Well i am bottlenecked at gigabit networking for transfer between two PCs with simple RAID-0 hdds, so this will definitely come in handy. I hope there is networking support using it.R3DP3NGUIN said:
A HDD alone wont utilize the full bandwidth of USB3 let alone thunderbolt. I dont think it will be very useful for the average person until SSDs are priced right.
Long distant, super-low-latency, super-high-speed data transfers without thousands of dollars of fiber network line equipment has a place in a lot of businesses and definitely in my home. Transferring 2TB of data over 100mbps network line takes days. Half a day on gigabit. This might take it down to a couple hours.dikbozo said:
Thunderbolt will fit right in on those old Rambus RAM machines. Another attempt by Intel to force people to pay them tribute. USB 3.0 has a huge advantage, the billions of USB 2.0 devices that will work with it. TB has zip, zero, squat, nada for an installed base and NO plans to be compatible with USB 2.0. DOA as Apple has such a minimal base, 5%, that they won't be much of driver for this tech.
If it were to be used for internal connections, drives, system buses, as well as external devices and was USB 2.0 and/or 3.0 compatible, then it would blow past the current infrastructure and become mainstream. It ain't so it is dead.
Intel wanted the interface to be compatible with USB....the USB-IF torpedoed the plan. Thunderbolt is also royalty free.. Another attempt by Intel to force people to pay them tribute. USB 3.0 has a huge advantage, the billions of USB 2.0 devices that will work with it...NO plans to be compatible with USB 2.0
Cool story bro...TB has zip, zero, squat, nada