Print 43 comment(s) - last by IntelUser2000.. on Nov 7 at 6:06 AM

Light Peak Demo  (Source: CNET)
Support for USB 3.0 by Intel could be as far out as 2012

Intel is an innovator in the computer market and has been for years, despite issues with anticompetitive practices around the world. Intel currently supports USB 2.0 and other connectivity like FireWire and eSATA in its mobile chipsets.

However, Intel has not offered support for the new USB 3.0 interface in its chipsets and the few machines on the market with USB 3.0 support are doing so using third-party chipsets. On-chip support for USB 3.0 from Intel is thought to be as far out as 2012. Intel is talking up its own much faster competing standard to USB 3.0 known as Light Peak. Light Peak first surfaced earlier this year and was thought to be coming in late 2010.

That date was later pushed and 
CNET News reports that Light Peak is now ready to hit the market by the middle of 2011. One industry source cited by CNET claims that support will come in the first part of the year, not the later part meaning it could be right around the corner.

Light Peak is much faster than USB 3.0 with speeds up to 10Gbps. Industry heavyweight Apple is not supporting USB 3.0 on its computers, but it is expected to fully support Light Peak and the thought is that Apple may even be the first computer maker to offer the tech on a computer. Intel has already stated when Light Peak was first unveiled that "Apple is an innovating force in the industry."

Officially Intel still has plans to support USB 3.0 reports 
CNET. An Intel spokesperson said, "We are absolutely committed to USB 3.0 and beyond that." Exactly when that commitment will start is the big question and it appears the start will be after Light Peak has time to take hold in the market.

Comments     Threshold

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

RE: anticompetitive
By omnicronx on 11/4/2010 12:35:35 PM , Rating: 1
I understand this, but the entire situation seems fishy.

While USB3.0 is an open standard, Intel's Extensible Host Controller Interface (xHCI) specification is Intel controlled (everyone was waiting for this before they went ahead with USB3). They had every intention of impelenting USB3 from the get go.

So why the huge delay before implementing it into their chipsets? They should have had a huge headstart over everyone else (as they had access to the specification long before everyone else), not the other way around.

RE: anticompetitive
By PsychoPif on 11/4/2010 1:23:11 PM , Rating: 2
It's obvious they were working on Light Peak at the same time than USB3. I would'nt be surprise if they slowed down on USB once they had proof of concept that their proprietary connector would work.

Outside of Intel though, I doubt it will have a real impact on USB3 adoption. As stated by other, there is already plenty of motherboard with USB3. You also can't deny the huge advantage that backward compatibility with USB2 is.

USB is'nt going anywhere. Hell I still got a PS/2 input on my brand new GA-H55N-USB3

RE: anticompetitive
By omnicronx on 11/4/2010 1:48:26 PM , Rating: 2
You missed the most important part of my post. They controlled the way in which USB3 was actually implemented, which means that they have been performing the R&D pre 2008. It does not take 4+ years to bring a standard in which you wrote the book on its implementation to the market. It makes absolutely zero sense. Its also not so obvious that they were working on it at the same time. The Light Peak concept was not even brought to Intel until 2007. In fact the USB3 specification was almost finished before Intel received the concept.(I don't even think it was demonstrated until this year)
As stated by other, there is already plenty of motherboard with USB3.
No, there are plenty of motherboards when you are buying single components. I just never understand why posters on DT think that these buyers account for more than a fraction of the market? Go look at offerings from Dell, HP etc.. That is what counts when it comes to mass adoption.

History has shown what happens when Intel backs/does not back a standard, so I don't know why anyone should be surprised by my statements.

RE: anticompetitive
By foolsgambit11 on 11/4/2010 3:32:47 PM , Rating: 3
History has shown what happens when Intel backs/does not back a standard, so I don't know why anyone should be surprised by my statements.
Exactly. Look at those titans of the computing world, Rambus, IA64, and EFI.

It took a while for USB 2.0 to go from a niche product to widespread adoption, as well. I remember buying a PCI card to add USB2.0 slots to a brand new computer at least a couple of years after USB 2.0 came out. As for LightPeak, I don't expect the release in 2011 will mean widespread deployment. There will be initial hardware, but I doubt it will be standard on Intel motherboards or integrated into a south bridge chip for at least couple of years. Essentially, I predict the release of LightPeak will be similar to the release of USB 3.0 almost two years ago.

RE: anticompetitive
By SPOOFE on 11/4/2010 8:51:41 PM , Rating: 2
It does not take 4+ years to bring a standard in which you wrote the book on its implementation to the market.

Perhaps the delay is not of a technical nature; perhaps it is due to market demographics. Perhaps Intel does not see a huge need for the faster speeds of USB3 among vast swaths of the population. Perhaps they recognize an inherent limitation of maintaining backwards compatibility with an older, slower standard. Perhaps they view the need for faster transfer speeds from external devices to be mostly the domain of professionals or the very high-end enthusiasts, and want to offer something for them that is markedly different than consumer-oriented standards.

There are so many details and possibilities that I'm amazed you think this is a matter of Intel being incapable of doing it, or having trouble implementing it. The vehemence with which you post indicates that there is somehow a great, pressing need for faster transfer speeds amongst the masses. I'd love to know why you think this is the case, if in fact you do.

"So if you want to save the planet, feel free to drive your Hummer. Just avoid the drive thru line at McDonalds." -- Michael Asher

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki