Apple blames Intel for no USB 3.0 support

By on November 1, 2010, 4:55 PM
An Apple fan recently e-mailed the company's CEO, Steve Jobs, asking about whether there'll be USB 3.0 (SuperSpeed) support in Macs soon. "We don't see USB 3 taking off at this time," Jobs reported wrote in a response e-mail, according to 9to5 Mac. "No support from Intel, for example."

SuperSpeed support isn't expected in the core-logic offerings accompanying Intel's Sandy Bridge CPUs, which are slated to arrive early next year. USB 3.0 support will instead arrive with Intel chipsets as part of the Chief River platform, expected enter mass production in September 2011 and get a public announcement in January 2012, according to a DigiTimes.

This begs the question: why is Intel not embracing the next version of USB as soon as possible? It's possible that the company is introducing delays on purpose, due to Light Peak. What do you think?





User Comments: 52

Got something to say? Post a comment
KG363 KG363 said:

Light peak is amazing. I completely understand why they wouldn't fully support USB 3

akannitaoheed said:

If light peak is it, then am in for it provided they start to roll out HDDs and other devices to using the standard simultaneously.

alexandrionel said:

If light peak is or can be a cash cow for Intel why the hell should they support USB 3.0 and affect their own income?

P.S.

I don't agree to what they are doing and I am not a fan of their products.

---agissi--- ---agissi---, TechSpot Paladin, said:

That would make sense financially wouldn't it?

Guest said:

LightPeak of course is pretty awesome and much desired, but USB 3 would be a decent stop-gap until LP comes out...so I think Intel has made a bad decision here.

Plus it may force people who want to upgrade to just wait for LP's release, as opposed to buying USB3 supported products next year (had intel decided to back it).

This is just as bad as Steve Jobs not supporting Flash. Why not give all the options to its customers and let us decide if we want to favor a certain technology or not?

2 steps forward 1 step back

princeton princeton said:

Blame game blame game. Even if apple is correct here they need to stop blaming everyone for every little thing.

Compnut said:

Someone needs to get the axe. USB 3 should be supported no ifs ands or buts. Other manufacturers are on board and usb 3 products are rolling out. No excuses, we need the speed, Intel should not be dragging their feet.

UT66 said:

Light peak is amazing-ly slow to materialize, where the hell is it? usb3 is here and it works. intel needs to suport usb3 because they have nothing else to market.

TeamworkGuy2 said:

I think Intel wants to delay USB3.0 so that when they release Light Peak it will really take off. Maybe I am wrong, but it makes sense, because if it is hard to find a computer to plug your USB3.0 device into, your going to stop using it.

Light Peak might be faster, but as others have said, USB3.0 is here!!! It is ready for use. How much closer to the consumer does it get than that...

mailpup mailpup said:

Motherboard makers aren't waiting for Intel support. They are including third party USB 3.0 on their motherboards anyway. If Light Peak comes along and catches on, fine, but until then we can use USB 3.0.

princeton princeton said:

Someone needs to get the axe. USB 3 should be supported no ifs ands or buts. Other manufacturers are on board and usb 3 products are rolling out. No excuses, we need the speed, Intel should not be dragging their feet.

Typical new user. Doesn't read the other comments. Intel is doing ANYTHING BUT dragging their feet. Lightpeak could do away with sata, usb ect all together. I guess developing revolutionary tech is dragging their feet.

Alathorne said:

DigiTimes reports Intel is talking up an upcoming Chief River platform with mobo manufacturers that is supposed to include native support for USB 3. Mass production in late 2011. Could this be Intel bowing to demand, or could LightPeak be more challenging than expected to bring into production?

klepto12 klepto12, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Intel still needs to support USB 3.0 but lightpeak will change everything if they can get it out soon. USB 3.0 is still needed at this time because alot of people are tired of waiting on usb 2.0 to do its job. This will cause many people to wait for LP to come out and cause less upgrades overall.

SNGX1275 SNGX1275, TS Forces Special, said:

Very few full computer manufacturers offer USB 3 support right now anyway, if you want it you have to buy your own card or build your own system. I see a few articles on some laptops have it planned in the future and with the exception of an eeePc I think they aren't cheap.

So while I think Apple should be planning on it being included, I don't think they are too much in the wrong here by taking the stance they are.

ChrisG683 said:

I'm really torn, I want to buy a Sandy Bridge CPU next year... but I don't want to leap right before 3.0 sees adoption. Course I said that before Intel delayed 3.0 this year, let's hope they don't do it again.

MetalX MetalX, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

I really think Light Peak is a much better implementation of peripheral connection technology than USB 3, or any non-optical version of USB could ever be. I'm hoping that the reason Intel is delaying USB 3 support is to push Light Peak. 10 Gbps of long range optical bandwidth, with the option of copper cables to retain the charging and power capabilities of USB is something the computer industry could seriously benefit from.

Trillionsin Trillionsin said:

Light Peak does sound amazing. Waiting for fiber optic motherboards.....

ruzveh said:

Intel is getting foolish here as they are rolling out usb 2.0 and not 3.0. What difference does it make for them to roll out 3.0? Anyways i am happy with my present P55 boards and i am really not looking for so called Sandy bridge untill it comes with usb 3 controller

Adhmuz Adhmuz, TechSpot Paladin, said:

My year old X58 platform will last me for quite some time, the Idea of upgrading just to get USB 3 or LP is of no interest to me nor do I own any devices that support either. Gonna pass on Sandy Bridge and probably the next iteration too, there's not much my current rig can't do. For anyone else waiting for either to come out it seems almost pointless, until either has had full market adoption both are pretty useless. When I can have a USB 3 flash key that is actually going to use then bandwidth and have a capacity that makes it worth while then I'll consider the upgrade. Till then eSATA works for me just fine when large data transfer is required.

Recipe7 Recipe7 said:

I purchased a UD3R Gigabyte MB with 2 USB 3.0 slots... its been a year and still hasn't been penetrated with a 3.0 Flashdrive or anything =\.

PaulWuzHere PaulWuzHere said:

even if apple was to support USB 3.0 they would put mini USB 3.0 ports in their computers, then they could charge $39.99 for a mini USB 3.0 to USB 3.0 apple certified adapter.

P.S. Unix sucks

slh28 slh28, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Lightpeak is definitely preferable over USB 3, and I can't help but feel that USB 3 is doomed without the support of someone like Intel. I bought a USB 3 mobo several months ago and don't have any devices connected to those ports.

FransB said:

Lol its intels fault? They can develop their own drivers if they buy chips from NEC/Renesas i think they dont need Intel for that in my opinion.

Darth Shiv Darth Shiv said:

Guest said:

LightPeak of course is pretty awesome and much desired, but USB 3 would be a decent stop-gap until LP comes out...so I think Intel has made a bad decision here.

Plus it may force people who want to upgrade to just wait for LP's release, as opposed to buying USB3 supported products next year (had intel decided to back it).

This is just as bad as Steve Jobs not supporting Flash. Why not give all the options to its customers and let us decide if we want to favor a certain technology or not?

2 steps forward 1 step back

HSDL is out earlier and is 20Gbit/s - close to Light Peak's initial max reported bandwidth. i.e. Light Peak is already obsolete to a product in the market and it isn't even out yet. Intel need to pull their finger out.

sMILEY4ever said:

Well, I agree with Intel. Why bother with USB 3.0 when they already know about something twice as fast.

Burty117 Burty117, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

The thing is, Apple create the actual MotherBoards for there computers do they not?

Intel supply the chipset.

Surely just installing the USB3 chip on the motherboard and updating OSX to use the chip is the easyest option? lots of motherboard Manufacturers can do it such as Asus and Gigabyte, why can't Apple?

Burty117 Burty117, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Also to add, if i'm going to spend £1500 on a Laptop i would "Expect" USB3 support!

Se7enVII said:

Would have been cool to see USB3 adopted earlier but LightPeak should make things interesting too!

Vrmithrax Vrmithrax, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Granted, LightPeak is a product concept with phenomenal potential. But, that's just what it is right now: potential. When it arrives, it will be like every other new technology that hits the marketplace - it will be expensive, hard to find compatible peripherals, etc. Full scale adoption will take a while, just as USB took a while to be adopted.

So, in the meantime, rather than giving consumers the option of using the readily available (and already widely adopted) USB 3.0 equipment, Intel is basically holding the industry hostage by refusing to support it. It's a classic case of "when I get it, my ball is going to be WAY better than your ball, so until then I'm just not playing!" As far as a marketing strategy for Intel, it's smart, but also very stupid. Smart, because they are trying to stem the tide of USB 3.0 adoption, by making it seem like it's not an "industry-wide" platform (the less people that jump to 3.0, the more they can woo to LightPeak). But it's stupid because consumers WANT the option, and Intel is refusing to provide it. Ticking off your customer base isn't the greatest strategy, usually.

It seems a bit petty and shortsighted to me (and apparently many many others). After all, the chipsets being provided now won't work with LightPeak anyhow, they will require a revision to natively support it. So, rather than make a chipset with SOME high speed provisions now, they are artificially retarding the current offerings, until they make a whole new setup for their LightPeak technology. Honestly, I'm a bit surprised no lawyers have jumped in with screams of anti-competitive practices and thrown yet another lawsuit at Intel (since that seems to be the "in" thing to do these days).

wiak said:

Light Peak is useless atm, PCI Express is to slow for it and USB 3.0 even gets bottlenecked by current PCI Express 2.x, given the fact that USB 3.0 is backwards compitable with USB 1.x and USB 2.0 why do you want Light Peak then?, if you say harddrive, then harddrives cant even hit SATA 1.5Gbps speeds yet, SSDs might but then light peak is bottlenecked by PCI Express :P

USB 3.0 is great atm, Light Peak will be useful in 10 year or something other than that its a waste of time

VitaminC said:

Honestly now, I don't need USB3 for my keyboard/mouse/Ipod/Portable Hard Drive/GPS/thumb drive(bare used anymore due to dropbox) to run at there max potential. So, i don't need another freaking port i'm not going to use, but pay a premium for when i buy my next motherboard.

bioflex said:

well whats Light peak if i may ask?.....i never heard of it, could it be like some other interface like fire wire or usb or what?.......any way although i think is going to be great, i mean just look at how long it takes to get bigger drives on a usb 2.0 pen drive.

ucould2 ucould2 said:

vitaminc said:

Honestly now, I don't need USB3 for my keyboard/mouse/Ipod/Portable Hard Drive/GPS/thumb drive(bare used anymore due to dropbox) to run at there max potential. So, i don't need another freaking port i'm not going to use, but pay a premium for when i buy my next motherboard.

That could be another reason not to adopt a "universal USB-3.0 platform" If you wanted to have higher retail prices a for longer period of time. What better way of controling that than owning the replication rights (copyright) eg. the automatic transmission in motor vehicles was always the more expensive or additional cost to the purchase price.

My guess is they (Intel) walk into their local computer store and looking at the "multi-card reader" in the bubble wrap hanging, cheaply off the hook remark where is the "Intel Marketing Share" in that rock-bottom pricing?

nazartp said:

slh28 said:

Lightpeak is definitely preferable over USB 3, and I can't help but feel that USB 3 is doomed without the support of someone like Intel. I bought a USB 3 mobo several months ago and don't have any devices connected to those ports.

There are quite a few hard drive enclosures that support USB 3. I bought one to connect an external back-up. In all honesty, all USB 3 needs is external drive manufacturers to get on board. The prime use for high speed external port is the large scale storage and USB 2 is not cutting the mustard with 2 TB hard drives out in the wild.

buttus said:

It Apple creates it, then it is new, revolutionary and inventive....but if Intel or anyone else invents it (Adobe anyone?) then it isn't "there" yet, or not up to Apple standards, or sub par and the tsk tsk finger pointing begins.

Don't get me wrong. I do love Apple products. But the pompus arrogance of the company is flat out distasteful.

9Nails, TechSpot Paladin, said:

This makes me wonder what exactly is Apple doing with their R&D money! They have the cash to buy their own chip design and make a chipset supporting all the features that the customer is asking for and anything that they want. They are a hardware design business primarily, and software design company as secondary. It wouldn't be the first time that Apple took a leap and stood behind a technology (SCSI, Appletalk, Firewire, Bonjour, etc). For them to sit on a mountain of cash and blame a partner for their shortcomings is just lazy.

Demons said:

Oh yes, it's all intel's fault. Ever heard of an expaintion card... or better yet, your own on board add on. Apple is all about making their own stuff anyway. Is it so hard to add USB 3.0 to your hardware.

frodough said:

I bet apple will sue, hell they sue so many ppl it's like eating a piece of candy to them. if they like proprietary connections they should just make their own apple-to-apple-talk crap. beggars cant be choosers if you got the money and dont wanna wait, DIY

AbsolutGaloot said:

I'm sure lightpeak is neat and all, but if it's not done yet, Intel should put out USB 3.0 and stop making us wait.

TorturedChaos, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

What I want to know is why he is blaming Mac's lacking of USB3 on Intel. I know Intel hasn't started supporting it yet, but plenty of Mobo have 3rd party chips installed on them that do. Why can't Apple get one of those 3rd party compaines to make they a batch of chips, and Apple writes the support into Mac OS - hey USB3!!!

Sounds more like Apple is being lazy and pushing the issue off on Intel as a scapegoat.

whiteandnerdy said:

i think they should wait for lightpeak. i only have one usb 3.0 device and thats my new external. i see many more devices becoming available for light peak if intel supports it.

SNGX1275 SNGX1275, TS Forces Special, said:

Also to add, if i'm going to spend £1500 on a Laptop i would "Expect" USB3 support!

There are less than a handful at any price that support USB 3 right now.

blimp01 said:

i dont even use USB3 because all i do is use a USB mouse/keyboard lol

HaMsTeYr HaMsTeYr said:

I think that they're really putting all of their money into light peak at the expense of isolating themselves from the world... Sure light peak is amazing, but will it have arrived in time before everyone starts using usb3 and it becomes the next firewire

hitech0101 said:

Apple blames intel for what ? Apple if is dependent on intel rolling out on USB 3.0 they have some issues.Besides apple's policy has made Mac not polupar they restricted everything & now they are paying & not able to keep up microsoft OS & do not have control on the PC market.Intel has a good reason to delay it why not? Everyone is worried what they can do to increase their profits.

kaonis92 said:

Intel's delays are understandable, they are trying to make fibers an affordable techology available to everyone, something not easy.

acecom said:

The argument over Intel's decision not to build USB3.0 into its Sandy Bridge chipsets is sterile. One can safely assume that motherboards will just ship with 3rd Party USB3.0 Chipsets in the meantime. Npthing to stop Apple doing the same. They just want a free ride rather than having to provide support through their O.S

Puiu Puiu said:

They are taking a really big risk with Light Peak. We'll see what they do with it. If it's as great as they then it might be worth the wait.

klepto12 klepto12, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I understand lightpeak but i still think there is a place for usb 3.0 since we all have tons of usb related items intel could have lightpeak and usb 3.0 but like someone else pointed out there is nothing that can do that kind of bandwidth anyway while usb 3.0 would be amazing right now and way faster than what we have.

jazboy said:

LightPeek definitely will be awesome. I guess Intel is delaying usb for their own benefit. But i think Intel doesn't need to worry as LightPeek will be bigger than usb 3.0 so they should start pushing usb 3.0.

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.