backtop

Print 83 comment(s) - last by zBernie.. on Jul 6 at 12:47 PM

Apple is keeping it pricey with a $49 cable for its new Thunderbolt interface.  (Source: Ubergizmo)

  (Source: iFixIt)

Apple's Thunderbolt cable contains over 10 chips  (Source: iFixIt)
But this cable has chips, so it must be worth it!

Apple, Inc. (AAPL) is borrowing a play from Monster Cables offering a cable that's almost as pricey as the peripherals it plans to support.  The new Thunderbolt cable will retail for $49 USD.

Plugging in to the Mini Display Port of new MacBook Pros and iMacs, the cable offers support for "Thunderbolt", a new high speed communications standard from Intel Corp. (INTC).  With the first peripheral (a RAID drive bay from Pegasus) launching, attention has turned to this pricey little number.

IFixIt tore the white cable apart and found a pair of Gennum GN2033 chips hiding beneath the sheathing, with one on each connector of the cable.  In total there were also 10 other smaller tiny chips and an assortment of transistors, etc.

Gennum's webpage brags that its chip takes normal cables and offers "sophisticated signal boosting and detection functions required to transfer high-speed data without errors."

Of course nobody seems to know how much these chips cost so it's hard to say exactly how much profit Apple is pulling in off the cables.

Adoption is expected to be slow for the standard.  Like Apple's original Firewire standard, the price of the communications band (in this case the cable) offers a barrier for market entry.  It doesn't help that Hewlett-Packard, Company (HPQ) already abandoned plans for Thunderbolt, or that Sony Corp. (TYO:6758) has released a special version of the tech that relies on a modified USB 3.0 optical port.  

And there's the question of USB 3.0, which has already seen much more broad adoption.  USB 3.0 offers transfer speeds of up to 4 Gbit/s.  While only about half the speed of the current Thunderbolt implementation, that's still pretty blazing fast so the question remains how many customers will actually notice a difference.

To Monster Cables' credit, at least it only charges $29 for its "gold-plated" USB 2.0 cables, which it brags "rejects noise" and works to "maximize signal integrity."  Sound familiar?

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Apple is Monster Cable
By Motoman on 6/30/2011 10:08:29 AM , Rating: 5
There's no appreciable difference between the 2 companies, other than the obvious difference of exactly what consumer products they sell. They operate the same way - as predators preying on the unsophisticated...promising to deliver unto them that sophistication which they seek, for outlandish prices.




RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By INeedCache on 6/30/2011 10:13:35 AM , Rating: 4
You are exactly right. There are lots of cables out there just as good as Monster's for a lot less. Same with Apple's computers. Ah, but the Monster and Apple fanboys will beg to differ. It should make for fun reading.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Dr of crap on 6/30/2011 10:28:53 AM , Rating: 5
Wait, what are you saying?
There must be a difference between the $100 cable and the $10 cable.
They SAY it's better with made up tech speak! And I should believe them right????

They aren't just out to steal my money!


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Souka on 6/30/2011 11:23:33 AM , Rating: 1
Thunderbolt.... uhm, doesn't Verizon already have a product with that name?

Hmmm.... so will Apple now sue Verizon for name infringement? Apple and Cisco got into it over that product called "iPhone"... Cisco make it first, patent, etc.

Just wondering....


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By cjohnson2136 on 6/30/2011 3:44:22 PM , Rating: 1
Well actually Apple has no right to the name Thunderbolt. Thunderbolt is an invention by Intel. Apple is just using it.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By GulWestfale on 6/30/2011 4:05:17 PM , Rating: 2
Only 50 bucks for a magical cable? At last, i'll be able own a piece of apple hardware! Ih sure, it's not compatible with anything, but who cares, right?


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By fic2 on 6/30/2011 8:08:55 PM , Rating: 2
As long as the product that Intel has doesn't do the same thing that HTC's does there is no infringement. i.e. one is a data transfer tech and the other is probably a phone.
And it is Intel and HTC not Apple and Verizon. Apple and Verizon just market the other companies tech.


By therealnickdanger on 6/30/2011 11:54:20 AM , Rating: 5
This is the greatest link I ever found relating to this topic. Old school and incredibly detailed. There's no limit to what money can buy... and what it can't. LOL

http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Motoman on 6/30/2011 12:00:52 PM , Rating: 1
Cue Pirks with his "you get what you pay for" BS.

Apparently, if you pay $1,000 for a Monster Cable instead of $10 for an equally appropriate cable from Monoprice you get...umm...well, you get f%cked. Which is what you paid for, obviously - the privelege of getting f%cked over by the vendor. Pirks thinks that's a good thing.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By bigboxes on 6/30/2011 3:28:02 PM , Rating: 2
You forgot the Mercedes vs. Honda analogy and how you are paying for the "experience".


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Pirks on 6/30/11, Rating: -1
RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Motoman on 6/30/2011 5:12:35 PM , Rating: 2
I have stated nothing but facts. You have done nothing but ignore them...then attempt to pretend they don't exist...misdirect...obfuscate.

You have not once stated any facts. None. And do nothing but puke the same Apple propaganda up that has been exhaustively debunked an infinite number of times before.

Seek medical attention. Seriously. You're possibly the most delusional person on the internet.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Pirks on 6/30/11, Rating: -1
RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Motoman on 6/30/2011 5:58:04 PM , Rating: 1
Google is your friend. Well, in your case, your enemy.

Why exactly are you pretending that all of the DT articles that have showcased all the Apple design/quality/reliabilty problems didn't get published? Do you honestly expect those of use here at DT, who have seen you puke your same garbage EVERY SINGLE TIME in every one of those articles, to believe that you didn't see them?

That's what you're trying to say. You didn't see them. You've seen the proof. You refuse to accept it. That's your problem...and not my responsibility to keep trying to fix it.

You remind me of a little joke that came out in a botany class once..."you can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think."


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Pirks on 7/1/2011 11:03:47 PM , Rating: 1
Why exactly are you pretending that all of the DT articles that have showcased all the Apple consumer ratings being highest in the industry or close to that didn't get published? Do you honestly expect those of use here at DT, who have seen you puke your same insane "magic" garbage EVERY SINGLE TIME in every one of those articles, to believe that you didn't see them?

So you're saying you didn't see them? Or did you? You refuse to accept them because you are too afraid to look dumb? Is that your problem?


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Pirks on 7/1/2011 11:12:19 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Why exactly are you pretending that all of the DT articles that have showcased all the Apple design/quality/reliabilty problems didn't get published?
Why exactly are you pretending that all of the DT articles that have showcased all the other computer builders like Dell/Sony/HP/etc design/quality/reliability problems didn't get published? What's the difference between Apple's problems and other computer maker's problems? You look dumb precisely because you try to imply that only Apple has issues, while everyone knows it's 100% lie. EVERYONE has issues, not JUST Apple. Stop looking like a juvenile liar Moto! I beg ya :)


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By robinthakur on 7/1/2011 12:43:29 PM , Rating: 2
Err...Actually Pirks is anti-Apple and anti-iPad now with a strongly pro-Blackberry Playbook agenda. I greatly suspect he just enjoys raising your volatile blood pressure Moto...keep up now.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By B3an on 7/2/2011 8:23:08 AM , Rating: 1
Lol yeah, i've seen Pirks bash Apple at times. He just seems to troll people like Moto. Or maybe he's simply insane. Who cares.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Pirks on 7/2/2011 8:27:19 AM , Rating: 2
If you review Motoman's arguments carefully, you'll realize he is the one who's insane here. Treating all Apple customers as fanatics is pure insanity.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By torpor on 6/30/2011 1:30:55 PM , Rating: 5
When I first saw the picture for this article, I thought it was a small crack pipe.

Then I read the article, and realized that it kind of is.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By quiksilvr on 6/30/2011 10:23:36 AM , Rating: 3
But at least in a world of ignorance, we have companies that know when to be responsible and give customers what they need, not what they THINK they want:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-...

I salute you, Amazon. You look after the little man with class.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Dorkyman on 6/30/2011 2:16:05 PM , Rating: 3
I support the right of people to throw their money away on anything at all, or even burn it in their fireplace if that's what they want to do.

Any cable designed to meet a particular spec will meet that spec. Monster is notorious for inventing false advantages ("Our cables are insulated with whale-free polyethylene! No free radicals to spoil your deep bass experience!) in order to carve out an extreme-price market niche.

This is NOT to say that these cables don't meet the spec. I assume they do. It's just that the other far-less-expensive cables do, also.

If the consumer is too dumb to realize they've been had, so be it.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Reclaimer77 on 6/30/2011 3:32:22 PM , Rating: 4
It's just a shame that the average consumer doesn't understand what digital means. The quality of the cable does NOT matter, if the 1 to 1 digital signal can pass through, it will sound as good as a $20,000 braided gold strand cable.

I saw a cool demonstration once of someone who used a metal coat hanger for the conducting material of an audio cable. Out of hundreds of audiophile types comparing the sound quality of a Monster Cable to the coat hanger cable in a double blind test, none of them could actually say which one sounded better.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By cjohnson2136 on 6/30/2011 3:46:00 PM , Rating: 3
That..is..AWESOME


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By quiksilvr on 6/30/2011 3:57:14 PM , Rating: 3
It's all about shielding. Sure you can get the signal across, but how long does the cable last before it gets messed up?

That's why MediaBridge is awesome, they show you exactly what makes it better:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51MuCkKHZPL....

And they still keep it under $10.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Reclaimer77 on 6/30/2011 5:31:19 PM , Rating: 2
OH and I'm sure Monster will say their "shielding" is worth $20 alone. It's a crock.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By crimson117 on 6/30/11, Rating: 0
RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By damianrobertjones on 6/30/2011 11:28:07 AM , Rating: 5
"in terms of features and capabilities."

Are you drunk? Seriously...


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Motoman on 6/30/2011 12:01:36 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Are you drunk?


On the Kool-Aid yo!


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By frobizzle on 6/30/2011 12:04:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Are you drunk? Seriously...

Yes, he, like all Apple zombies, is drunk on the heady wine of the Steve Jobs experience! They find it intoxicating in the same way a cat finds catnip irresistible.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By TSS on 6/30/2011 4:05:12 PM , Rating: 1
I don't know why he got rated down, he's right isn't he? Mac's are considerably different from windows PC's in terms of features and capabilities. And yes, Apple should be able to charge a premium for that if consumers are willing to pay that premium.

Nobody said apple was the one with more/better features though.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Pirks on 6/30/11, Rating: 0
RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Motoman on 6/30/2011 5:10:44 PM , Rating: 1
Post a fact sometime and we'll all take a look at it.

Or keep parading around the falsehoods you've been trying to pass off for all of eternity and keep pretending.

You're an abject failure, and are mentally ill.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Pirks on 6/30/2011 5:30:02 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Post a fact sometime and we'll all take a look at it
Why when I take Acer and MacBook Pro in my hands I see that MacBook's screen is noticeably better, especially when I pick the matte option (cheap Acers are all ugly glossy screens these days), why Acer squeaks and creaks in my hand and MacBook feels like a slab of metal, why MacBooks keyboard is firm and a pleasure to type unlike Acer's, why MacBook's large touch pad is more comfortable for multitouch gestures than smaller Acer's touch pad? Why no stickers on MacBook unlike Acer? Why no bloatware and Notron shit on MacBook unlike Acer? Why Acer works a few hours less on a battery than MacBook Pro? Why is Acer thicker and heavier than MacBook? Why I can put MacBook on a soft surface and its cooling system will continue to work as usual because the cold air intake is not at the bottom, while Acer's cooling system with moronically designed cold air intake at the bottom will be blocked by the soft surface underneath?

Enough facts?

Will you start your insane babble about "magic" again? Just curious how hard you try this time to slip out of this and get on your "magic" drivel instead of addressing the facts above :))


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Motoman on 6/30/2011 6:11:40 PM , Rating: 2
What Acer? Because, you know, there's more than one. So you starting your "argument" by not specifying which one...or even a price range, or a style of machine, makes the entirety of your rant invalid. I have seen low-end Acer machines that are very plastic, do feel somewhat flimsy, and aren't all that aesthetically pleasing - but those models cost maybe $400. I've also seen more expensive Acer machines replete with nice anodized aluminum, more solid designs, more attractive aesthetics...and a heftier price tag. But...you probably know that, which is why you're presenting a fallacious argument to begin with by being intentionally vague.

quote:
MacBook's large touch pad is more comfortable for multitouch gestures than smaller Acer's touch pad?


Your assertion is not fact. This is only your own wildly biased opinion, at best.

quote:
Why no stickers on MacBook unlike Acer?


Because Windows machines have to compete. Since they're all interchangable between different brands, each model has to make a big deal about what it's specific features are and try to draw the consumer into it. Because at the end of the day, there's a wad of different Windows machine manufacturers and every possible combination of specs and features is represented...so they have to draw the consumers attention in the store. Macs don't compete on features...specs...or price. They compete based on the fact that it's an Apple product. Features, specs, etc. are irrelevant to that buyer. So there's no stickers. And at any rate - do you not see how utterly vapid you've proven yourself to be by trying to declare that "no stickers" is some kind of great virtue of a Mac over a PC? This is quite possibly the stupidest thing you've ever said...unless you're somehow under the impression that those stickers don't just peel right off once you have the machine at home. Then again...that kind of thinking is probably beyond your primate-level brain capacity.

quote:
hy no bloatware and Notron shit on MacBook unlike Acer?


Exact same reason as the stickers. Because Windows machines are highly interchangeable, the OEMs use software bundling to try to differentiate their product. That attempt to differentiate has resulted in nothing but bloatware. Sad but true. The reason it's not on Macs is the same reason why there's no stickers - Apple has no need to differentiate by product features of any kind, including software bundles. You're either going to buy an Apple, or your aren't. That decision is made long before you go to the store/place the order, and nothings going to change it.

...and on and on and on. I'm not going to directly address any of your "vs. Acer" assertions for the reason I noted at the beginning of this post. And why are you picking on Acer anyway? The fact of the matter is that all Windows machines are essentially interchangeable - and that's why the Windows marketshare is so strong. The OEMs have to compete on features, specs, quality, and price - which means a VAST array of options for the consumer. Since Apple doesn't compete on any of those issues...well, none of them matter. You're either going to buy one or you aren't, and that's all there is to it.

...because if you're going to buy an Apple product, it's because of the "magic" that Steve told you was in there. And you believed him.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Scott66 on 6/30/2011 10:16:35 PM , Rating: 2
Window computers have bloatware because the hardware makers are paid money for each piece of software they cram onto the computer.

And then the retailers offer a computer setup service to allow the customer to get the computer he should have had in the first place.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By lukarak on 7/1/2011 1:23:24 AM , Rating: 2
Funny how you selected only a few statements to 'disprove' and completely disregarded the rest.
He's completely right on most points. The biggest concern is that apple charges more for weaker hardware. So let's compare. The only real competition to the MBP 13 is the HP envy 14.

In their base models, you get a similar i5 cpu (2.3 GHz), with the Envy getting 2GB of ram more, a larger HDD and a standalone graphics card. With apple, you get a 16:10 screen with a bigger vertical resolution, you get a thiner and lighter device, and you get a better quality screen and a better battery. Extras such as magsafe adapter and a better trackpad on one side, and USB 3.0 on the other are worthy mentions.
When you put all of that together, as always, it comes down to your personal preference. I don't need a GPU, so that's the first thing i will remove from my calculations. With the macbook, i get a lighther machine, that can use all three majos operating systems, that i use regularly (XCode i.e.), that is lighter and with a better battery (and better power management in OS X). And it costs just 200 more. It is not noticeablely slower, and even if it was, it wouldn't be more than a few seconds on a one minute task. I waste more time going to the toilet with newspapers :D

I just don't understand why there's such a hate towards apple, when you have, by your own words, so much to chose from from other manufacturers.

In a laptop world, performance is not everything, especially on a 13-14'' device. Battery, construction, keyboard and trackpad and screen quality are my five top things in this form factor.

It has nothing to do with steve, or magic. It has to do with the features i expect and simply the fact that one is the closest.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By torpor on 7/1/2011 10:06:29 AM , Rating: 2
Funny how you selected only a few statements to 'disprove' and completely disregarded the rest.

The video card in the HP machine makes the integrated Intel graphics in the MBP look like a wind-up toy. And is easily worth $200 in additional cost. But hey, we can ignore that huge fact because you don't care about it.

eSata, as usual for Apple, is ignored in favor of the antiquated firewire connection. HP has it.

But again, we don't hear about that from The Initiated.

You are who you complain about.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By lukarak on 7/3/2011 1:52:48 AM , Rating: 2
I did mention the graphics card. And i said that it comes down to personal preference. Somebody needs a graphics card in a 13'' laptop. I don't. Most people I know don't. I doubt they are an unrepresentative group of people.

I'm just saying that in this form factor, performance isn't everything, it usually isn't in the top 5 on which you will make your decision. Apple has quite a few advantages, that are, in my opinion, much more important for a real mobile laptop.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Silver2k7 on 7/3/2011 4:32:33 AM , Rating: 2
"eSata, as usual for Apple, is ignored in favor of the antiquated firewire connection. HP has it."

Uhm *Im a PC* but c'mon eSata was just some temporary sidetrack until there was avalibility of USB3.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Pirks on 7/1/2011 11:37:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I have seen low-end Acer machines that are very plastic, do feel somewhat flimsy, and aren't all that aesthetically pleasing
So you just proved my point! You agreed that you get what you paid for! Jee Moto, I had no idea you'd heal so fast :)))
quote:
Macs don't compete on features...specs...or price. They compete based on the fact that it's an Apple product. Features, specs, etc. are irrelevant to that buyer
This is BEYOND DUMB, way way waaayy beyond dumb, this is insanity. Only a few really hardcore Apple freaks, totally brain damaged Apple freaks, buy Apple stuff just because of the logo. You think that ALL Apple customers are these kind of brain dead zealots which is why you look so funny and childish :))) You SERIOUSLY think all these hundreds of millions of guys and gals bought their MacBooks and iPods and iPads and iPhones JUST BECAUSE OF THE APPLE LOGO??!! You are totally unbelievably insane, you need to seek professional help, seriously. IF you REALLY think like that. Do you? Tell me you're pulling my leg.

Man, I know myself, and I know about a dozen of my friends who bought some Apple gear, one got Air, two got iPads, a few got iPods, NO ONE of them, NOT A SINGLE PERSON got their Apple stuff only because of the Apple logo. They tried it, they compared it with other hardware, and they chose them because they felt Apple's features and design beat the crap out of other products. IMPORTANT NOTE: all of them do not possess the full spectrum of Apple gear, i.e. most of them use Windows PCs everywhere, and laptops too, because they believe Windows laptops are better. What does it prove? It proves your total insanity, Moto. You are sick, you need professional help, really. You can't think all Apple customers are brain dead zealots. A fair chunk of them are but VERY VERY FAR FROM ALL.
quote:
You're either going to buy an Apple, or your aren't. That decision is made long before you go to the store/place the order, and nothings going to change it.
Lies lies lies. For most customers it's lies. Only minority is brain dead Apple fanatics, majority just likes Apple hardware and buys it for various objective reasons. Just go to Apple store and try to talk to some of the people about why they got what they got, why they didn't get non-Apple stuff, and you'll see that most of the answers won't be "because it's Appple", it will be more like "because Apple product such and such does this and that better for me"
quote:
because if you're going to buy an Apple product, it's because of the "magic" that Steve told you was in there. And you believed him
Nah, if I weren't using Apple hardware stuff at work for a couple of years I'd maybe believed you, but I know from my practical experience that you are lying. I know that Apple devices are still somewhat different from others, and most often this difference in features and design is what makes people buy it, not your "magic" fantasy. I mean yes, a few people buy because of "magic" but not all of them, and you still keep lying that ALL of them are like that. This is a serious problem Moto, I'll try to fix it, maybe I can carefully talk you out of your insanity, we'll see :))


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By TheDoc9 on 6/30/2011 10:43:13 AM , Rating: 5
Don't forget to add Bose to this list.


By therealnickdanger on 6/30/2011 11:52:09 AM , Rating: 2
No highs, no lows, it must be Bose.

Joking aside, I get it. Wife approval (or acceptance) factor (WAF) is what drives this niche economy of Monster, Bose, Apple, etc. Make a product that LOOKS nice, PROMISES an unprecedented experience, and carries a HIGH PRICE to allay all doubt that you are buying a run-of-the-mill product. If you can afford it and you think it's good, then go ahead, you don't need anyone's permission to waste your money.

For the rest of us, there's monoprice or bluejeanscable.

http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Motoman on 6/30/2011 11:59:05 AM , Rating: 3
Verily.

Apple - Monster Cable - Bose

The Unholy Trinity.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By mondo1234 on 6/30/2011 12:05:33 PM , Rating: 2
Tonights Shocker....Apple is expensive.

Other breaking news....The earth is round

Special Report....Jason Mick beats dead horse


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Bad-Karma on 6/30/2011 1:47:38 PM , Rating: 3
Keep your sadomasochistic necrophiliac equine fantasies to yourself!


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By name99 on 6/30/2011 9:05:07 PM , Rating: 2
OK, so what do you think equivalent cables cost?
Let's do a search for, say, an infiniband copper cable. Go to Amazon and check it out. What's that, these cables all cost $70 to $150?

Apple tax strikes again! Clearly Apple is somehow behind the high prices of those cables.


By TakinYourPoints on 7/1/2011 6:01:03 AM , Rating: 2
Quiet you, Mick has the magic sunglasses like Roddy Piper in They Live and is here to reveal the truth about how Apple is the only predatory company out there.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By mondo1234 on 6/30/2011 12:35:26 PM , Rating: 2
Toyota gets $75 for a plastic hubcap that fits a late model corolla. Now thats a ripoff.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Invane on 6/30/2011 12:42:36 PM , Rating: 2
They tried to charge me 60 bucks for a freaking plastic gas cap for my Mazda 3. I made 'em do it under warranty as the old one had broken, but it definitely struck me as ridiculous.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Warwulf on 6/30/2011 1:20:15 PM , Rating: 2
Can buy a replacement universal gas cap at Walmart for, like, $10.

Just FYI for when you're out of warranty.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By nafhan on 6/30/2011 12:40:03 PM , Rating: 2
Monster cable preys on idiots who think paying more money always gets you a better product. Apple on the other hand... never mind.


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Samus on 6/30/2011 1:23:53 PM , Rating: 3
Granted, this is brand new technology that just started shipping and the cable is quite complicated. There are many SCSI cables that cost $50+


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By SleeStack1 on 6/30/2011 2:50:18 PM , Rating: 2
But it has electrolytes!


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By Reclaimer77 on 6/30/2011 3:26:39 PM , Rating: 2
lol

"Brawndo's got what plants CRAVE!"


RE: Apple is Monster Cable
By zBernie on 7/6/2011 12:47:09 PM , Rating: 2
The "unsophisticated"? You must be a clueless fandroid.

But regardless, I'm a Sr. Systems Engineer, and my primary computer in my home office is a Mac. I also have a MacBook Pro, iPod, and iPad, and 3 Apple TV's. The Apple ecosystem's interoperability has no equal.

I also have have one physical Linux box, and run several Linux VM's as well a Windows 7 VM.
My point is I'm familiar with OSX, Linux, Windows, and Unix. As far a desktop operating system is concerned, Mac OSX is superior.

The GUI is much more polished than Linux, and is MUCH more stable than Windows, while at the same time providing the power of the Free BSD Unix command line. It cannot be beat.

Our Sr. Architect also runs Mac OS X as his primary workstation at home. At work, we run Ubuntu on our workstations, Redhat or CentOS on our servers.

Unsophisticated? I've conversed with many Mac OSX users in various forums, and the are not unsophisticated in the least.

You are the one who's lack of sophistication is evidenced by your juvenile misconceptions.


Pricing?
By melgross on 6/30/2011 11:17:45 AM , Rating: 5
I guess you guys are too young to remember when the cheapest usable SCSI cables were $50. And the ones we needed at the end were a good $150. Today's prices would be higher. We're spoiled by cheap FireWire and USB cables. But active cables aren't unusual in the world of video and high speed electronics, and they do cost more. I don't understand the hate here. A Thunderbold RAID has just been tested at 700MBs, let's see USB3 get to that speed.




RE: Pricing?
By damianrobertjones on 6/30/2011 11:28:59 AM , Rating: 1
SCSI was never really a consumer product while IDE was/is.


RE: Pricing?
By Bad-Karma on 6/30/2011 1:54:59 PM , Rating: 2
It depends on your level of consumerism. I still remember when Iomega offered some of their ZIP & tape drives with only SCSI interfaces (drive came with the card) . It was something like $30-$50 more than the ATA or later USB models but the additional speed was worth it.


RE: Pricing?
By 91TTZ on 6/30/2011 2:07:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I guess you guys are too young to remember when the cheapest usable SCSI cables were $50.


A SCSI cable is a lot harder to make, though. It had 50-80 individual wires inside that all were insulated, and the connector was much larger and had a lot more contacts. This Thunderbolt cable has less than half that.


RE: Pricing?
By messele on 6/30/2011 3:29:08 PM , Rating: 3
Absolute nonsense, SCSI cables of whatever flavour were really no more sophisticated than any other ribbon cable and the science was in the design - manufacturing costs were not massive as the design had taken care of how the thing went together and that is very easily.

Since you are counting contacts, lets examine how exactly you pack all of that stuff into a connector sheath that is 8mm or so square. I think there is a hell of a lot of tech in there for $50 and it's not like you need one for anything as mundane as a camera or printer so the USB comparisons are irrelevant.

Plus let's not forget Intel's hand in this, but don't let that get in the way of a bit of desperate Apple bashing.


RE: Pricing?
By Motoman on 6/30/2011 7:35:47 PM , Rating: 2
Well, can also depend on whether or not terminators were built into the cable...and also, I would imagine the low volume of SCSI stuff compared to IDE had something to do with it too.

...I don't remember SCSI cables being $50, but I remember them being significantly more expensive than IDE cables - especially once you factored in the terminator.


RE: Pricing?
By messele on 7/1/2011 2:59:54 AM , Rating: 2
Indeed but you may recall that the terminator block was just a big pack of resistors anyway, it was something you could build yourself if you were so inclined at a fraction of the price.

Irrespective SCSI was an incredibly expensive system, I remember building a card into a PC back in 1993 just so I could have a decent performance CD-ROM drive (Toshiba Caddy Load, wooo!) and the sum for that little lot was over £500 (probably near $900 back then).

Then there was the Seagate 2Gb SCSI hard drive on the same bus. A bargain at £1200...


RE: Pricing?
By 91TTZ on 7/1/2011 5:03:27 PM , Rating: 2
Apple bashing? How was I Apple bashing?


RE: Pricing?
By messele on 7/3/2011 7:43:37 AM , Rating: 2
You weren't but the article in general is.


RE: Pricing?
By TakinYourPoints on 7/1/2011 5:55:55 AM , Rating: 3
Nailed it. The people who would buy this are in the pro AV market, and they are willing to pay for this level of performance that very little outside of fiber would get you, and that costs much more and doesn't offer bi-directionality and the daisy-chaining of storage, displays, and other kinds of hardware like Thunderbolt does.

BOM is also a terrible way to judge value, especially when it comes to high-end low-volume gear aimed at a niche professional market. Utility and scarcity drives cost in the market at that point. If you want speed and utility, especially for bleeding edge technology, you pay for it.

And if it still bothers you, wait, Monoprice should have the same cables for much less soon enough. Either way it is much cheaper than the SCSI example you provided.


Sounds about right
By longstride on 6/30/2011 12:10:23 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think you understand that this price is pretty much in line with the industry for ACTIVE cables. The purpose of the chips, is that the transceiver is built-in the cable ends, allowing for different transport medium. Right now the transport is copper, but with no changes to the connector they should be able to develop active fiber optic cables, but expect those to cost even more.

Look into the costs of SFP+ optical transceivers, some of them are as high as $500 each and you need TWO of those in addition to the cable!

$50 is about in line with the cost of 10GbE copper SFP+ DAC (direct attach) cabling.




RE: Sounds about right
By dark matter on 6/30/2011 1:35:47 PM , Rating: 2
There is no need to make the cable active. This could be quite easily incorporated into the actual devices.

We are taking consumer and prosumer products here.


RE: Sounds about right
By longstride on 6/30/2011 3:55:13 PM , Rating: 2
If you want the flexibility to have a cable which is copper or fiber without changing the connector then you need an active cable with transceivers for each media type.


RE: Sounds about right
By TakinYourPoints on 7/1/2011 5:49:24 AM , Rating: 2
People also forget that the people who would buy this, specifically AV professionals, are willing to pay more for the kind of performance that this equipment gets you.

BOM is a terrible way to judge value, especially when it comes to high-end low-volume gear aimed at a niche market.


RE: Sounds about right
By TakinYourPoints on 7/1/2011 6:18:05 AM , Rating: 2
I also don't see extortion. Here are copper interconnects for servers that are also 10 Gbps, but unlike Thunderbolt they are not bi-directional, they are only good for transmitting storage data, and they cost $70-$150 instead of $50: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-...


There are cheaper alternatives
By DaveLessnau on 6/30/2011 10:47:04 AM , Rating: 3
I have no idea if these are equivalent, but Monoprice has Thunderbolt cables ranging from about $14 to about $18 (3-15 ft):

http://www.monoprice.com/products/search.asp?spcDB...

If that link doesn't work, go to monoprice.com, search for "thunderbolt," and filter by Video Cables.

I use Monoprice for all my cables.




RE: There are cheaper alternatives
By ksherman on 6/30/2011 11:23:46 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry chuck, those are for display only. For display, it's still the same cable as the Mini Display Port cables.

These cables are specifically designed to carry a total of 20Gbs (10Gbs each way). That pretty impressive for a copper cable.

I still think $50 is too much for a cable, even worse that even the $2000 Promise RAID drive doesn't include one.


Closed standard: death knell
By Taft12 on 6/30/2011 10:51:54 AM , Rating: 2
If it turns out there's proprietary standards and -- perhaps more importantly -- patent and licensing encumbrance in the way of producing generic thunderbolt cables, the wider market beyond Apple will never adopt this standard. It never has before and it won't now.

As we move into the future and start to feel the pinch of 4Gbps USB3.0 not being fast enough, we'll get a parallel optical cable tech to go alongside the optical thunderbolt.

This is a lot of hand-wringing over an issue that has often existed in the technology market that we've always gotten around.




By unclebump2011 on 6/30/2011 11:13:25 AM , Rating: 2
'Thunderbolt and lightning - very very frightening me'

Thanks to QUEEN. Now I'm going to be singing this in my head all day.


Traditional wires?
By CZroe on 6/30/2011 11:50:40 AM , Rating: 2
Is it just me or do those look like traditional conductive wires? Is it only "light" inside the PC?




RE: Traditional wires?
By nafhan on 6/30/2011 12:43:14 PM , Rating: 2
Correct, they're using copper for the physical layer of thunderbolt this time around.


these dailytech articles
By hexxthalion on 7/1/2011 11:48:49 AM , Rating: 2
wtf is wrong with you guys? do you have nay knowledge about manufacturing/distribution costs of this cable? no. so stful. dailytech = troll blog




RE: these dailytech articles
By 91TTZ on 7/1/2011 5:07:44 PM , Rating: 2
yes, this cable costs 10x more to distribute than a normal cable, since it must be packed in a special box and carried on special trucks which drive on special highways.


Rat Hole
By Focher on 6/30/2011 6:03:46 PM , Rating: 2
Despite that most of the comments have gone down the rat hold of "Apple products are overpriced", the topic of the article is the Thunderbolt cable. Yes, there is a premium when you buy a name brand cable - Monster is an extreme example, but if you buy a Sony, HP, or other top brand cable you also pay a higher price than a generic one.

This cable is not priced out of the realm of reasonableness. It has two active transceivers in it, so it's not a $.10 manufacturing cost. Try buying an HDMI cable. Prices range from a few dollars up to beyond $50, and the price you pay often has nothing to do with the actual cost of the cable to make.




How is this any different?
By mydogfarted on 7/1/2011 9:46:11 AM , Rating: 2
How is this any different than Best Buy selling HDMI cables for $50? If consumers don't know to shop around, or are too lazy to do so, you can't blame the seller. Anyone who has worked for any chain electronics store knows that cables and accessories are marked up ridiculously. Why this article exists, other than to dump on Apple, is beyond me. Nothing else to report today?




Not a fan of Apple, but...
By rvd2008 on 7/1/2011 12:57:09 PM , Rating: 2
Thunderbolt smokes USB, FireWire with 10Gbps throughput.
This is not just "gold plated" crap from Monsters. Be objective. $50 for a cable is steep? Well, by all means, but what is the alternative if you need/want 10Gbps?




Apple hater
By Smilin on 6/30/11, Rating: 0
"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation











botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki