Why Thunderbolt Is Dead In the Water
adeelarshad82 writes "In the same way that Apple championed FireWire for the replacement of parallel SCSI, Thunderbolt is meant as the next big thing in video and audio peripheral interfaces. Plus, it's Apple's move to beat USB 3.0. However, Thunderbolt is off to a slow start, for a number of reasons — from cost to the technology's features in comparison to USB 3.0 — which is why it may be dead in the water."
That much is obvious, yes. But if you read the article, you will see that the author's primary problem with Thunderbolt is that it offers practically no improvement over USB3, while cutting out the backwards compatibility that was originally intended in the LightPeak demo. Combine that with the high cost of entry, and why would anyone want to switch to the new technology? Without high volume, the price will never come down. THAT is what the author meant.
"Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
I still have a Mac with HDI-45 connector for Apple's AudioVision 14 display. The monitor died years ago (Florida thunder storm) but was nice, having ADB connections on it. And I'm currently using 4 Apple ADC monitors, each on $100 adapter box that allows me to connect their single cable connection up to a modern Intel Mac.
Do I like the idea of single cable monitors? Hell yeah!
Do I think they'll take off? Eh... not likely. And I'm still bummed Firewire never took off as AV equipment interconnects. Would make my home theater setup a lot cleaner.
I drank what? -- Socrates
The author is an idiot. Comparing USB and thunderbolt just proves it. Thunderbold will expose pci-express lanes to external devices. USB does not even have DMA.
You mean no improvement other than basically making the PCI Express bus available to any device that wants to use it?
No improvement other than running TWO bi-directional 10 Gbps channels through a single connector? (4x USB 3.0)
No improvement other than allowing manufacturers to build Firewire, eSATA, USB, and even USB 3.0 adaptors and docks connecting to a single port?
No improvement other than (in the future) allowing you to snap in a MagSafe power cord and get power AND Thunderbolt connectivity?
No improvement other than letting you run multiple monitors simultaneously? (new iMac)
Those "no improvements"?
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
External DMA is extremely useful - it dramatically reduces system load when accessing storage devices (whether single drives or drive arrays). This lets a notebook be used for data-intensive work (like video and photo work) with minimal overhead. DMA makes the difference between a pleasant experience and whimpering in the corner.
Claiming that external DMA is horrible idea is disingenuous; winlockpwn (or FireWire, or Thunderbolt) requires physical access to the machine, at which point security becomes a non-issue because there is none - DMA has nothing to do with it. If an attacker has physical access to a machine, the game is over.
More to the point: Winlockpwn is not a weakness of DMA, but in how Windows uses DMA. Windows has enough remote security problems; we don't need to go into the problems it has when an attacker has physical access.
-- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.