[outworlder]

So, will Apple finally be able to refresh the Thunderbolt Display?

I got an old one I want to sell before it gets obsolete. I guess the time is now.

Edit: "Thunderbolt 3 integrates USB 3.1, optional 100W power delivery, 5K @ 60Hz display."

Optional power delivery? Optional nowadays just mean "will be removed before even reaching production"

[wlesieutre]

Universal Serial Bus. With optional universalness.

I think Roritharr is right, this is the beginning of the end for the great era of standardization that USB brought. If there was a port and a cable, you pretty much knew it would work for everything the port should do.

DisplayPort and HDMI port/cable versioning have been a colossal pain for me. GPU spec lists on shopping sites don't even list what version they support, so you have to constantly cross reference things to manufacturer datasheets.

http://i.imgur.com/ffMR5gj.png

What's sad is that we had the same sorts of differentiations in the past, like with DVI-I (digital and analog) and DVI-D (digital only) and Dual-link DVI (for big screens). So what did we do? We called them different things and then actually advertised what it was capable of.

But apparently saying "DisplayPort 1.2" is too complicated now or something? Maybe there are too many different optional features that may or may not be supported by a GPU or the cable or the display, so they just assume none of them will work? I don't even know.

That screenshot isn't an old graphics card either, it's a GTX 970.

Not looking forward to USB turning into the same mess.

EDIT: This isn't all new, I recall seeing some laptops with strange things like yellow USB ports that were still powered for charging when the computer is sleeping. But that's a minor feature that most people wouldn't even notice. Major capabilities missing from some ports is different, and can get more confusing than "the blue ports are faster but all of them will work".

[tw04]

That is completely inaccurate. USB-C is backwards compatible with older versions of USB. And just like older versions of USB, the version directly determined capabilities. They did make an effort with USB3 to make the ports blue, but even that isn't universally true.

USB is already "that mess" depending on what it is you need the port to do. Let me know how that USB-powered device that needs 90W does when you plug it into a port that's only 1.0 capable.

[matthewmacleod]

Optional power delivery? Optional nowadays just mean "will be removed before even reaching production"

Your point is taken, but we also have to consider if that would even be possible. 100W is not a power level that a laptop device is going to be able to output, so it clearly can't be standard. It's good to have a standardised option, however.

[timdorr]

Whenever this makes it's way to the Macbook Pro (probably next year?), this will definitely enable them to make the upgrade. Right now, they don't have any TB3-capable computers, so no one would want to buy that monitor.

And I guess the sticky part will be all those 12" Macbook's with Type C connectors that wouldn't work with such a display...

[bryanlarsen]

Those 12" Macbook's aren't capable of driving a 5K display at 60Hz, period, even if they had a TB3 port. However, a TB3 display plugged into a standard type-C port would negotiate a DP1.2 connection so it could run 5K@30 or 4K@60.

[timdorr]

I'm not saying they should. I'm just saying there will be confusion about there being a Type C connector on the monitor and the laptop, and that they don't work together.

[bryanlarsen]

But I'm saying that they probably will work together. Downgraded, sure, just like when you plug a USB3 hard drive into a USB2 port. It's not fast, but you can get your files off.