Pravius
Apr 22, 08:37 AM
You never OWNED any of this stuff. You owned the physical media, and you had an unlimited license to you. The technology is just clarifying this.
If you had actually owned it, you could have copied it as much as you wanted-- legally-- and resold the copies to others. You have been capable of doing this, but it was illegal; it also was difficult to enforce the law. Now the technology is actually starting to match your legal rights. It's actually wonderful. You are not losing anything you had legally, but the true owners (the content creators and the people who support them financially) can stop getting ripped off by criminals.
Not sure this will completely stop piracy, but it will further deter it. However if you can store it on a drive without any sort of DRM. This service will do nothing for piracy.
If you had actually owned it, you could have copied it as much as you wanted-- legally-- and resold the copies to others. You have been capable of doing this, but it was illegal; it also was difficult to enforce the law. Now the technology is actually starting to match your legal rights. It's actually wonderful. You are not losing anything you had legally, but the true owners (the content creators and the people who support them financially) can stop getting ripped off by criminals.
Not sure this will completely stop piracy, but it will further deter it. However if you can store it on a drive without any sort of DRM. This service will do nothing for piracy.
RKpro
Apr 30, 07:07 PM
Yes! Credit card is ready.
I kind of wish they made a 24" model, but it's very unlikely. Because it would have a smaller pixel density than last year's 21.5" model.
Unless they can somehow source some 24" LCDs with very weird resolutions that slot between 1920x1080 and 2560x1440.
I kind of wish they made a 24" model, but it's very unlikely. Because it would have a smaller pixel density than last year's 21.5" model.
Unless they can somehow source some 24" LCDs with very weird resolutions that slot between 1920x1080 and 2560x1440.
needthephone
Oct 27, 08:04 AM
They do build in obsolescence into the ipod as you can't replace the battery (easily). It does become a disposable item, although a pricey one at that. I do love the ipod (even though I don't own one) but this puts me off to the point where I just can't go through with actually buying one. My experience with rechargeable batteries in mobile phones and lap top isn't good.
HarryKeogh
Mar 23, 04:34 PM
This is ridiculous. I drive better when I'm drunk.
ctdonath
Mar 22, 02:34 PM
How are you MBP owners liking your Thunderbolt port? Do you feel like someone with a DVD disk in 1975?
Having a host with that port makes it easier to get a device to match than the other way around. At most months until match-up instead of years.
Having a host with that port makes it easier to get a device to match than the other way around. At most months until match-up instead of years.
kettle
Oct 27, 02:04 PM
Yeah, but what is currently out there that's better?
That's an empty question that just defends what's going on as "don't worry, it'll be all right" when what people are really too frightened to ask is how long will this go on and what opposing force will be needed to make it change direction. Things are getting worse and lately it's hard to ignore the smell.
That's an empty question that just defends what's going on as "don't worry, it'll be all right" when what people are really too frightened to ask is how long will this go on and what opposing force will be needed to make it change direction. Things are getting worse and lately it's hard to ignore the smell.
Boomhowler
Apr 19, 07:51 AM
While I think this is silly I fully understand why Apple has to put down their foot and show what they think is ok and not ok to protect their brand. The phone IS very similar to the iPhone 3G and since it's almost impossible to sue someone for software design (so not google then) they sue the hardware company: Samsung.
Spyriadon
Apr 30, 01:29 PM
Also the obligatory:
OMG A MAC RUMOR.
-snigger-
OMG A MAC RUMOR.
-snigger-
Vegasman
Mar 30, 12:56 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Windows are generic. More so than app store. Just took at your browser and see where it says open a new window. This is not specific to only windows OS.
I am old enough to remember the complaints of Microsoft calling there OS windows when they were not the first to create the concept.
But "Windows" are not operating systems. The "App Store" is an app store.
Windows are generic. More so than app store. Just took at your browser and see where it says open a new window. This is not specific to only windows OS.
I am old enough to remember the complaints of Microsoft calling there OS windows when they were not the first to create the concept.
But "Windows" are not operating systems. The "App Store" is an app store.
Eraserhead
Apr 19, 04:19 PM
What about a hotshot stock trader making a killing working 80+ hours a week on salary. Should we be allowed to work this much without overtime?
Probably not. If the bankers had worked sensible hours they'd have been better integrated with society as a whole which would almost certainly have made the financial crisis less likely.
Probably not. If the bankers had worked sensible hours they'd have been better integrated with society as a whole which would almost certainly have made the financial crisis less likely.
Eidorian
May 3, 12:12 PM
You can see the multiple monitor setups for those cards in the usual hardware sites.That is still one display per output though.
HecubusPro
Sep 14, 09:27 AM
There is no way in hell that they will introduce laptops at this event.
Period.
I agree. This isn't a big computer hardware event. This is why I'm banking on the this Tuesday, the 19th for C2D MBP's. I think.:)
Period.
I agree. This isn't a big computer hardware event. This is why I'm banking on the this Tuesday, the 19th for C2D MBP's. I think.:)
XArt@justinks.c
Sep 13, 09:01 AM
Apart from the word serach not being on 5GiPod, only the new 5GiPod has it (but seem that this is incorect, proberly some hidden option to enable).
It dose 640x480 h.264 when updated to 1.2 but still need to find out if it dose games as well as the new improved video size.
has the new iPods been givev improved ARM7 or upgraded to ARM9 for games or is it the same and just needs 1.2 for games as well as 640x480 video
It dose 640x480 h.264 when updated to 1.2 but still need to find out if it dose games as well as the new improved video size.
has the new iPods been givev improved ARM7 or upgraded to ARM9 for games or is it the same and just needs 1.2 for games as well as 640x480 video
sam10685
Sep 10, 08:58 AM
My nano is already on eBay awaiting a nice metal clad 8GB version, I hope they do an andonised black one though to match my other gadgets.
wow. your rather optimistic. hope everything works out for you.
wow. your rather optimistic. hope everything works out for you.
hobo.hopkins
Apr 20, 10:48 AM
so the program can not find the file. Does that mean my iPhone isnt tracking me?
I was just about to post the same thing; the application says that it couldn't find the consolidated.db file. I even tried syncing my iPhone once more and it still didn't help. An interesting note though - I own a Verizon iPhone. I wonder if that has anything to do with it.
I was just about to post the same thing; the application says that it couldn't find the consolidated.db file. I even tried syncing my iPhone once more and it still didn't help. An interesting note though - I own a Verizon iPhone. I wonder if that has anything to do with it.
KeriJane
Mar 19, 11:24 AM
Hi munkery
Thank you for the helpful link. It explained a lot.
I was wondering why Linux and OSX are virus-resistant and the page you linked to explains it well.
The old "market share" argument didn't make sense to me because:
1- the fame associated with writing the first major Mac (or Linux) virus would be immense.
2- there's at least some hatred of Apple out there amongst the technically proficient. (geeks). I've met such a person..... Very smart, very pro-Linux and if you mention you like Macs or own one.... BOOM! :eek:
That guy and probably lots of others really, really hates Macs. If he could he'd take down Apple in an instant.
3- if the conspiracy theories are true, the AV companies and/or Microsoft would love to shatter Apple's image of invulnerability to viruses. Even if they aren't actively trying to develop one, they wouldn't mind it if someone else did.
Thanks to all for the insights,
Keri
Thank you for the helpful link. It explained a lot.
I was wondering why Linux and OSX are virus-resistant and the page you linked to explains it well.
The old "market share" argument didn't make sense to me because:
1- the fame associated with writing the first major Mac (or Linux) virus would be immense.
2- there's at least some hatred of Apple out there amongst the technically proficient. (geeks). I've met such a person..... Very smart, very pro-Linux and if you mention you like Macs or own one.... BOOM! :eek:
That guy and probably lots of others really, really hates Macs. If he could he'd take down Apple in an instant.
3- if the conspiracy theories are true, the AV companies and/or Microsoft would love to shatter Apple's image of invulnerability to viruses. Even if they aren't actively trying to develop one, they wouldn't mind it if someone else did.
Thanks to all for the insights,
Keri
MattG
Aug 28, 01:32 PM
Wow, that Dell 2010...it's just like an iMac, just 3x the price and 3x as ugly. Eww.
aswitcher
Sep 15, 06:36 PM
I'll be very tempted if it has;
3MP
All the display info in the latest iPods
BT
4-8 GB
Full iLife intergration (iSync, iTunes, iPhoto, iCal, Address book (with pictures), Mail)
Earphones (Pref BT and acts as hands free)
Desire
3G?
iChat with BT for Audio?
Widgets?
WiFi
IR remote feature
Light / Flash
3MP
All the display info in the latest iPods
BT
4-8 GB
Full iLife intergration (iSync, iTunes, iPhoto, iCal, Address book (with pictures), Mail)
Earphones (Pref BT and acts as hands free)
Desire
3G?
iChat with BT for Audio?
Widgets?
WiFi
IR remote feature
Light / Flash
BRLawyer
Apr 28, 03:59 PM
So, are we supposed to be proud about this? And if so, why has the same 'accomplishment' earned Microsoft the 'M$' reputation? Double morals?
Illegal and abusive monopolistic practices, as opposed to a legitimate market domination based on innovation and organic growth.
Illegal and abusive monopolistic practices, as opposed to a legitimate market domination based on innovation and organic growth.
samiwas
Apr 18, 04:56 PM
Of course that is ridiculous, and I totally agree there should be a line, but where do we draw it? Who gets to draw it?
Ummm...that was pretty much the point....:confused:
The line should be drawn by universal standard workers laws that prevent an employer from needlessly abusing their employees (timewise) without just compensation.
For instance, when I'm working on a union job (yeah, those awful unions protecting workers and stuff), anything over 8 hours a day is time+half. Anything between midnight and 6am is double-time. More than 40 hours in a 7-day period is time+half. Sunday is time+half. The employer has a right to decide when he wants his job done, and he can pay the price for it. The problem is that most employers choose ridiculous timelines and budgets, and the people working for them are stuck having to work the hours to complete something beyond their control. Without some sort of workers protection laws, this will only get worse and worse.
Of course, there are jobs that have to get done in a certain amount of time (as I referenced above), and some people may alter their speed and go slower to push into that overtime (of course this happens...I've seen it firsthand and abhor the practice). But that's no different than an employer dumping a new workload onto someone on Friday afternoon and saying "Yeeeaahh...I'm gonna need you to go ahead and come in tomorrow. Oh, and I almost forgot, I'm also gonna need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday, too, okay? We, uh, lost some people this week, and, uh, we have to sort of play catch up. Thanks!"
So, do you prefer a world where the employer has all the control and can make his employees do whatever he wants for whatever he wants to pay (or they can quit/be fired), or a world where employees have some sort of power to require fair compensation for extraordinary work periods? I know which I prefer, and I'm pretty sure I know which you prefer.
What about a hotshot stock trader making a killing working 80+ hours a week on salary. Should we be allowed to work this much without overtime?
I realize it is an obscure analogy, but it is valid nonetheless.
What does the hotshot trader making a killing have to do with anything? What if the trader is working 80 hours a week and not making a killing? Is the trader WANTING to work 80 hours, or is his firm requiring him to work 80 hours? Are they compensating him or is he just working for the man making the killing for his company but not really seeing the results for himself? I guess if someone WANTS to work 80 hours for free, you can let them...but it should never be a required part of the job.
Ummm...that was pretty much the point....:confused:
The line should be drawn by universal standard workers laws that prevent an employer from needlessly abusing their employees (timewise) without just compensation.
For instance, when I'm working on a union job (yeah, those awful unions protecting workers and stuff), anything over 8 hours a day is time+half. Anything between midnight and 6am is double-time. More than 40 hours in a 7-day period is time+half. Sunday is time+half. The employer has a right to decide when he wants his job done, and he can pay the price for it. The problem is that most employers choose ridiculous timelines and budgets, and the people working for them are stuck having to work the hours to complete something beyond their control. Without some sort of workers protection laws, this will only get worse and worse.
Of course, there are jobs that have to get done in a certain amount of time (as I referenced above), and some people may alter their speed and go slower to push into that overtime (of course this happens...I've seen it firsthand and abhor the practice). But that's no different than an employer dumping a new workload onto someone on Friday afternoon and saying "Yeeeaahh...I'm gonna need you to go ahead and come in tomorrow. Oh, and I almost forgot, I'm also gonna need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday, too, okay? We, uh, lost some people this week, and, uh, we have to sort of play catch up. Thanks!"
So, do you prefer a world where the employer has all the control and can make his employees do whatever he wants for whatever he wants to pay (or they can quit/be fired), or a world where employees have some sort of power to require fair compensation for extraordinary work periods? I know which I prefer, and I'm pretty sure I know which you prefer.
What about a hotshot stock trader making a killing working 80+ hours a week on salary. Should we be allowed to work this much without overtime?
I realize it is an obscure analogy, but it is valid nonetheless.
What does the hotshot trader making a killing have to do with anything? What if the trader is working 80 hours a week and not making a killing? Is the trader WANTING to work 80 hours, or is his firm requiring him to work 80 hours? Are they compensating him or is he just working for the man making the killing for his company but not really seeing the results for himself? I guess if someone WANTS to work 80 hours for free, you can let them...but it should never be a required part of the job.
mcarnes
Sep 19, 01:56 PM
I'd gladly wait overnight for a solid 1080p movie that played in quicktime. Don't need the DVD features (or frickin' ads). Just give me the movie.
kryca
Apr 23, 02:31 PM
Yes, built-in 3G is more costly to buy, usually locked into a particular carrier (what do you mean I can't switch my 1500$ laptop to a new carrier ?) and with the Rev D's 2nd USB port being next to a display port, the "extension" cable is moot.
So you are quite missing tons of things. The current scheme of "get a stick from your carrier" is the best as far as costs and carrier non-attachment go. I tether to my iPhone using Bluetooth anyhow, making the USB thing even more moot.
Built-in 3G is overrated.
It's just not up-to-date anymore. At least for a company that claims to be on the bleeding edge.
My iPad is not locked into a specific carrier and it's a officially fully supported configuration. So it's not really alchemy involved. Same could be done for the MBA. I also do not intend to abuse my iphone as a modem - I don't see why I do have to keep two devices going to get *one* of them online. That iPhone workaround sounds like a real bad excuse to me - it's just a way of keeping carriers happy (because phones usually are bought directly from the carriers with a 1+ year lock-in and for computers I assume people would rather turn to the AppleStore).
For my laptop I also want to have a different carrier and price plan.
So you are quite missing tons of things. The current scheme of "get a stick from your carrier" is the best as far as costs and carrier non-attachment go. I tether to my iPhone using Bluetooth anyhow, making the USB thing even more moot.
Built-in 3G is overrated.
It's just not up-to-date anymore. At least for a company that claims to be on the bleeding edge.
My iPad is not locked into a specific carrier and it's a officially fully supported configuration. So it's not really alchemy involved. Same could be done for the MBA. I also do not intend to abuse my iphone as a modem - I don't see why I do have to keep two devices going to get *one* of them online. That iPhone workaround sounds like a real bad excuse to me - it's just a way of keeping carriers happy (because phones usually are bought directly from the carriers with a 1+ year lock-in and for computers I assume people would rather turn to the AppleStore).
For my laptop I also want to have a different carrier and price plan.
cwt1nospam
Jan 3, 08:09 AM
Ummm.... Didn't most of the early iOS jail breaking methods target holes in OS. Sure more grey hat than black hat but risk is there to be aware of regardless of platform.
That "risk" requires the active participation of the user. That's a huge difference from simply tricking them into clicking/tapping on something.
In theory, your bank account is vulnerable to a hacker getting you to deliberately withdraw cash and give it to them, even though you know what they're trying to do. Is that a realistic possibility? It's not any less real than the same hacker getting you to deliberately jail break your iPhone so they can send you a virus.
That "risk" requires the active participation of the user. That's a huge difference from simply tricking them into clicking/tapping on something.
In theory, your bank account is vulnerable to a hacker getting you to deliberately withdraw cash and give it to them, even though you know what they're trying to do. Is that a realistic possibility? It's not any less real than the same hacker getting you to deliberately jail break your iPhone so they can send you a virus.
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 10:27 AM
Yes because everyone loves to carry around external breakout boxes with their sleek portable Macbooks.... :rolleyes:
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
0 comments:
Post a Comment