@Noobs-R-Us: Well its coming soon I'm sure. I agree with you. I don't think I will spend more to get usb3.0. So its faster but its over priced right now. Also not a standard yet not many have adopted 3.0 yet. I think I'll wait. One more thing LightPeak will be awesome!
@Mike Zuniga: That was Unexpected: 3.0 is backward compatible with 2.0 but I don't know about older 1.1 hardware. Also 3.0 has more contact areas. #supertalent
@Mike Zuniga: That was Unexpected: Yeah I remember reading something that it would work like that, but as a bonus you get the higher power provided to 2.0 devices, making them charge even faster. #supertalent
This delay is really shaking my interest in USB3, especially when the likes of eSATA and (in my case) FW800 can pick up the slack for high speed data transfer. With that, I'm glad my MBP is brand new, since by 2011 I'll still be using it as my main system, and probably won't upgrade until USB3 has lots of adoption (and hopefully in Macs) and peripherals are plentiful.
As stated in the article, Asus already has their Mobo with 2 USB 3.0 slot on it. They have also released a 4 port USB 3.0 card as well I think. Hopefully more companies follow suit if this unnecessary delay it true. #usb30
@curious-character: 10x faster than USB 2.0, charge your devices faster, use less CPU cycles with large data transfers, and CPU won't need to constantly poll devices for data. #usb30
@CraigJ: My thoughts on this: Intel is delaying UBS 3.0 in order to give Light Peek a chance to gain market share when it is released in 2010. After all, they helped design the standard, they will want to promote its adoption, even if that means unnecessarily delaying the support of competing products. #usb30
@Xelmon: its a competing standard that was developed by Intel alone (USB3 was created by a number of parties incl intel). Light Peak uses fiber optic like technology to achive it's fast speeds, but has more durablity the FO and has a copper wire for charging. It is due for comercial release some time next year. #usb30
@Peregrinvs: Like hell. My mouse cannot get any better.
Unless I find a mouse that can make nachos and pizza and get me a soda/whiskey/both, while I still use it to frag nOObs. Is that part of USB 3.0, or will I have to wait for 4.0? #usb30
@whiteknight89 still plays DiabloII: Then just give me your soul so I can convince Intel to give me a chipset with DDR5 ram and a couple of those fancy PCIE 2.0 SSDs.
I don't know... I don't think I would sacrifice a PCI-E slot just for a couple of USB 3 ports. Most motherboards are likely to have a surplus of SATA ports in which case it would be easier to just install some SATA to eSATA converters. The existing SATA standard already nets you 3Gbps which isn't too much slower than USB 3.0's 4.8Gbps.
@B-low: True, but you can't beat the plug-and-play convenience. Which would you rather trust granny to plug in: a USB device or an eSATA device? #usb30
@B-low: @B-low: I have to disagree a little here. 3Gbps vs 4.8Gbps is a transfer speed difference of more than 60%. That's pretty significant, I think.
I still agree generally...it's tough to sacrifice a PCI-E slot when you'll have lots of extra SATA ports. #usb30
@Counterglow: If you're already transferring at 3gbps, it's hard to imagine having a file large enough for the 4.8 gbps to make a big difference. Well, on a domestic computer, at least. I guess it's the difference between a 30 second transfer, and a 20 second transfer. But that's still not much. #usb30
@Pope John Peeps II: Most of the time you're probably going to be transferring data from an internal drive with an interface speed of 3.0Gbps to an external USB drive. So you're still capped at 3.0Gbps regardless of the fact the USB interface speed is 4.8Gbps.
Plus, I imagine there is some overhead anyway translating from SATA to USB 3.0.
SATA and eSATA are just two different physical interfaces. They both use SATA commands.
@Counterglow: Shouldn't we first determine how much of that 4.8 Gbps is available in the real world?
High speed USB 2.0 is rated at 480 Mbps = 60 MB/s...but in the real world, you're lucky to be able to get half of that. As I understand it, the real-world limit is due to overhead, extra processing, etc. in the spec. I've never seen any device that can actually transfer even 45 MB/s over USB 2.0.
Do we know if the 4.8 Gbps is going to actually be achievable? #usb30
@Counterglow: Seeing as only the most elite RAM-based "hard drive" devices can even think of touching 3Gbps currently, forget it. 4.8 isn't gonna happen for you. #usb30
@Sneaky0: Right now nothing that I'm aware of. Some NAS setups in RAID are well capable of write speeds in excess of 500MBps or over 4Gbps but I think at those thresholds you begin to see bottle necks all over the place. I'm not sure if many CPUs can handle data transfer at that rate. #usb30
@B-low: That's what I meant. Without a raid setup or similar, reaching those speeds are nearly impossible. Also the average users don't even know what a raid is. It's great having a connection that's capable of those speeds, but until manufacturers start making fast disks at consumer prices. These connections are somewhat useless in the real world. #usb30
10:28 AM
11:23 AM
12:58 PM
#tips
03:47 PM
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
However, there are those that value pornography. #supertalent
11/04/09
I'll live inside one of these. I call the 128 GB. :) #supertalent
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
Yes. Light Peek #usb30
11/04/09
11/04/09
Please do expand on Light Peek... Are they the guys that devved 3.0? #usb30
11/04/09
11/04/09
Ahhhaaaa... Noted! #usb30
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
But maybe I'm misreading. Last night was a loooooong night. #usb30
11/01/09
Also, when you swap up to a better mouse, I get your old one. ;] #usb30
11/02/09
Unless I find a mouse that can make nachos and pizza and get me a soda/whiskey/both, while I still use it to frag nOObs. Is that part of USB 3.0, or will I have to wait for 4.0? #usb30
11/02/09
=D You've gotta be worth somethin', right? #usb30
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
I still agree generally...it's tough to sacrifice a PCI-E slot when you'll have lots of extra SATA ports. #usb30
10/31/09
10/31/09
Plus, I imagine there is some overhead anyway translating from SATA to USB 3.0.
SATA and eSATA are just two different physical interfaces. They both use SATA commands.
10/31/09
High speed USB 2.0 is rated at 480 Mbps = 60 MB/s...but in the real world, you're lucky to be able to get half of that. As I understand it, the real-world limit is due to overhead, extra processing, etc. in the spec. I've never seen any device that can actually transfer even 45 MB/s over USB 2.0.
Do we know if the 4.8 Gbps is going to actually be achievable? #usb30
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/31/09
[www.pcper.com] #usb30