why isn't thunderbolt eveyrwhere?

[1832vin]

i mean, it's 5GB/s, that's sufficient for EVERYTHING, why? patent fees? why are we still sticking to usb 3?

tell me why! cuz i really want it.... and it's not on most windows

[Geekazoid]

i mean, it's 10GB/s, that's sufficient for EVERYTHING, why? patent fees? why are we still sticking to usb 3?

tell me why! cuz i really want it.... and it's not on most windows

Just because.

[Jamdude]

Do you really need to transfer things at more than 5Gb/s?  USB 3.1 is 10Gb/s http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2338243/design-for-next-generation-reversible-usb-31-cable-is-revealed

[nsyedhasan]

It is because there is not much support for it. You find products but they are usually more expensive than things that use USB.

[TheDigitalRealm]

i mean, it's 10GB/s, that's sufficient for EVERYTHING, why? patent fees? why are we still sticking to usb 3?

tell me why! cuz i really want it.... and it's not on most windows

Have you ever bothered to check out the price of a portable Thunderbolt/2 thumb drive?...Yeah...no.

[nsyedhasan]

Do you really need to transfer things at more than 5Gb/s?  

^Most things won't even use 4Gb/s.

[Osmium]

Well why do we need it right now. Peripherals don't need that high of a transfer rate and storage solutions are better internally anyway. It is an amazing piece of tech but it is expensive and display port, USB, and SATA/PCIE already do what we need them to do well enough.

[1832vin]

yes, i know, but i mean, does people not seek for unification? cuz it's like on my laptop there is a ethernet cable, a DVI port, HDMI, use 3.0 ethernet cable

i mean, wouldn't it just be so much better if all of them are only one connector, then orientation of things matters much less

[iExpurge]

Its because of the price. When 3m cables start costing over 40$ something is going wrong.

[Sharif]

all of the above   

[Real_PhillBert]

Its the same reason that TV's and A/V receivers haven't adopted display port.

[Freaky_spider]

all of the above, also intel charges to be able to use thunderbolt... i think its like 15 buck for licencing fees or something, let me look it up

 

  cant find anything about it but im pretty sure they charge licensing fees for it

[iExpurge]

Also when most usb flash drives don't even reach 100 MB/s ( 1000Mb/s ) or 1/5 of the max theoretical speed for usb. There is no need to pay such redicoulous amounts for the benefits of thunderbolt.

[-iSynthesis]

Do you really need to transfer things at more than 5Gb/s?  USB 3.1 is 10Gb/s http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2338243/design-for-next-generation-reversible-usb-31-cable-is-revealed

USB 3.1 isnt available, thunderbolt has been and its can go 50gb/s with that intel controller

[Legion]

Because of how much it costs, Thanks intel

[wjdobie]

Intel is picky about who can make Peripherals... Not too mention the overpriced cables have some fancy Chips in each end

[Jamdude]

USB 3.1 isnt available, thunderbolt has been and its can go 50gb/s with that intel controller

How many people require more than 5Gb/s though?  Where does it say that Thunderbolt has transfer speeds of 50Gb/s?

[-iSynthesis]

How many people require more than 5Gb/s though?  Where does it say that Thunderbolt has transfer speeds of 50Gb/s?

Intel created a pcie controller or some controller that allows thunderbolt up to 50gbps. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Thunderbolt-silicon-photonics-optical-networking-50-gigabits-per-second-Jef-Demain,12668.html

(Correct me if i interpreted it wrong)

 

It can be helpfull if you have some kind of nas-raid array that pumps throught more than 5gpbs, or some kind of external ssd

[Guest Generallee]

imo it's not going to happen, or it will be used only by rare peripherals. I'm talking to you, firewire

[ericlee30]

Not 100% why, but maybe the partnership that Intel and Apple have together with thunderbolt might have something to do with why we do not see it a whole lot on other manufactures stuff.

[GoodBytes]

Intel Thunderbolt is not everywhere because:

-> It is actually expensive to get. The technology requires expensive components, and Intel charges a high price, which doesn't help.

-> Thunderbolt cables are expensive for the consumer. They are expensive mainly due that they need circuitry on plug ends.

-> Thunderbolt also requires a chip on the device itself (a controller), which cost money, making thunderbolt enabled device expensive.

-> Due to the high price, you have no products for it, beside external HDD's, which is a complete waste, as HDD speed doesn't even come somewhat close to USB 3.0, and USB 3,0 is bi-directional. If you seek lower latency, and lower CPU usage, then you get eSATA instead which is free (it's exactly the same SATA connector, just the shape of teh plug is made different to support more plug-in's and out, and holds better and works like the full size USB plug, without a latch system, and hold well.

So they are no real world benefit for the technology.

[Jaybird]

Intel has a thumb drive. 

[Cookie Monster]

How many people require more than 5Gb/s though?  Where does it say that Thunderbolt has transfer speeds of 50Gb

 

Need I bring up the 640kb of ram quote?

 

I remember people saying cd-roms were so big that everyday prgrams couldn't fill them up..

[SeanE]

There isn't much of a need for that fast of a transfer rate. Some people might want it, but a majority of the people have no need for it.

[elecxonica]

It needs intergrated graphics which means it won't work on most pro grade machines. Also, most consumers won't need/care for transfer speeds that fast (there'd be a lot more people with wired networks if they did)