backtop


Print 90 comment(s) - last by DKantUno.. on Nov 13 at 12:24 AM


Apple is denying its customers access to a hot new technology PC users are enjoying -- USB 3.0.  (Source: Apple)
Macs can't be on par with certain PCs quite yet

USB 3.0 is slowly taking off in the PC market.  Thanks to early support from motherboard manufacturers like ASUS and Gigabyte, some PC customers now have access to USB 3.0 ports.  And the growing array of USB 3.0-ready devices, like SuperTalent's new Flash sticks andSeagate's new 3.0 TB external HDD allow users to increasingly take advantage of this new standard.

In the face of growing PC use, a Mac user named Tom Kruk reportedly emailed Apple CEO Steve Jobs asking him when Apple's customers might get the gift of USB 3.0.  To his surprise Mr. Jobs replied, but the reply basically made it clear that Apple wasn't going to upgrade its lineup to employ the new tech until 2011 at the earliest.

Mr. Jobs, who typically writes one or two-line replies, wrote:

We don’t see USB 3 taking off at this time. No support from Intel, for example.

To be fair, Mr. Jobs is correct about Intel's lack of support.  The world's largest chipmaker and one of the largest makers of motherboards has been sluggish at adopting the faster standard, which was first ratified by the USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF) on November 17, 2008. Intel will finally push out USB 3.0 sometime in 2011.

That said, the appeal of USB 3.0 seems obvious.  The specification requires that manufacturers achieve a throughput of 3.2 Gbit/s -- a nearly seven-fold increase from USB 2.0's throughput of 480 Mbit/s.  The spec also supports six 150 milliamp loads, versus five 100 milliamp loads for USB 2.0.

Apple despite claiming to have "cutting edge" hardware often lags behind the highest end enthusiast hardware.  It's common to be able to pick up an ASUS laptop with greatly superior hardware specs than a MacBook Pro that costs nearly twice as much (granted the MacBook Pro is much lighter and features a slick aluminum unibody case). 

Apple also made the curious decision to stop installing Flash on its Mac computers.  Flash is one of the most-used multimedia technologies on the internet, and recently became much more efficient, thanks to the inclusion of hardware support.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

The ones most screwed on this are...
By theArchMichael on 11/1/2010 10:05:49 AM , Rating: 5
...probably Apples most loyal customers, Video Editing / graphical design people using Adobe and Final Cut. Both of these crowds make extensive use of external storage.




RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By atlmann10 on 11/1/2010 10:19:39 AM , Rating: 2
rofl; probably Apples most loyal customers, I find that funny. As far as computers go for the last decade until recently (IE: the last 3 years) the largest amount of users which would most likely be 45-65% bought an Apple for multimedia manipulation of some kind. Not only would these users gain a very desirable usage in external storage, they would gain a very desirable upgrade in cameras and most video processing equipment, iPhones, Sound equipment and on and on even if said equipment was USB 2.0.

This is because a USB 3.0 port accepts the maximum transfer level of USB 2.0 equipped equipment. Just as a example on my 2 desktops I have used both the front ports which are USB 2 to transfer photos, and I have used the USB 3 ports as well. The USB 3 ports take roughly 3 minutes maximum to transfer a data card from my camera, whereas the USB 2 ports take 45 minutes to just over an hour.


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By bplewis24 on 11/1/2010 11:51:17 AM , Rating: 3
You had me at "rofl".


By ninjit on 11/1/2010 5:10:09 PM , Rating: 2
really?
cause he LOST me afer "rofl"...


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By tdawg on 11/1/2010 12:54:51 PM , Rating: 4
How does transferring images via USB 2.0 take you 45 minutes? With hundreds of 10mp raw files from my D90, it takes about 5 minutes to transfer images via the card reader. Are you sure your front USB port is fully functioning?

Even transferring HD video from my camcorder to my PC via USB 2.0 takes no more than 10 minutes for a few gigs worth of footage.


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By Luticus on 11/1/2010 3:04:43 PM , Rating: 2
Yea, i gotta admit that this dude is either working off of 1.0 or he's cooking the numbers. Or perhaps he's got a massive amount of space on his camera and he's grabbing 10+gb of pics all at once.


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By SPOOFE on 11/1/2010 4:45:09 PM , Rating: 2
He could be a Spray 'n Pray photographer, guys that indiscriminately take a humongous number of photos (because they can) and hope that they got something good.


By twhittet on 11/1/2010 5:55:11 PM , Rating: 4
That's me!! I hate people posing, so random shots are more fun. Unfortunately most of them don't turn out.


By Silver2k7 on 11/1/2010 7:40:01 PM , Rating: 2
Either that or using some Middle format camera with 20-40MP

Thought right now there are even fairly cheap cameras with 16MP, im guessing the RAW files from those will be pretty huge.


By namechamps on 11/12/2010 4:36:13 PM , Rating: 2
Even if that were true there is no media card large enough to take 45 minutes.

Say he has a 34GB card completely full. To take 45 min he would need to average:

32 * 8 *1024 / 45 / 60 = 96Mbps.

If he is only getting 96Mbps off the card then he is constrained by the speed of the memory card not USB 2.0 bus.


By kraeper on 11/1/2010 8:11:57 PM , Rating: 2
I'm gonna go with "cooking the numbers" on this. There's a minor little issue with card read speeds that throws his story off a bit.

Otherwise yes, USB3 is rad, having used it a bit at work. Now to get a USB3 CF reader for home! (Oh, and much faster CF cards, since that would be the limiting factor in '3 min transfer times' as mentioned above. lol)(Also an unrelated side-note, there are several 24MP dSLR cameras out now, including mine, which can indeed eat up 10GB in a hurry. Doesn't change the math on that guy's story though.)


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By Pirks on 11/1/10, Rating: -1
RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By atlmann10 on 11/1/2010 10:37:33 AM , Rating: 5
Pirks; Firewire 800, is also out performed by USB 3.0 in all ways, although not as much as USB 2.0 is. However it is still significantly faster as well as more compatible, it also gives better power as well as other operational specs. In the largest way it basically say's Apple owns my a77, because the biggest impact will be on your time. If you are fine with Apple owning your personal time (as in the less time a product takes to perform it's task the less time I am waiting to do what I want to do with it's contents) then it is fine I guess as your the only looser. This is also not to mention being an environmentally conscious company. As the less time you take to use a peripheral or storage device, the less time that power is sucked from the power grid, which overall would have a lower power impact.


By Silver2k7 on 11/1/2010 7:42:35 PM , Rating: 2
PC's never really adopted Firewire but I guess the Mac's still have them FW ports.. wich is atleast faster than USB2.


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By omnicronx on 11/1/2010 11:11:10 AM , Rating: 3
Shut your trap Pirks, if that were true then why are they developing FW3200?

My guess is that Job's is only stating Mac's don't need USB3 because FW3200 is not out yet. If they brought in USB3 support before FW3200, then nobody would use the new specification as USB3 would already be entrenched.


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By Shadowself on 11/1/2010 1:43:23 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
why are they developing FW3200
They are not "developing" FW3200. That variant has been part of the standard for over a decade when using a fiber interface. It has been part of the standard for over two years when using a copper interface (maybe even three years now, if don't recall the exact date FW3200 over copper was ratified).

Apple does not push FW3200 because so few users require it. Even Apple knows that less than 1% of its users really require a FW3200 type interface. Those that do typically utilize something based upon an add in card supporting a large external RAID system -- and those are typically not FW3200 based.

What Apple is supposedly developing (actually, Intel is developing with Apple actively making comments from the sidelines) is LightPeak -- an interface that *starts* at 10 Gbps and will move to 100 Gbps within 5-10 years. Intel claims that LightPeak systems will ship in 2011. IF that becomes reality (which I doubt), you can expect Apple to be shipping systems with LightPeak interfaces by the end of 2011.


By omnicronx on 11/1/2010 2:54:46 PM , Rating: 2
The standard was only ratified in late 2008, even USB3 with all its backings was ratified in early 2009 and we are only starting to see devices trickle out now. Its not like a standard is ratified and devices suddenly start rolling off the production lines, it can a year or two to start seeing prototypes let alone mass deployment.. Furthermore..

Until now Apple had absolutely no reason to push anything that was currently ahead of the competition (i.e FW400 was almost as fast as USB2 let alone FW800)

Are you seriously trying to imply that now that USB3 is out that there will not be a demand for something faster?

Perhaps not the average user, but I never stated as such. This is about those who will be able to make use of it, i.e Graphic Design, Video Editing etc..

Then again the average user hardly needs FW at all, yet Apple still pushes that out to the majority. Which makes me doubt this has to do with what the average consumer wants.

I think the poster below may be right on the ball though, USB3 not integrated directly into Intel's Chipsets equal no deal. Right now all USB3 solutions are third party.


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By Reclaimer77 on 11/1/2010 10:28:34 AM , Rating: 5
Haven't they always been screwed by Apple though?

If you want to get work done, use a PC. If you like looking cool and being "stylish", well, you don't really need USB 3.0 anyway.

This should come as no surprise. Honestly hasn't Apple consistently pushed older hardware in a pretty form factor? I can't name one time they were ever an early adopter of a new technology.


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By Anoxanmore on 11/1/2010 10:38:22 AM , Rating: 1
Well they were first with 64bit processors(Power PC). :)

That is the only one I can think of off the top of my head.


By Reclaimer77 on 11/1/2010 7:31:30 PM , Rating: 4
If by "first" you mean first to take a CPU for a server and plop it into a mid-tower for around 6 thousand bucks, monitor not included, then yes I'll give you that one.


By sprockkets on 11/1/2010 9:15:43 PM , Rating: 4
OSX wasn't fully 64 bit until the current release anyhow, so it was just pure marketing.

Add insult to injury, Adobe was using 64 bit carbon to redo Photoshop, when Apple decided to ditch that development runtime completely before it came out.

Thanks Apple! We always can count on you being a douche bag!


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By Tony Swash on 11/1/10, Rating: -1
RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By Pirks on 11/1/2010 10:59:36 AM , Rating: 5
That's why those professionals from Pixar picked Windows Azure instead of Apple :P

http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/archives/22642...

Munch on this Tony, hehe ;-)


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By Luticus on 11/1/2010 3:06:06 PM , Rating: 2
Nice.. i did not know this. Does apple even have a cloud based solution yet?


By Pirks on 11/1/2010 5:26:13 PM , Rating: 3
Who needs clouds when you have such a strong RDF :)))


By foolsgambit11 on 11/1/2010 3:47:46 PM , Rating: 2
I'll start by saying I'm a Windows man, in the hopes I don't get rated down for disagreeing with and anti-Apple comment. Feel free to rate me down if I'm inaccurate, though - but somebody correct me, too.

I don't think Apple has a cloud computing system like Azure. Pixar's RenderMan software (the software that will actually run on Azure when/if they release this proof of concept) runs on OS X, Linux, or Windows. Which platform Pixar prefers to use in its studios, I don't know.


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By Reclaimer77 on 11/1/2010 6:37:04 PM , Rating: 2
Ok Pirks what's gotten into you lately? Keep up the good work :)


By Pirks on 11/2/2010 10:41:07 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
what's gotten into you lately?
Tony Swash


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By BurnItDwn on 11/1/2010 11:14:07 AM , Rating: 5
I disagree.

I think that between 90% and 100% of apple "loyal" customers are people who don't know anything at all about computers and probably would never hook up an extnernal hard drive or multimedia device in the first place.

Educated people generally don't buy macs.


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By rcc on 11/1/2010 4:06:39 PM , Rating: 3
Try not to let your bias blind you. A great many educated people use Macs.

If you want to argue, go with people educated in computer hardware generally don't buy macs. Closer, but still not accurate.

And no, I don't currently own any Apple products.


By SPOOFE on 11/1/2010 5:14:31 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
A great many educated people use Macs.

And they're probably not heavily included in the grouping of "loyal" Apple users. I don't think it's any stretch to suggest that a lot of Apple's customers don't know anything significant about the products that they buy, other than vague platitudes such as "it just works," "it's magical," and "it's safer".


By teng029 on 11/1/2010 6:34:52 PM , Rating: 1
congratulations on being the dumbest person on this forum...


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By tayb on 11/1/10, Rating: 0
By makken on 11/1/2010 10:46:00 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Show me a single Windows based notebook that will get be 8+ hours of battery life and I'll trade in my MacBook Pro.


IIRC the Asus U30Jc gets 10 hours idle; 8 hours heavy web browsing
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3730/asus-u30jc-refi...


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By kattanna on 11/1/2010 11:24:52 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Video Editing / graphical design people using Adobe and Final Cut. Both of these crowds make extensive use of external storage


not really. FW800 is more then enough for a single person editing using final cut.

when you get into group work you will be using an avid editing system and a unity storage system that uses fiber to connect the clients anyways, so whether they have USB3 is a moot point to them. heck one VERY popular medical show thats been on for years now uses G4's running OS9 for their editing machines LOL


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By omnicronx on 11/1/2010 12:19:05 PM , Rating: 3
I completely disagree, how on earth do you know what is more than enough when you don't have the technology to make that comparison in the first place?

I know SEVERAL people who work in that field, and whether they are a Mac user or not, one thing remains the same, any speed increase especially with the handling of large files is more than welcomed..

Its hardly moot, and if Apple thought that was the case they would not be developing FW3200/6400..

Please refrain from making comments as to what is or is not enough without any kind of comparison to base those claims upon.


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By Shadowself on 11/1/2010 1:53:07 PM , Rating: 1
And please refrain from making inaccurate statements. Apple is not "developing" FW3200. It's been part of the Firewire standard for years.


By omnicronx on 11/1/2010 2:58:10 PM , Rating: 2
I meant they are not implementing the standard for their use..

And please stop saying its been apart of the standard for years, its barely been 2.. (i.e its still in its infancy standard wise)


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By kattanna on 11/1/2010 3:28:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I know SEVERAL people who work in that field, and whether they are a Mac user or not, one thing remains the same, any speed increase especially with the handling of large files is more than welcomed..


first off, all i commented on was video editing, and when it comes to video editing, USB is not even used. it is local storage or fiber connected to remote storage. LOL USB. and you can take that from someone who ACTUALLY works in the industry, not second or 3rd hand word of mouth.

quote:
Please refrain from making comments as to what is or is not enough without any kind of comparison to base those claims upon


your funny. thanks for the chuckle

but as someone who has actually worked on professional level video editing systems for many years i can say what is and isnt needed. when a studio has an issue with their editing equipment, I am the one they call. so forgive me in stating that yes i do know what i am talking about.


By SPOOFE on 11/1/2010 5:18:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
but as someone who has actually worked on professional level video editing systems for many years i can say what is and isnt needed.

You can say what YOU did or didn't need; I know plenty of guys in the field whose need for more speed will never be satisfied.


By MGSsancho on 11/1/2010 5:31:14 PM , Rating: 2
I can add on this. I have walked into many editing houses and they use massive amounts of fiber. they always pay top dollar for the fastest equipment. sure some editing workstations can cost more than $30k but they honestly do not care if they have windows, osx or linux. usually it is a combo. Always fun to see a post processing house that has 20 workstations and an 8 rack server room/render farm.

Higher edn cameras connect via SDI interfaces. more like 4gb fiber hooked directly up to equipment. so parent is right, more speed is appreciated but they honestly don't get their panties in a bunch over interfaces..


RE: The ones most screwed on this are...
By omnicronx on 11/1/2010 6:30:06 PM , Rating: 2
No, you can say what is or what is not needed NOW. Once again how can you make such a claim before you have something to compare too.. Or has video editing remained constant for the past 100 years?

There is always something new, and there is always something that was not needed before..

Once again, how can you make any claims or comparisons against a product that you, or any of your workers have yet to use or see.(i.e personal storage with speeds that high)

You make it out as though nobody uses FW which is not the case. Its still widely used in education and many smaller sized businesses. i.e not everyone has a server farm, nor was the original firewire marketed to these kind of people.


By Alexstarfire on 11/1/2010 7:12:10 PM , Rating: 2
Ummm, SSDs easily surpass FW800 and USB2.0 speeds. Some even pass USB3.0 speeds, though usually only when reading. Not sure if any SSDs in external enclosures are sold commercially but they could easily be made with off the shelf parts. That's about all I can think of really. Not sure why anyone would want to do that anyway, but that's rather beside the point.


By Ted Landry on 11/2/2010 3:23:26 AM , Rating: 1
But the point is, FireWire is plenty fast for any common task people do on any Mac or PC, it's the main standard for fast transfers, so USB 3.0 doesn't make sense for the next 6-8 years.

Apple will let you know when USB 3.0 is ready for market, just like they did when they popularized USB in 1998, so hang on, 3.0 is a waste until Apple approves it.


In other words
By nafhan on 11/1/2010 10:14:02 AM , Rating: 5
You'll get it when it's included free in the Intel MB chipsets. We aren't going to spend money and/or development time on supporting a third party chipset.




RE: In other words
By kmmatney on 11/1/2010 11:16:22 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly - its as simple as that. USB 3.0 won't go mainstream until that happens as well.


RE: In other words
By tallcool1 on 11/1/2010 12:07:12 PM , Rating: 2
Samething applies for "Alienware" PCs. You would think that a high end gaming system from Alienware (Dell) would have USB 3.0, but it doesn't. Probably because they are using Intel motherboards as well. So is it really INTEL that is lagging and causing the problem for Apple and Alienware in this case?


RE: In other words
By SPOOFE on 11/1/2010 5:11:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You would think that a high end gaming system from Alienware (Dell) would have USB 3.0

I wouldn't. Gaming doesn't make me think "needs really fast content transfer speeds". On the other hand, Apple, and its reputation for appealing to content creators, does.

quote:
So is it really INTEL that is lagging and causing the problem for Apple and Alienware in this case?

The "problem" is that Apple has chosen to minimize the variables in their machines. Adding one more piece of hardware (and the drivers and software to control it) is something they don't want to do. There are good solid reasons for this, but it also has drawbacks.


RE: In other words
By Flunk on 11/1/2010 1:38:25 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, exactly like the other big PC manufacturers are doing. This doesn't really qualify as a story.

If you really need USB 3.0 you can get an expansion card... Unless you have a notebook (includes the iMac) in which case you're pretty much SOL.


RE: In other words
By MonkeyPaw on 11/1/2010 1:44:43 PM , Rating: 2
Yup, and intel is taking its time so it can sell more chipsets. Sure, they could have probably adopted it sooner, but with graphics and memory control going to the CPU, there really isn't much left to make the chipset look interesting.


RE: In other words
By SPOOFE on 11/1/2010 5:22:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yup, and intel is taking its time so it can sell more chipsets.

Lame interpretation; price USB3 chipsets at a premium and it just means MORE money.


RE: In other words
By msheredy on 11/1/2010 6:48:15 PM , Rating: 2
USB3 is still new, there's not that many devices out there to buy that fully take advantage of it's speed. Google USB 3.0 devices and you get a list of express cards, chipsets and not much else. Even when that list starts to cover cameras, both still and video, it's not like the majority of consumers will go out and spend more money just so they have USB 3.0 peripherals.


Nothing New
By fredthelight on 11/1/2010 10:33:30 AM , Rating: 5
M. Jobs always told people/his customers what is best, or not, for them.

Too bad he did not told them he's selling them crapware made in china that's killing jobs in America, land of his brainless fanboys...

Apple might be very rich now, but I'm not sure it's making americans more rich, or intelligent...I wish they'll open their eyes before it's too late.

For old Europe from where I am, it's too late I'm afraid, but maybe not for my north american friends.




RE: Nothing New
By rcc on 11/1/2010 4:13:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Too bad he did not told them he's selling them crapware made in china that's killing jobs in America, land of his brainless fanboys...


Are you under the misunderstanding that PC components are made in the US?


RE: Nothing New
By SPOOFE on 11/1/2010 5:27:45 PM , Rating: 2
Are you under the misunderstanding that PC components have the same profit margins as Apple's products?


RE: Nothing New
By rcc on 11/1/2010 5:53:03 PM , Rating: 2
So? What's your point, and what does it have to do with the original post, or my reply.

The OP was talking about crapware made in China as if Apple were the only one doing it.


RE: Nothing New
By teng029 on 11/1/2010 6:37:28 PM , Rating: 2
and where exactly are your PCs made?


May be they're just forgoing it in favor of
By MeesterNid on 11/1/2010 10:29:24 AM , Rating: 2
Light Peak? It sure seems that Intel isn't jumping all over USB 3 with lack of chipset support for the spec, plus having designed Light Peak. I wouldn't be surprised if Intel themselves were the primary force killing off USB 3 in order to push their (seeming superior, on paper at least) technology.

We shall see.




RE: May be they're just forgoing it in favor of
By Gungel on 11/1/2010 10:50:52 AM , Rating: 2
All future Intel chipsets for Sandy Bridge (Huron River) and Ivy Bridge (Chief River) will support USB3.0


By Shadowself on 11/1/2010 1:57:17 PM , Rating: 2
Intel could support USB 3.0 in their new chipsets, but support a different hardware layer in LightPeak. That *may* be where Intel is headed.


RE: May be they're just forgoing it in favor of
By Shadowself on 11/1/2010 1:56:10 PM , Rating: 2
USB 3.0 can be carried over LightPeak. Intel is not killing off USB 3.0 as a protocol, just thinking about a different hardware layer for it. Think of two USB 3.0 and two USB 2.0 links over one cable. With LightPeak it could be possible.


By fteoath64 on 11/2/2010 3:20:19 AM , Rating: 2
True for LightPeak as a transport for USB3. But for now,using the electrical transport is possible and the only way and is shipping, so Intel is really dragging their feet on USB3. This is very unusual because it did not happen in USB2's case. So one has to question, why is Intel delaying USB3 introduction ???...


Shiny
By solarrocker on 11/1/2010 10:11:56 AM , Rating: 1
quote:

It's common to be able to pick up an ASUS laptop with greatly superior hardware specs than a MacBook Pro that costs nearly twice as much (granted the MacBook Pro is much lighter and features a slick aluminum unibody case).


And that totally gives it the green light to have prices twice as high for older hardware. Me liky shiny.....

/sarcasm




RE: Shiny
By nafhan on 11/1/2010 10:16:47 AM , Rating: 3
Actually, it does. People are buying them after all. What company wouldn't jump at the chance to sell older, cheaper hardware at a higher price than newer hardware? It's a win-win. Apple rakes in money, and their customers are "cool".


RE: Shiny
By kingius on 11/1/2010 10:20:56 AM , Rating: 2
If having the latest gadget makes you cool, instead of a victim of advertising that makes you buy the latest thing that you do not actually need, of course. ;-)


RE: Shiny
By nafhan on 11/1/2010 1:43:58 PM , Rating: 2
I think most people would be hard pressed to distinguish between "victim of advertising" and cool!


Ohhhh Steve...
By zero2dash on 11/1/2010 10:58:09 AM , Rating: 5
Jobs is just fishing for upgraders.

Why put USB3 in their current crop of machines when they can wait awhile, and then churn out a "new! fresh!" lineup of the same machines they have now, only with USB3 ports and another full MSRP retail price? Oh, but unfortunately, no upgrade cards for any previous model owners...something about "incompatible" or something.

Ah Apple, you're far too easy to predict. And as usual, the fanboys will laud it as the second coming and the greatest thing since sliced bread. "Macs with USB3! I will get so much more work done now!"

This is exactly why I refuse to buy Apple products. I don't need a fascist gas bag telling me what I do or don't need. Just sell me the computer I want, keep your opinion to yourself.




RE: Ohhhh Steve...
By priusone on 11/1/2010 11:43:15 AM , Rating: 1
Well, I was comparing motherboards for my new tower, but since I now know that I don't have to worry about USB 3.0, that does really open up my selection. I hope Jobs lets us know what else not to worry about. So much nicer having someone else tell me what to do. Yep, that's also why I vote liberal and live on welfare.


RE: Ohhhh Steve...
By StevoLincolnite on 11/1/2010 3:03:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Ah Apple, you're far too easy to predict. And as usual, the fanboys will laud it as the second coming and the greatest thing since sliced bread.


I'll probably get down rated for this comment as it is rather crude, but I don't care.

Apple doesn't have "fans" it has biatches, they take whatever is given to them. ;)


Uhh
By msheredy on 11/1/2010 11:43:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Mr. Jobs, who typically writes one or two-line replies, wrote:
We don’t see USB 3 taking off at this time. No support from Intel, for example.
To be fair, Mr. Jobs is correct about Intel's lack of support. The world's largest chipmaker and one of the largest makers of motherboards has been sluggish at adopting the faster standard, which was first ratified by the USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF) on November 17, 2008. Intel will finally push out USB 3.0 sometime in 2011.


What his answer wasn't good enough? Sounds like it's out of their [Apple's] hands...




RE: Uhh
By SirKronan on 11/1/2010 1:31:28 PM , Rating: 2
Still no eSATA either, though ...


RE: Uhh
By Luticus on 11/1/2010 3:13:52 PM , Rating: 2
It's probably that intel doesn't support it (or has been slow to) and intel is what apple uses.

the esata thing not so much... and that sucks by the way... i want esata or better yet power over esata! granted with the new usb standards esata may be out classed anyway... haven't checked the numbers and right now i don't have the time to.


RE: Uhh
By Ted Landry on 11/2/2010 3:32:49 AM , Rating: 2
eSATA isn't a standard, so there is no way Apple will use it. FireWire is and currently a better choice than USB 3.0.

Apple controls connection standards for the entire industry, so we need to wait until 3.0 has been approved.


Thge real reason
By atlmann10 on 11/1/2010 10:27:17 AM , Rating: 1
The real reason for this is this new BIOS standard you have been hearing about really. Apple computers as well as some high end PC's (Servers mainly) support this new BIOS standard. Intel motherboards made for Apple which support this BIOS, rather than using an extra internal chip to do this, and therefore gimp the system into only using the very few products supported internally by Apple are not current hardware, nor will they be until Apple and Intel's stock pile of them run out.

When a new from bottom to top Apple desktop/laptop computer is introduced you will see USB 3.0 on an Apple. With the ratio at which Apple computers command the market you may be waiting later even significantly than is stated.




RE: Thge real reason
By Penti on 11/1/2010 12:25:44 PM , Rating: 3
No, HP's EliteBooks (i.e. laptops) have had UEFI for a while and Apple has a none standard EFI firmware. But the EliteBooks or some of them already supports USB3, it's about the software, OS X doesn't support it but Windows and Linux do. UEFI or no UEFI. Apples firmware where once based of work by Intel and the industry but that was a long time ago, but there's no problem loading in external BIOS/UEFI payload or talk to the shit directly. What they need is support in the kernel.


No big deal
By Etern205 on 11/1/2010 12:16:19 PM , Rating: 2
My system does not support USB 3.0, so I went out and bought USB 3.0 card (Asus U3S6). http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...

Does Apple user has this type of option or they're stuck with whatever Jobs gives them?




RE: No big deal
By BearAteMe on 11/1/2010 12:52:22 PM , Rating: 2
There are already cards available for Macs. Its just a matter of whether the company wants to develop a driver at this point with no support from Apple.


Shots at Apple
By BSMonitor on 11/1/2010 2:18:22 PM , Rating: 1
Whenever blogging gets slow, take a shot at a big name company that polarizes readers.

Really, so Apple dolls out which hardware/software it lets its users have. We definitely have never heard this same sort of comment about EVERY one of Apple's products...... It is their company policy to do this.... Why is it news worthy when they don't adopt a new technology immediately after it's release... We already know this about the company... Quit pandering for cheap web hits...

Tiger Woods golfed this weekend without his ex-wife present.

Lebron James and his former owner had cupcakes together.

See, I can blog too!




RE: Shots at Apple
By Luticus on 11/1/2010 3:28:16 PM , Rating: 2
becsause news companies need material for their articles... besides apple could do something different. In this case it makes sense because intel is dragging it's feet with usb3 and apple uses intel that it would also drag as a result.

i have a better question... if you have such a problem with these news articles then why bother to read/comment on them?


Is this really a story?
By techbulldog on 11/1/2010 10:32:08 AM , Rating: 2
Why is it wrong for a major manufacturer to wait for their CPU manufacturer to have native support for USB 3.0? It's much more reliable to have proper integration of a new hardware device instead of slapping on a third party chipset just to have the latest and greatest. Anyone remember the first generation of mobo SATA controllers? If you wanted to actually be able to install windows on them you had to create a floppy with the driver. I for one appreciate the time it takes to have a proper integration every time and am more than willing to wait for it. I've seen way too many issues with third party hardware not being up to par, it shows intelligence on their part for not ALWAYS rushing a product out the door.




By raabscuttle on 11/1/2010 2:03:38 PM , Rating: 2
...basically, Jobs sems to be saying that he doesn't want to add a 3rd party NEC chip to the motherboards just to add one feature - he'd rather wait for new Intel motherboard chipsets to add it. It is actually reasonable - but you'd think that they'd offer it as an add-on feature for their high end units (especially since Der Apple Führer can get his minions to pay through the nose for it). Also of note is that Apple doesn't actually **make** laptops, they have them made under contract by the exact same companies (Quanta, Compal, etc) that make all the other laptops they compete against...




Why?
By name99 on 11/1/2010 6:35:41 PM , Rating: 2
Well I had a great article here on WHY Apple is refusing to do this, but the great and powerful comment system claims it's spam --- without telling me why, even though it contains no html. So there you are.

Great going Anand --- preventing people from submitting useful comments will really add to the appeal of the site.




Troll
By XeroG1 on 11/1/2010 8:14:10 PM , Rating: 2
This article is just trolling the readers. Manufacturers supporting USB 3.0 right now are early adopters. Well good for them - that doesn't mean Apple is behind the times. And for the record, I hate Apple - I would never buy one of their products, but lack of USB 3.0 support is not making my list of reasons to hate Apple. Neither is the fact that the CEO responded to a customer's question with a perfectly valid, rational answer.




Help me find high end laptop with 3.0
By Dug on 11/1/2010 10:02:03 PM , Rating: 2
I can't find a 1" thick, high resolution, lightweight laptop with nvidia 330 or higher graphics, that has USB 3.0.
Please, someone help me out. Otherwise your bashing against Apple is the usual dumbass coments because your favorite plastic piece of crap Windows laptop with 4 stickers on it, no battery life, flexing keyboard, and glossy black palm rests piece of crap doesn't count.




Non sequitor
By goku on 11/1/2010 11:54:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
and recently became much more efficient, thanks to the inclusion of hardware support.


How exactly does offloading processing to the hardware make flash more efficient? Unless they're saying it's more efficiently utilizing the hardware that is available. However flash is still a huge hardware and software burden and it will be a good day when we can transition away from flash. Using a flash wrapper to watch videos online can bring the fastest computers to their knees. HD Videos that can't play smoothly in flash on my computer play just fine when they're downloaded and opened in a proper media player.




This is unacceptable APPLE!.
By fteoath64 on 11/2/2010 3:16:07 AM , Rating: 2
As an external disk interface, USB3 is a great way of moving large numbers of files to and from the PC. USB2 has had its limits for some time and eSata is just too cumbersome although it has the speed.

This is just a driver to develop and even Linux has it!. So for Apple to blame Intel for delaying their introduction is such a lame excuse, shame on you Jobs!.

NEC has a nice USB3 chipset and so does a few smaller companies. Intel could develop one themselves last year but they chose to hold back due to their competitive situation. So it seems Apple is holding on the same principles as well here. All this at the expense of the consumer. You hear that Apple ?. Your consumers....




By Deanjo on 11/3/2010 9:40:03 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple also made the curious decision to stop installing Flash on its Mac computers. Flash is one of the most-used multimedia technologies on the internet, and recently became much more efficient, thanks to the inclusion of hardware support.


Hmmm, windows doesn't ship with flash nor does linux or any other OS really. What is the point of shipping something that will be riddled with needed security updates upon first boot?

As far as the rest of the article goes it is no secret that Apple is co developing Lightpeak with intel and should debut on the Mac in the near future. In the mean time Firewire fills the gap.




Really?
By DKantUno on 11/13/2010 12:24:06 AM , Rating: 2
A Mac's price being twice as much as that of an equivalent PC can be justified because it looks good? Oh so Sony and the bunch are not insane when they produce a half-assed laptop and sell it at a jacked-up price because they slapped a nice cover on it.

The one reason - the ONLY imaginable reason - for paying more for a Mac, is to gain access to the software platform. At least that's the ONLY reason I got a Mac.

If OS X were installable on normal PC's (not interested in Hackintosh), I would have gone dual boot, been a bunch richer and happier!




"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki