Probably, but you'd be unlikely to need them. There's no reason really to buy any USB3 devices at present.

Is it likely that Apple will include USB3 in the next update to the iMac?

No. TB is the superior technology, making USB3 effectively obsolete before it even got going. Apple never bothers with anything it considers obsolete, even if others continue to push it for a while longer.

Portable Firewire hard-drives were almost non-existent as far as I know. Will Thunderbolt be widely supported and will there be portable thunderbolt hard-drives?

Thanks in advance for any thoughts.

Thunderbolt will be supported by just about everybody within the next year or two. Intel own it and will be pushing it to everyone who uses their chips. They'll open out the license to those using AMD chips too I've no doubt. So everyone will have as easy access to it as they have to USB3, and given that TB is much faster as is, and potentially a lot faster again, there'll be no reason for anyone not to use it in their devices.

condra

psycjay wrote: »

You'll be fine cas all the hardware you'll buy will be white with an apple on it

macs fukes your gradeds balls.
mac cost 99999999999
etc

melekalikimaka wrote: »

thunderbold will be widely supported imo very soon

Widely supported compared to USB3? Firewire? I was under the impression Thunderbolt would never be widely supported, but remain an expensive alternative, like Firewire.
If TB set to be more widely supported and adapted than FW, well, that's great news. I hope you're right.

whiterebel wrote: »

I never had a problem gettIng portable FW drives

Turns out I was wrong about that. Apparently Lacie and others do portable FW hard drives. So I presume it's safe to assume the same will go for TB.

stimpson wrote: »

I would imagine there will be TB -> USB3 adaptors in the future.

Thanks for the reply. I read somewhere that it is definitely possible.

Johnmb wrote: »

No, TB will be the main way to connect devices going forward. At the moment there's not that many devices using it because it is brand new, but USB3 is in a similar boat.

I was under the impression USB3 is making great progress already. I was in Tesco recently and saw USB3 hard-drives for sale.

There's no reason really to buy any USB3 devices at present.

I'm not sure I follow. If I had an iMac with USB3, I would buy a USB3 hard-drive.

TB is the superior technology, making USB3 effectively obsolete before it even got going. Apple never bothers with anything it considers obsolete, even if others continue to push it for a while longer.

Firewire made USB2 obsolete but remained massively successful. I have one Firewire device, and about 20 USB2 devices.
You're telling me Apple won't be supporting USB3 in the next iMac? Would it even be expensive to include USB3 over USB2?

Thunderbolt will be supported by just about everybody within the next year or two. Intel own it and will be pushing it to everyone who uses their chips. They'll open out the license to those using AMD chips too I've no doubt. So everyone will have as easy access to it as they have to USB3, and given that TB is much faster as is, and potentially a lot faster again, there'll be no reason for anyone not to use it in their devices.

But in the near future, surely new iMac owners are missing out. I don't like the idea of a new iMac owner envying his mates hideous grey box PC because it has USB3.

I've been reading bits and pieces around the net and the lack of USB3 on the new iMacs seems to be a genuine concern. Speed is one thing, compatibility is another. Feck :mad:

psycjay

Johnmb wrote: »

No, TB will be the main way to connect devices going forward. At the moment there's not that many devices using it because it is brand new, but USB3 is in a similar boat.

How could you possibly know this, unless you can see into the future all anybody can do is speculate.

No. TB is the superior technology, making USB3 effectively obsolete before it even got going. Apple never bothers with anything it considers obsolete, even if others continue to push it for a while longer.

Just because it is faster does not mean it makes USB3.0 obsolete. Plus USB has the obvious advantage of being "Universal" and backward compatible. I had to laugh at your comment about apple not using equipment that is obsolete, they usually wait until technology is at least 2 years old before adopting it.

Thunderbolt will be supported by just about everybody within the next year or two. Intel own it and will be pushing it to everyone who uses their chips. They'll open out the license to those using AMD chips too I've no doubt. So everyone will have as easy access to it as they have to USB3, and given that TB is much faster as is, and potentially a lot faster again, there'll be no reason for anyone not to use it in their devices.

Again, you are basing this on pure speculation. You are the only person who I have heard to have this blind face in thunderbolt. I just wonder if intel had joined with another brand would you be so convinced that is it going to triumph.

Fact is, all we can do at this stage is speculate, however USB3.0 is being adopted and is the safer option at the moment. Only time will tell how well thunderbolt is adopted.

stimpson

condra wrote: »

macs fukes your gradeds balls.
mac cost 99999999999
etc

Best comeback ever

I've been reading bits and pieces around the net and the lack of USB3 on the new iMacs seems to be a genuine concern. Speed is one thing, compatibility is another. Feck :mad:

Thunderbolt is essentially an external PCI bus so compatability should not be an issue. My eSATA box also has USB connectivity and I'm sure most TB drives will ship with USB interfaces too.

Do you actually need a fast external bus at the moment? If not then I wouldn't lose too much sleep as there will be Thunderbolt drives that will blow USB3 out of the water.

condra

stimpson wrote: »

Do you actually need a fast external bus at the moment? If not then I wouldn't lose too much sleep as there will be Thunderbolt drives that will blow USB3 out of the water.

I can't help but feel it's highly likely that I'll own many USB3 devices in the future.
Cameras, phones, hard-drives, microphones, soundcards, midi controllers, flash drives, card adapters, hubs, printers, scanners, novelty peripherals...

Surely USB3 will be much more common in all of these things.

I think there was a similar situation once before with Apple laptops (gen 1 Macbook Pros?) where they were crippled with USB 1, despite having firewire.

Compatibility > Speed IMO

psycjay

Yes illegible comebacks are among my fav's too...

My point was that I'm sure Apple will manufacture products that will take advantage of TB. That is what they do. That is why they wanted to have the product exclusively for one year. Compatibility is not their concern, if it was they would have included USB3.0 as well as TB.

If compatibility is a concern for you then either wait for another year until apple put USB3.0 in their machines or buy a different system.

condra

Psycjay my apologies, I thought you were a troll from your first reply. Thanks for your contribution to the thread. It's been an interesting read.
(
the "gradeds balls" thing is a geeky apple troll meme, see here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gx-WBaSNrTQ&feature=player_embedded
)

Anyway. My concerns about the absence of USB3 have not been alleviated. I'll sit pretty for now, and hope that John was wrong in his prediction that Apple won't adopt USB3

stimpson

condra wrote: »

I think there was a similar situation once before with Apple laptops (gen 1 Macbook Pros?) where they were crippled with USB 1, despite having firewire.

Compatibility > Speed IMO

But you couldn't get a FireWire -> USB adaptor. You wont have that problem with TB as it is based on PCI-e.

And regarding speed, that is what will provide the killer ap for this tech. The original spec was to run over fiber and give silly speeds. Anyone saying speed doesn't matter is talking through their hat. It's the modern equivalent of saying 640k should be enough for anybody.

I can see the day when iOS devices are transferring @ 10gbs

OctavarIan

Kinky Slinky wrote: »

Apple have exclusivity of thunderbolt until 2012 so it can't really go mainstream until 2012 if it were to go mainstream.

Just popping in to correct this; they don't.

psycjay

No I apologise for sounding like a troll in my first post!

I think holding back on USB3.0 this year was done in a way to boost TB simply because early adopters will have no choice but to go for TB drives etc. Once the license opens up it would be crazy for them not to add USB3.0 because that will give other systems an advantage (as they will have both).

Most sites are assuming that TB and USB3.0 will function as Firewire and USB2.0 did. Therefore I would def want both.

Thanks for the advice on the meme btw

EDIT: watched the video

stimpson

psycjay wrote: »

Most sites are assuming that TB and USB3.0 will function as Firewire and USB2.0 did. Therefore I would def want both.

From the Apple Thunderbolt page:

With PCI Express technology, you can use existing USB and FireWire peripherals — even connect to*Gigabit Ethernet and Fibre Channel networks — using simple*adapters

Why ship usb3 onboard when you could ship a TB USB3 hub?

psycjay

Why put more than one USB on a machine when you would just ship a hub?

Why not put a small hard drive into a machine and ship a large external etc.

It's the same argument.

The machines have USB2.0 anyway, why not just replace those with USB3.0. More and more devices will take advantage of USB3.0 in the future so you will benefit from having the extra connections. Plus in the meantime they will still function for all the 2.0 devices you have.

stimpson

psycjay wrote: »

Why put more than one USB on a machine when you would just ship a hub?

Why not put a small hard drive into a machine and ship a large external etc.

It's the same argument.

The machines have USB2.0 anyway, why not just replace those with USB3.0. More and more devices will take advantage of USB3.0 in the future so you will benefit from having the extra connections. Plus in the meantime they will still function for all the 2.0 devices you have.

Cost. You need to provide for the cost of chipsets and worry about laptop design and heat dissipation etc. A hub could be sold as an accessory thereby keeping the price of the machine down.

And they want to push TB as a platform. It would make sense to do USB3 through TB as a stopgap.

Talisman

The Intel chipset won't provide USB 3.0 support until 2012, hence Apple won't have it until then either.

Talisman

stimpson wrote: »

If HD bandwidth is important to you it's not a great time ot be buying (until Thunderbolt is fleshed out a little.) Personally, I rely on a modded Mac Mini with the Airport card replaced with a SATA card and a 4 bay eSATA JBOD setup (up to 16TB @ 3GB/s ) It will probably keep me ticking over for a while.

Can you post more details of this mod?

stimpson

Talisman wrote: »

Can you post more details of this mod?

Let me get some dinner and I'll do up a proper thread with pics and PM you when it's done.

psycjay

stimpson wrote: »

Cost. You need to provide for the cost of chipsets and worry about laptop design and heat dissipation etc. A hub could be sold as an accessory thereby keeping the price of the machine down.

And they want to push TB as a platform. It would make sense to do USB3 through TB as a stopgap.

But we are not talking about a budget machine here we are talking about a premium machine. It would not increase the cost significantly by adding usb3.0. People pay for premium to avoid compromising and inconvenience. In this case you have both!

Therefore I am arguing that the reason is purely to promote TB (a point I also made earlier) and not to keep costs down.

psycjay

Talisman wrote: »

The Intel chipset won't provide USB 3.0 support until 2012, hence Apple won't have it until then either.

Ah, that makes more sense.. sorry apple..

Johnmb

psycjay wrote: »

How could you possibly know this, unless you can see into the future all anybody can do is speculate.

Given that the OP asked for thoughts, what you state above has to be one of the most blatantly obvious things ever, hardly worth the bother was it?

Just because it is faster does not mean it makes USB3.0 obsolete. Plus USB has the obvious advantage of being "Universal" and backward compatible. I had to laugh at your comment about apple not using equipment that is obsolete, they usually wait until technology is at least 2 years old before adopting it.

I'm not sure where you get that from, but Apple actually has a reputation for being an innovator, it leads, others follow. You don't have to be a Mac user to know that.

Again, you are basing this on pure speculation. You are the only person who I have heard to have this blind face in thunderbolt. I just wonder if intel had joined with another brand would you be so convinced that is it going to triumph.

What part is pure speculation?
That Intel own it? That's fact.
That Intel will push it to everyone they deal with? That's pretty obvious isn't it? Otherwise why would they bother developing it?
Opening the license to AMD chips is speculation, but given that those using those chips also often use Intel chips, it's a fair assumption once Intel don't lock the two licenses together.
That everybody will support it within the next couple of years? It's already being taken up by quite a few manufacturers, and that with only Apple using it. Once Intel release their developer kit you'll see TB all over the place. And finally, that TB is much faster than USB3? Again, that's a fact.
So a paragraph that you attempt to brush off as "pure speculation" actually contains 3 indisputable facts, one highly likely bit of speculation, and one piece of "pure speculation".

Fact is, all we can do at this stage is speculate, however USB3.0 is being adopted and is the safer option at the moment. Only time will tell how well thunderbolt is adopted.

melekalikimaka

leaving out the key advantage.
daisychaining

think tb is gonna finally put usb to rest.

psycjay

Johnmb wrote: »

Given that the OP asked for thoughts, what you state above has to be one of the most blatantly obvious things ever, hardly worth the bother was it?

Yes Op did ask for thoughts. A thought is "I think TB will be the main way to connect devices going forward" but you said "TB WILL be the main way to connect devices going forward". That is a statement of which there is implied truth. My reply was pointing out that you had no basis for this statement. That IMO was worth the bother.

I'm not sure where you get that from, but Apple actually has a reputation for being an innovator, it leads, others follow. You don't have to be a Mac user to know that.

No they don't actually, in the computer world Apple has a reputation of bringing currently available tech to the masses. That is good marketing but not innovation. The technology in mac's has generally been available in other systems prior to its adoption (this is often a good thing from a stability point of view). TB is an exception to this.

not sure what you meant about being a mac user, don't think that statement was worth it do you?

What part is pure speculation?
That Intel own it? That's fact.
That Intel will push it to everyone they deal with? That's pretty obvious isn't it? Otherwise why would they bother developing it?
Opening the license to AMD chips is speculation, but given that those using those chips also often use Intel chips, it's a fair assumption once Intel don't lock the two licenses together.
That everybody will support it within the next couple of years? It's already being taken up by quite a few manufacturers, and that with only Apple using it. Once Intel release their developer kit you'll see TB all over the place. And finally, that TB is much faster than USB3? Again, that's a fact.
So a paragraph that you attempt to brush off as "pure speculation" actually contains 3 indisputable facts, one highly likely bit of speculation, and one piece of "pure speculation".

Your paragraph began with the conclusion that..

“Thunderbolt will be supported by just about everybody within the next year or two.”


You then proceeded to base this conclusion on a number of premises, some facts, and some speculation. Facts + Speculation = Speculation. Therefore your conclusion was speculation.

stimpson

psycjay wrote:

No they don't actually, in the computer world Apple has a reputation of bringing currently available tech to the masses. That is good marketing but not innovation.

LOL. I'll just leave this here. I'm sure you can find one with the firsts for this millennium.

The Apple II was the first personal computer to offer colour graphics [1977]
VisiCalc, first spreadsheet program, released for the Apple II [1979]
First PC maker to reach $1 billion in annual sales [1982]
First personal computer (Apple Lisa) to use a GUI (Graphical User Interface) [1983]
First personal computer company to use a mouse [1983]
First personal computer with dynamic memory allocation [1984]
First computer with API programming support (the Toolbox) and a graphics API (QuickDraw) [1984]
Built-in LAN networking [1984]
Built-in sound [1984]
First personal computer to use 3.5 inch floppies disks that most PC users now use [1984]
Self-configuring LAN networking [1984]
Microsoft Word is released on the Mac only (Windows is yet to appear) [1984]
Microsoft Excel is released on the Mac only (Windows is yet to appear) [1984]
PostScript printer [1985]
Built-in SCSI [1985]
Disability support [1985]
Aldus PageMaker is released, ushering the concept of desktop publishing [1985]
Apple was the first to allow use of multiple monitors [1997]
Microsoft PowerPoint is released 3 years before it will appear on Windows is yet to appear) [1987]
Address 8 MB RAM [1988]
Hypercard - objects [1988]
Optional Unix OS [1988]
Multitasking [1988]
16 million colours [1988]
First to introduce a superdrive floppy drive that could read and write Mac, DOS, OS/2, and ProDOS floppies [1998]
Apple invented True Type fonts (Reference) [1990]
Built-in sound input [1990]
32 bit Operating System [1990]
Built-in file sharing [1990]
QuickTime - the first standard architecture for dynamic media [1991]
QuickTime for Windows - first cross-platform dynamic media standard [1992]
Auto docking portable computer [1992]
Portable with full I/O [1992]
First to ship a personal computer with built-in CD-ROM [1992]
First worldwide language support for an operating system (Worldscript) [1992]
Apple released the Newton and used the new term "PDA" (Personal Digital Assistant) to describe it [1993]
First unified telephony and e-mail architecture for a personal computer operating system (PowerTalk and PowerShare) [1993]
NTSC video input and output [1993]
First personal computer with built-in TV and CD stereo system (Macintosh TV) [1993]
Speech recognition [1993]
Speech synthesis [1993]
First to provide colour-matching technology built-in to an operating system (ColorSync) [1993]
The first computer to introduce built-in microphones on its chassis (Colour Classic) [1993]
80486/Windows machine inside a Mac [1994]
RISC microprocessors [1994]
Apple was the first company to release a laptop with a trackpad instead of a trackball or nubby [1994]
First panoramic VR technology for personal computers (QuickTime VR) [1994]
Invented Firewire technology for connection video cameras to computers for easy video editing (reference) [1995]
2nd generation RISC [1995]
Delivered desktop Java applications [1996]
First to ship a personal computer *without* a Floppy Drive [1998]
First computer manufacturer to use solely USB as a means of connecting peripherals, with no serial, ADB or SCSI ports [1998]
First portable computer with wireless networking capability built in [AirPort] [1999]

Johnmb

psycjay wrote: »

Yes Op did ask for thoughts. A thought is "I think TB will be the main way to connect devices going forward" but you said "TB WILL be the main way to connect devices going forward". That is a statement of which there is implied truth. My reply was pointing out that you had no basis for this statement. That IMO was worth the bother.

I have a very strong basis for the statement, as I went through. Since I never claimed to be a prophet, it was obviously speculation, as all statements about future technology is.

No they don't actually, in the computer world Apple has a reputation of bringing currently available tech to the masses. That is good marketing but not innovation. The technology in mac's has generally been available in other systems prior to its adoption (this is often a good thing from a stability point of view). TB is an exception to this.

LOL! This would seem to indicate a lack of understanding of the word "innovation". Also, see stimpson's post above.

not sure what you meant about being a mac user, don't think that statement was worth it do you?

You said: "I just wonder if intel had joined with another brand would you be so convinced that is it going to triumph." Work it out.

Your paragraph began with the conclusion that..

“Thunderbolt will be supported by just about everybody within the next year or two.”


You then proceeded to base this conclusion on a number of premises, some facts, and some speculation. Facts + Speculation = Speculation. Therefore your conclusion was speculation.

One part was speculation, based on a number of facts which were also given. You attempted to deceive by claiming the whole thing was "pure speculation".

psycjay

That is a list of innovations from the 70's 80's and 90's. I think that actually supports my argument. We are in 2011. Seems like apple has been "following" for the past 12 years.

Kinky Slinky

OctavarIan wrote: »

Just popping in to correct this; they don't.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/02/24/intel_details_thunderbolt_as_exclusive_to_apple_until_2012.html

psycjay

Johnmb wrote: »

I have a very strong basis for the statement, as I went through. Since I never claimed to be a prophet, it was obviously speculation, as all statements about future technology is.

You claimed it was a given. I know it was speculation. You may not have intended to do it but your choice of words expressed that.

LOL! This would seem to indicate a lack of understanding of the word "innovation". Also, see stimpson's post above.

See previous my post.

You said: "I just wonder if intel had joined with another brand would you be so convinced that is it going to triumph." Work it out.

Ahh, now it makes sense.

One part was speculation, based on a number of facts which were also given. You attempted to deceive by claiming the whole thing was "pure speculation".

I was referring to what you were saying in your paragraph. The central point of it. The conclusion. I was not trying to deceive.

stimpson

psycjay wrote: »

That is a list of innovations from the 70's 80's and 90's. I think that actually supports my argument. We are in 2011. Seems like apple has been "following" for the past 12 years.

:rolleyes:

MS's Vista demo, except demonstrated on OSX 10.5

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2674791799339834706#

Johnmb

psycjay wrote: »

That is a list of innovations from the 70's 80's and 90's. I think that actually supports my argument. We are in 2011. Seems like apple has been "following" for the past 12 years.

LOL. iPod, iPhone, iPad. Unibody construction. ARM chips that outperform all others. Battery performance that can't be matched. iTunes. App Store. Mac App Store. Web Kit. Mac OSX. iChat. Facetime. Time Machine. iLife. etc.

Kinky Slinky

Johnmb wrote: »

LOL. iPod, iPhone, iPad. Unibody construction. ARM chips that outperform all others. Battery performance that can't be matched. iTunes. App Store. Mac App Store. Web Kit. Mac OSX. iChat. Facetime. Time Machine. iLife. etc.

FYP

psycjay

Thanks for that, at least vista is getting a little more up present time

But as I recall this discussion was originally about hardware. At least that's what I was referring to.

Of course OS developers will continue to copy each other on different features, but that does not make one the "leader".

@Johnmb

I did say "in the computer world" because I knew I would get an Iphone thrown in my face

Johnmb

Kinky Slinky wrote: »

FYP

Are you saying iTunes wasn't an innovation? It was, and one that competitors are still trying to imitate and catch up to

psycjay wrote: »

But as I recall this discussion was originally about hardware. At least that's what I was referring to.

Then that still leaves: iPod, iPhone, iPad. Unibody construction. ARM chips that outperform all others. Battery performance that can't be matched. That's just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are others. The different iPod models probably should be listed separately rather than lumped in together.

Of course OS developers will continue to copy each other on different features, but that does not make one the "leader".

The one that the others tend to copy would have good claim to being the "leader".

@Kinky Slinky

I did say "in the computer world" because I knew I would get an Iphone thrown in my face

The iPhone is a portable computer. It's a lot more powerful than my first computer. It, along with the iPods and iPad, is basically a peripheral, and one that will most likely end up using a TB connection in the future.

psycjay

The Irony is that the latest upgrade to one of the key innovations in the world of computers is not currently on apples line of products

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/the_100_greatest_tech_innovations_of_all_time?page=0,9

@John

We were clearly talking about Personal Computers, be it macs or whatever. To define. A desktop or a laptop computer. Not smartphones, software, operating systems etc.

stimpson

psycjay wrote: »

Of course OS developers will continue to copy each other on different features, but that does not make one the "leader".

If one company is constantly copied by another then they are the leader. That's what the word means.

Perhaps you could give some examples of tech that Apple has copied from another PC manufacturer or OS developer.

melekalikimaka

i think pyscjay is peed off cos he got a dell instead of mbp off santa

psycjay

stimpson wrote: »

If one company is constantly copied by another then they are the leader. That's what the word means.

Perhaps you could give some examples of tech that Apple has copied from another PC manufacturer or OS developer.

No because that would be a pointless cat and mouse game and it is not required. I am not trying to start yet another mac vs PC debate, that has been done to death, and trying to establish who is the leader is pointless. They are both useful, both have good things and bad things, although fan boys on both sides often deny any aspect of weakness.

The innovation argument started in reference to the hardware used in macs. My point was that apple usually (and have done in recent years) are not early adopters of brand new hardware, I also pointed out the benefit of this in terms of stability (less issues with drivers etc) which is one of the reasons why they are so popular in multimedia industry.

psycjay

melekalikimaka wrote: »

i think pyscjay is peed off cos he got a dell instead of mbp off santa

Guess again mate

Kinky Slinky

Are you saying iTunes wasn't an innovation? It was, and one that competitors are still trying to imitate and catch up to

It was innovative ten years ago but iTunes is one of the laggyest pieces of software I know of now.I absolutely hate using it, Why do I have to download 100mb everytime for an update ? It's the biggest piece of bloatware I know of and it's always trying to get you to install more crapware at every update

What was apples latest innovation in regards to iTunes ... ping that social network that no one ever talks about or uses

iTunes 1


Hardly innovative to be honest, hasn't really changed that much in appearance and only adds new features(non-essential) now and again.Honestly the amount of features on iTunes that a typical user will never use is ridiculous. The only reason that iTunes is so popular is because of the hardware associated with it.Zune software now that's innovation.Brilliant interface , very easy to use but as per usual micro$hit mange to ruin a perfectly brilliant product by not supporting/Marketing it enough

stimpson

psycjay wrote: »

No because that would be a pointless cat and mouse game and it is not required. I am not trying to start yet another mac vs PC debate, that has been done to death, and trying to establish who is the leader is pointless. They are both useful, both have good things and bad things, although fan boys on both sides often deny any aspect of weakness.

The innovation argument started in reference to the hardware used in macs. My point was that apple usually (and have done in recent years) are not early adopters of brand new hardware, I also pointed out the benefit of this in terms of stability (less issues with drivers etc) which is one of the reasons why they are so popular in multimedia industry.

Even if you restrict it to Mac hardware its not true as johnmb has shown. Apple were the first company to ship an exclusively USB computer. I remember people saying it would fail at the time due to lack of 3rd party support. Either you don't know your stuff or you're trying to dig yourself out of a hole.

psycjay

stimpson wrote: »

Even if you restrict it to Mac hardware its not true as johnmb has shown. Apple were the first company to ship an exclusively USB computer. I remember people saying it would fail at the time due to lack of 3rd party support. Either you don't know your stuff or you're trying to dig yourself out of a hole.

What is not true? Again I'm talking about modern macs

condra

melekalikimaka wrote: »

leaving out the key advantage.
daisychaining

think tb is gonna finally put usb to rest.

Firewire has had daisy-chaining for years and made up probably less than 1% of peripherals.

condra

Talisman wrote: »

The Intel chipset won't provide USB 3.0 support until 2012, hence Apple won't have it until then either.

Interesting. I'll cut Apple some slack then..... though I won't be buying an iMac until USB3 is support, hopefully in early 2012.

OctavarIan

Kinky Slinky wrote: »

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/02/24/intel_details_thunderbolt_as_exclusive_to_apple_until_2012.html

Nice try, but point me to the section of that article that states Apple have an exclusive on Thunderbolt until 2012.

Apple don't have an exclusive, Intel just don't expect any other manufacturer to include Thunderbolt until next year. Sony reportedly are including it in a new laptop that should be out soon, although they're using a USB3 connector instead of a mini displayport.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/24/intel-refutes-apple-exclusivity-for-thunderbolt-i-o-lacie-and-p/

Johnmb

Kinky Slinky wrote: »

It was innovative ten years ago ....

And since the request was for Apple innovations from the last 12 years, it was correct to include it, even from your own description.

psycjay wrote: »

@John

We were clearly talking about Personal Computers, be it macs or whatever. To define. A desktop or a laptop computer. Not smartphones, software, operating systems etc.

Actually, I would have thought we were clearly talking about peripherals, as they are what TB will be used to connect to, and how many peripherals (and their quality) come on line will determine the success, or otherwise, of TB. But, again, even if you want to narrow down more and more to ignore all the innovations of Apple, you still have from my post:
Unibody construction. ARM chips (I'm counting iPad as a portable computer, as that is what it is) that outperform all others. Battery performance that can't be matched.
And as I said, they are off the top of my head, I'm sure I'd find many others if I put a bit of effort in. Removing Floppy disk drives was also quite innovative in its time, just can't remember how long ago they did that.

psycjay

Johnmb wrote: »

And since the request was for Apple innovations from the last 12 years, it was correct to include it, even from your own description.


Actually, I would have thought we were clearly talking about peripherals, as they are what TB will be used to connect to, and how many peripherals (and their quality) come on line will determine the success, or otherwise, of TB. But, again, even if you want to narrow down more and more to ignore all the innovations of Apple, you still have from my post:
Unibody construction. ARM chips (I'm counting iPad as a portable computer, as that is what it is) that outperform all others. Battery performance that can't be matched.
And as I said, they are off the top of my head, I'm sure I'd find many others if I put a bit of effort in. Removing Floppy disk drives was also quite innovative in its time, just can't remember how long ago they did that.

Your argument was that macs lead and others follow. Now if you look at macs current line, the only thing that they have that other machines don't is TB. On the other hand, there are many competitive models out there which also have features such as 3D, blu-ray, HDMI. So in terms of their laptops and desktops they are not leading anything.

Giving examples of past innovations is fine but that does not mean that they are currently leading in relation to technology. If I wanted to see the latest tech in a laptop or desktop, I would not look at apple, in fact I would have to look across many different manufacturers.

Apple did lead the smartphone revolution, they brought the portable music player to the masses, had many key innovation in regards to their OS and software, I'm not denying that, I'll take my hat off, and perhaps they used to be more on top of the game in terms of tech in their computers but I feel they have lagged behind these last few years. One of the reason's why is because they are very stubborn in putting standard peripheral connections on their products.

Johnmb

psycjay wrote: »

Your argument was that macs lead and others follow.

Actually, I said Apple lead, others follow. It may sound pedantic, but I wasn't limiting myself to just computers using the Mac OS.

Now if you look at macs current line, the only thing that they have that other machines don't is TB. On the other hand, there are many competitive models out there which also have features such as 3D, blu-ray, HDMI. So in terms of their laptops and desktops they are not leading anything.

They also use unibody design. Their battery life can't be matched. They also have the iPad, which takes computing to a new level of portability, and which the industry as a whole is scrambling to try and imitate. I have yet to see any manufacturer design anything remotely as good as the iMac I have in work (27"), with its wireless keypad and magic mouse (soon to be updated to the magic trackpad, another innovation), although I've seen a few bad attempts. No laptop I've seen, or used, can match my 17" MacBook Pro that I'm currently typing on for looks, sturdiness, weight, battery life, the MagSafe power connector, multi touch trackpad, etc. Although, my one peeve about it is the lack of Blu Ray. I use an adapter for HDMI, and don't mind that because I think it would be much worse to end up with loads of connection points trying to cater to everything.

Giving examples of past innovations is fine but that does not mean that they are currently leading in relation to technology. If I wanted to see the latest tech in a laptop or desktop, I would not look at apple, in fact I would have to look across many different manufacturers.

Looking at many different ones is good, not looking at Apple means you'll be missing out on future technologies. Even stuff you find in other products that may look poor and seem like a failure can be used by Apple in innovative ways to make it a huge success.

Apple did lead the smartphone revolution, they brought the portable music player to the masses, had many key innovation in regards to their OS and software, I'm not denying that, I'll take my hat off, and perhaps they used to be more on top of the game in terms of tech in their computers but I feel they have lagged behind these last few years. One of the reason's why is because they are very stubborn in putting standard peripheral connections on their products.

I'd say they've lagged behind in the sense that they are not as far ahead of the others as they used to be, but they're still ahead. They only error I think they've made with the Mac is the lack of Blu-Ray support. I know why they did it, and their reasoning, I just think they're wrong. But if they turn out to be correct, as they were when they dropped support for floppy disks, then even that one problem will not be such a big deal (but I'll still want a Blu-Ray player, I like to have tangible things that I can hold, not relying on downloads or cloud storage, etc.)