Talk:Light Peak
{{WikiProject banner shell}}
to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.![]() | Computing Redirect‑class | ||||||
|
on board
Apple seems to be on board, I say seems because so far it's only in mac blogs. Some of them must have references saying more than might/probably/secretly plan to. 217.39.57.220 (talk) 10:35, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- This link may be interesting to you, then; it says Apple is the originator of the concept, and asked Intel to develop it. --moof (talk) 15:10, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Powered cable
Will the Light Peak cable include electrical power to the gadgets? Thue | talk 19:21, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- Found the answer: Intel is working on it. Thue | talk 19:29, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Competing optical technologies
Are there emerging/competing technologies with a similar goal and performance spec? Alanbrowne (talk) 20:51, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Transfer Rate
Gb/s = Gigabits per second, not Gigabytes. Can someone please clarify which of these two is the correct transfer rate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.5.150 (talk) 08:13, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Suggested characteristics by public section
I'm just curious where this section came from. I've performed several google searches on the subject, and haven't come up with anything. Who are the "public" this section is referring to? Cyclonius (talk) 03:00, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Any new info?
It's the middle of Februrary 2010... and there been any new developments with Light Peak? --70.167.58.6 (talk) 16:54, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Bulky cables
Optic cables aren't bulky in general. Only multi-fiber types designed for "outside" use are equipped with heavy armouring. Those used to connect devices in racks are even thinner than an ordinary USB cable. I admit, however, that more convenient plugs should be developed for customer use (OFC_ST) but unlike USB and FW they still should feature latches. Stlman (talk) 19:37, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
ClearCurve speed
Even the single-mode version, with a single carrier frequency, offers maximum data rates of 25 Gbps.[4]
If I remember correctly my physics courses, monomode fibers are always the fastest, as you don't have any modal dispersion; only chromatic dispersion (insignificant). So the word Even is superfluous or wrong.
I'm not totally sure (that's why I post this comment and don't edit the page) but I guess it should be replaced by
The monomode version offers maximum data rates of 25Gbps. [4] --7e'o (talk) 08:40, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Connector picture
Is there a picture of any connectors for cables using this standard? Also, is there already a pictorial convention on how the connectors would be labeled? Demf (talk) 18:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- To this date the connectors are stil not defined. For the prototype shown during IDF 2010 Intel used a modified USB connector.
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20100915/185684/ 212.99.48.166 (talk) 11:27, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Large section removed
In April a single-edit anon editor removed a large portion of the article with no notice, checkin note, or anything of the sort. Should this be reverted? Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:41, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- I have done so, let's see if anyone pops up to explain the deletion. 90.195.73.153 (talk) 18:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Removing "written like an advertisement."
I'm of the opinion that it's going to be difficult to write a truly NPOV article about technology that hasn't been released to the public. This is to be expected because the company has a near monopoly on all the information regarding their product.
That being said, I'm going to go ahead and remove the "written like an advertisement" header. I think the article does a pretty good job of maintaining an encyclopedic tone and, when I read through it, I didn't notice anything that sounded like advertising.
If you believe that the WP:SOAP tag still belongs, please provide explicit examples of where the article needs improvement. If something is not properly cited, well, that's what [citation needed] is for. Robert Seaton (talk) 16:36, 14 September 2010 (UTC)