Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: Thunderbolt Still Has Problems For Linux

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by molecule-eye View Post
    Let Apple and the few other endorsers use thunderbolt and the rest better cross-platform interfaces like USB and HDMI.
    I think you meant DisplayPort

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    49

    Default

    I just got an Intel motherboard with a Thunderbolt port. The fact it has one was mostly seen as a negative for me, since it potentially opens up DMA attacks and I don't really have any use for it. As of now, I don't even have a way of testing if it works, and have no idea what to do with it. I've heard of people gluing theirs shut, but I figure there has to be something it's useful for, right? Other than a display port of course, though even that is useless to me right now.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    840

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    Firewire and Thunderbolt hit the same problem, they're new and different....
    New? ...firewire dates back to the very late 80's or early 90's. Obviously, thunderbolt is somewhat new 2010 or 2011..? i can't remember off-hand the exact years...

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    The people who are gonna USE thunderbolt are the same people who used Firewire...

    Technologically informed computer users who buy into Apple's marketing / hate Windows... Or in other words: Audio/Video guys. Thunderbolt will remain THEIR niche the same way Firewire did.
    Firewire is still very much a highly used standard among proaudio device manufacturers, *regardless of platform/OS* and much more popular than thunderbolt. Sure, Firewire came from Apple, but it's common place and has been for a long time. It's really not a matter of buying into Apple's hype / hating windows ~ USB 2.0 is often less reliable, imho and more importantly ~ USB 2.0 is about half of the transfer rate of Firewire 800 based devices (and that is only in theory, USB 2.0 NEVER lived upto it's supposed 480mbps metric) and you can run firewire cables a lot further (which is an important practical detail)....

    Even with USB 3.0 isn't it still only half the total band-width of thunderbolt? (unless this has changed?)...

    < note: i use neither thunderbolt nor USB 3.0 devices, but do have USB 2.0, firewire 400 && firewire 800 based audio interfaces ... so i do have experience with those. firewire is *always* better than USB devices of the same type - in terms of speed / performance, stability and reliability . >

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    782

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ninez View Post
    New? ...firewire dates back to the very late 80's or early 90's. Obviously, thunderbolt is somewhat new 2010 or 2011..? i can't remember off-hand the exact years...
    He was comparing what hindered the firewire adoption in the 90s to what is hindering thunderbolt adoption now, not saying that firewire is new today.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tga.d View Post
    I just got an Intel motherboard with a Thunderbolt port. The fact it has one was mostly seen as a negative for me, since it potentially opens up DMA attacks and I don't really have any use for it. As of now, I don't even have a way of testing if it works, and have no idea what to do with it. I've heard of people gluing theirs shut, but I figure there has to be something it's useful for, right? Other than a display port of course, though even that is useless to me right now.
    You can use it as a low-latency point-to-point network if you like. Better than 1Gbs ethernet at latency-bound loads despite the nominal 800Mbps speed.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Thunderbolt is dead. It won't see any adoption.
    It is not royalty-free, so it cost much money.
    Also it is Intel-owned with no third-party manufacturers, so you have to buy the circuits from Intel, no competition.

    Also, USB 3 which is royalty-free is "good enough".
    Lets just wait for USB 4.

    Also Chromebook Pixel sucks, it costs very much, its expensive and only has 4 GB RAM and 32 or 64 GB SSD. So it is only good as a web browser.
    There is very little need to go above 4GB of RAM at this point unless you like to open tons of big applications all at once which is not something 99% of people do. The (relatively)small amount of storage is because you're supposed to store everything in Google Drive. The display is what makes it so expensive. That's just what happens if you want a good display at the moment. I guess now you could say Google has the same "tax"(high-end hardware) that Apple does.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,300

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    You can use it as a low-latency point-to-point network if you like. Better than 1Gbs ethernet at latency-bound loads despite the nominal 800Mbps speed.
    According wikipedia it only allows 3 meter long cables.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    According wikipedia it only allows 3 meter long cables.
    Comparable range to IRDA then

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Thunderbolt was actually created by Intel. Apple is just the only one using it.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by caryhartline View Post
    There is very little need to go above 4GB of RAM at this point unless you like to open tons of big applications all at once which is not something 99% of people do. The (relatively)small amount of storage is because you're supposed to store everything in Google Drive. The display is what makes it so expensive. That's just what happens if you want a good display at the moment. I guess now you could say Google has the same "tax"(high-end hardware) that Apple does.
    Developers are advanced users and often do things like virtualization.
    Example Windows developers who run Linux in a virtual machine.
    Or Linux users that run Windows or another Linux guest.

    For virtualization, you preferably do want more than 4 GB RAM.

    Or if you're a developer doing Java or .NET then that can take quite much RAM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •