The technology inside Apple's $50 Thunderbolt cable

[Lazybones]

The technology inside Apple's $50 Thunderbolt cable http://t.co/98oxkj4 via @arstechnica

The cable has transceivers at each end tuned to the length and type of cable to reduce noise and achieve the new insane high speeds.

I expect the "Monster" version of these cables to retail for $1000+

[Tom]

The technology inside Apple's $50 Thunderbolt cable http://t.co/98oxkj4 via @arstechnica

The cable has transceivers at each end tuned to the length and type of cable to reduce noise and achieve the new insane high speeds.

I expect the "Monster" version of these cables to retail for $1000+

Too bad for them, they can't gold or platinum plate the optical only cables

[Lazybones]

The technology inside Apple's $50 Thunderbolt cable http://t.co/98oxkj4 via @arstechnica

The cable has transceivers at each end tuned to the length and type of cable to reduce noise and achieve the new insane high speeds.

I expect the "Monster" version of these cables to retail for $1000+

Too bad for them, they can't gold or platinum plate the optical only cables

It sounds like the optical cable will have the same connector and transceivers. Thus be backward compatible and enable long cable runs.

[Tom]

The technology inside Apple's $50 Thunderbolt cable http://t.co/98oxkj4 via @arstechnica

The cable has transceivers at each end tuned to the length and type of cable to reduce noise and achieve the new insane high speeds.

I expect the "Monster" version of these cables to retail for $1000+

Too bad for them, they can't gold or platinum plate the optical only cables

It sounds like the optical cable will have the same connector and transceivers. Thus be backward compatible and enable long cable runs.

Hm, it seems that the connector is electrical only. That kinda sucks. A fully optical cable would allow runs of hundreds of meters. I wonder if they'll make a super long optical only cable that leaves out the copper between the transceivers. I can only guess that that'll increase the cost of longer cables significantly.

Last I heard about it, it was supposed to support both optical and electrical communication with the same connector, no transceivers, and cables had the option of leaving out the optical, or electrical connections. So I guess that's where the money goes. Instead of the device having the optical module on it, you now pay for EACH CABLE to have them.

[Lazybones]

Yet at $50 it is cheaper than most analog monster cable.

Also I suspect it has to do with mobile devices not needing the extra transceiver inside.

[Mr. Analog]

Granted there is a semiconductor at each end (just like HDMI, PCI-E and USB) but why so expensive??

Oh yeah: Apple.

Right then.

[Tom]

Granted there is a semiconductor at each end (just like HDMI, PCI-E and USB) but why so expensive??

Oh yeah: Apple.

Right then.

None of those cables have two semiconductors built in to each cable afaik.

But yes, most of it is Apple charging whatever they want for it.

[Mr. Analog]

Granted there is a semiconductor at each end (just like HDMI, PCI-E and USB) but why so expensive??

Oh yeah: Apple.

Right then.

None of those cables have two semiconductors built in to each cable afaik.

But yes, most of it is Apple charging whatever they want for it.

Look up "active cables"

[Tom]

Granted there is a semiconductor at each end (just like HDMI, PCI-E and USB) but why so expensive??

Oh yeah: Apple.

Right then.

None of those cables have two semiconductors built in to each cable afaik.

But yes, most of it is Apple charging whatever they want for it.

Look up "active cables"

They are not the norm by far. For thunderbolt, it seems its the only way you can go.

[Mr. Analog]

Granted there is a semiconductor at each end (just like HDMI, PCI-E and USB) but why so expensive??

Oh yeah: Apple.

Right then.

None of those cables have two semiconductors built in to each cable afaik.

But yes, most of it is Apple charging whatever they want for it.

Look up "active cables"

They are not the norm by far. For thunderbolt, it seems its the only way you can go.

I think HDMI is pretty common now-a-days what with our horseless carriages and zeppelins and all...

It's the only way you can go for devices that require it, yes, sort of like proprietary batteries make Sony products work.

[Lazybones]

Did you guys even read the article?

A source within the telecom industry explained to Ars that active cables are commonly used at data rates above 5Gbps. These cables contain tiny chips at either end that are calibrated to the attenuation and dispersion properties of the wire between them. Compensating for these properties "greatly improves the signal-to-noise ratio" for high-bandwidth data transmission.

You think this cable is expensive, try pricing out a External PCI Express cable.. It is a thick SOB and costs in the hundreds! We use them to interconnect our switch stack. O and it only achieves between 5 and 8 Gig, Thunderbolt Optical will do 40 and higher!

[Tom]

Granted there is a semiconductor at each end (just like HDMI, PCI-E and USB) but why so expensive??

Oh yeah: Apple.

Right then.

None of those cables have two semiconductors built in to each cable afaik.

But yes, most of it is Apple charging whatever they want for it.

Look up "active cables"

They are not the norm by far. For thunderbolt, it seems its the only way you can go.

I think HDMI is pretty common now-a-days what with our horseless carriages and zeppelins and all...

It's the only way you can go for devices that require it, yes, sort of like proprietary batteries make Sony products work.

I was talking about Active cables, not plain old HDMI cables.

Did you guys even read the article?

A source within the telecom industry explained to Ars that active cables are commonly used at data rates above 5Gbps. These cables contain tiny chips at either end that are calibrated to the attenuation and dispersion properties of the wire between them. Compensating for these properties "greatly improves the signal-to-noise ratio" for high-bandwidth data transmission.

You think this cable is expensive, try pricing out a External PCI Express cable.. It is a thick SOB and costs in the hundreds! We use them to interconnect our switch stack. O and it only achieves between 5 and 8 Gig, Thunderbolt Optical will do 40 and higher!

Yeah I read it. I can see active cables helping. But now you pretty much cut out pure optical cables and the extended length that would come with. And more expense. So they sacrificed longer runs for cheaper end points.

[Lazybones]

What good is a longer cable if you loose all of your speed?

[Tom]

What good is a longer cable if you loose all of your speed?

You wouldn't loose all your speed with an optical cable. But each end needs to provide its own power. But that's not really a huge issue.

The original plan I read about was to allow optical only, electrical only, and combined optical+electrical cables. All using compatible plugs. I guess they decided to drop all of that, and go with a combined, active cable. Which makes the cable more expensive, and less flexible (ie: shorter runs only).