Thunderbolt Hubs and docking stations

Not referring to the cost of cables here. I'm talking about the bandwidth requirements of the users here. You're saying it's much faster, sure, no one would question that, but i've also given an example that 4K video has no bandwidth issues when used with the Thunderbolt 2 ports Apple are sporting on the Mac Pro. 4K Video is usually the peak benchmark disk speed applications use in benchmark tests, so do you have any examples of higher data bandwidth applications that the average consumer uses to benefit from this faster data? (Keeping in mind that 4K video is still far from getting close to any level of mainstream adoption)

P.S. I get that you've had more than your fair share of hassles from what you've said with Thunderbolt, so it's understandable you're irritated, but the problem sounds more like a manufacturating / quality control issue in your case

You are missing the point completely.
It's not just the cost of the cables, its the cost of the entire ecosystem! Optical interconnect would have made everything ultimately cheaper AND more reliable, AND futureproof.

I was responding to your points over speed and its relevance to users. Cheaper would've been a great thing though. As things went, Apple made a decision that at the time likely made the most sense to them (probably a mixture of technology and cost), the power issue is a relevant one, optical had not solved that problem and copper was a solution to that problem, and I can't see Apple having chosen the optical route when they knew it wouldn't suit what they felt the user's needed at that time, even if now, in 2013, we are seeing things moving towards optical, now. That said, neither of us work for Apple, nor know the actual factors considered when they made these decisions. What we do know is it's 2013 and we still don't have Thunderbolt hubs, we only have docks, the same kind of thing Sony did back in 2011 with this technology, but using optical. Maybe having optical might have changed this, but given hubs often support devices that draw power there would've been technical issues that an optical version of Thunderbolt would've created too.

So it appears a Thunderbolt hub with ports to attach multiple TB devices is not possible, due to the Thunderbolt standard itself. However it is possible to create hub that has Firewire and other ports, along with an additional TB port to daisy-chain additional TB devices.

It would be nice if Apple (or another company), offered a TB to Firewire or TB to DVI/HDMI/etc. adapter with the extra TB port to daisy chain additional TB devices. Nothing fancy, keep it small and simple and (relatively) cheap.

If you own a MBA and want an external display and say a FW external drive, it's not possible unless you buy a $300 hub, or the $1000 Apple TB Display. That's quite a premium to pay, for a relatively ordinary configuration.

Belkin Thunderbolt Hub

• Connect 8 separate devices to your laptop through a single Thunderbolt cable (Cable sold separately)
• 1 Thunderbolt port to connect to laptop
• 1 Thunderbolt port to connect Thunderbolt devices (Daisy-chain up to 5 devices through one port)
• 1 Gigabit Ethernet port
• 1 FireWire 800 port
• 1 3.5mm Headphone Output Jack
• 1 3.5mm Audio Input Jack
• 3 USB 3.0 ports (data transfer at 2.5Gbps max)
• Powered USB 3.0 Ports support USB Charging (500mA)

If you own a MBA and want an external display and say a FW external drive, it's not possible unless you buy a $300 hub, or the $1000 Apple TB Display. That's quite a premium to pay, for a relatively ordinary configuration.

Yup, that's my complaint exactly. I don't even mind that TB has such constraints, or that the only solutions involve $300 products, but Apple removed any other way to connect devices (except for USB 2.0, which isn't very good for fast devices). At least they might've had more than one TB port on a MacBook Air. So here I am with an array of nice FW800 disks that I can't use without unplugging the 22" monitor that's hogging the only TB port. This is not one of Apple's more user-friendly technical improvements.

I just love iot when people assume that other people are ignorant and post so called solutions that don't address the point being raised initially! That belkin box is expensive and doesn't do everything it needs to. It can't give you more bandwidth than the upstream thunderbolt port. And it's still thunderbolt based which has all of the problems i have referenced before. Nice try!

The only positive thing I will say about the MBA and this current limitation regarding multiple peripherals and the TB port, is I guess at least this option is open to us now- compared to last year's MBA with only USB ports.

I hope that at some point, cheaper adapters will become availabe of the sort I described- a simple Firewire or DVI adapter with a 2nd TB port...

brainburst wrote:

I just love iot when people assume that other people are ignorant and post so called solutions that don't address the point being raised initially! That belkin box is expensive and doesn't do everything it needs to. It can't give you more bandwidth than the upstream thunderbolt port. And it's still thunderbolt based which has all of the problems i have referenced before. Nice try!

I just love it when people post claiming to know what everyone else wants. Nothing has more bandwidth than Thunderbolt. If you can't afford one go without

Nobody called you ignorant but you displayed quite a lot of it in that post.

The issue here is that there is no reasonable-cost way to get high-speed data on an Apple product with one Thunderbolt port, and we have had to wait two years for even the few high-cost solutions. Constantly proposing high-priced solutions to a problem that previously didn't even exist is not helpful, and at the very least appears to be condescending, whether intended that way or not.

I previously had a very nice MacBook Pro with FW800, for which there were numerous peripherals at decent prices. I now have a MacBook Air with a single TB port, and no way to use many of my peripherals (aside from USB 2.0) without spending several hundred dollars on one of the hub devices, none of which do everything that I want. And, to make matters worse, we've had to wait two years for them. This is, to understate the problem, a sub-optimal situation.

I will be *very* careful in the future to delay purchase of Apple products (and not rely on promises) until it's clear that they will meet my needs. In the case of my current MacBook Air, had I known what I do now, I would not have bought it. Two years is way too long to find out that it still doesn't meet all of my requirements (and possibly never will).

xgrep wrote:

The issue here is that there is no reasonable-cost way to get high-speed data on an Apple product with one Thunderbolt port, and we have had to wait two years for even the few high-cost solutions. Constantly proposing high-priced solutions to a problem that previously didn't even exist is not helpful, and at the very least appears to be condescending, whether intended that way or not.

Of course it didn't previously exist, until TB existed the issue did not, that is no surprise.

As TB is a daisy chain system why not use it as designed, 1 port, up to 7 devices supported. And lest you forget all of the previous options still exist, TB is an additional one (just like USB3)

You seem to be saying that TB doesn't work the way you would like it to, and is too expensive. Why not stick with Firewire in that case?

Csound1 wrote:

You seem to be saying that TB doesn't work the way you would like it to, and is too expensive. Why not stick with Firewire in that case?

You are absolutely correct in what I am saying. And, as I said, had I known in Nov 2011 what I now know, instead of believing promises of many TB devices soon to come, I would not have bought my MBA, and would've kept the MBP with FW800 and waited to see what else Apple was going to do.

Saying "why not stick with Firewire" is not a helpful suggestion (and it appears condescending, even if it wasn't intended that way). What would you propose now? That instead of spending $300 for a TB hub, I spend $2000 for an Apple product of some sort so that I can somehow get Firewire capability again? Better yet, I could maybe spend $10M on a modified DeLorean with new flux capacitors so that I can go back in time and warn myself to keep the MBP and not buy the MBA (and I could still use the DeLorean to shop for groceries).

Stop blaming the victims for "failing to understand what TB is" while claiming to not be disappointed because you knew what you were getting into. Apple didn't pull this off well, and they and everyone else know it. We also know that there's no good way to fix it other than to wait until economies of scale bring prices down and selection of products up (which is the normal cycle for all new technologies). That will happen, but it's taken far longer than anyone wanted (Apple and Intel included).

Firewire exists on all Apple devices using the TB to FW adaptor it also exists on most Apple devices from before TB debuted. Frankly I don't see the issue.

instead of believing promises of many TB devices soon to come

Who promised you that, and do you know how many TB devices already exist?

Csound1 wrote:

As TB is a daisy chain system why not use it as designed,

TB is *not* a daisy chain system if peripherals don't provide a second TB port. None of the low-cost TB products provide a second TB port. I'm referring here to Apple's TB-FW800 adapter, which, aside from that, is an excellent product. You can say that "it's not a peripheral", but the fact is that it doesn't allow chaining; it is, in effect, a chain terminator, consuming the TB port at the head of the chain.