Windows Support

I've got good news and bad news for Windows 7/Boot Camp users. If you're using the Pegasus as a pass through for a 27-inch Cinema Display, your monitor will still work under Windows 7. Unlike what we saw when Apple first introduced the MacBook Pro, there's now a Thunderbolt device listed in Device Manager. As we mentioned in our review of the MacBook Pro, the Thunderbolt device branches off 4 PCIe lanes from the Sandy Bridge CPU itself:

The bad news is that neither Promise nor PMC Sierra have published Windows drivers for the PM8011 SAS/SATA RAID controller - the Pegasus is currently unavailable under Windows.

There's some more bad news. With the Pegasus attached, you lose the ability to put your machine to sleep under Windows. Sleep works totally fine under OS X, just not under Windows with a Thunderbolt device attached. Target display mode isn't supported under Windows either.

There are a couple more quirks that exist under Windows. Apparently you can't use the ExpressCard slot while a Thunderbolt device is connected to your MacBook Pro under Windows. And finally if you have a Thunderbolt device connected and choose to eject it using the taskbar tool, you can't reactivate the device without restarting Windows. This last quirk doesn't really apply yet since there is no Windows driver support for the Pegasus, but these issues do seem a little worrisome for Thunderbolt adoption under Windows. It remains to be seen whether these are Boot Camp issues or broader problems that will impact all Windows implementations of Thunderbolt.

DisplayPort Passthrough Final Words
Comments Locked

88 Comments

View All Comments

  • enthios - Thursday, July 28, 2011 - link

    "Ironically isolated from the world around them?" How about wifi and iCloud? With limited storage capacity, there's no need for anything more. iOS devices are simply thin clients - and they work wonderfully as such.
  • NirXY - Friday, July 8, 2011 - link

    Which is 0$
  • Exelius - Friday, July 8, 2011 - link

    Yes, but in this instance, it's not just a dumb wire; there is an IC at each end of the cable. So theoretically, if Intel comes up with an upgraded Light Peak spec, there may well be cables that are capable of faster speeds. I also imagine longer cables become more difficult, and may in fact require fiber optic transceivers built into the cable. This cable also likely costs significantly more to manufacture than a crimped cable, since there's a tiny IC and micro soldering that needs to be done on each cable.

    But yes, in one sense you are right that in a digital bus, higher quality cables do not provide better performance (though I have run into very low-quality HDMI cables that work fine at 720p but refuse to carry a 1080p signal.)
  • repoman27 - Sunday, July 10, 2011 - link

    At the moment, i’m not sure the Thunderbolt host controller has any real legs on the cable. That host controller is already pumping data to each port at the same speeds as the DMI link between the CPU and PCH. Everything in the chain that is connected to it needs to get faster for Thunderbolt to get faster, i.e. PCIe 3.0, DMI 3.0, DP 1.2.

    Also, I’m pretty sure it’s not those little ICs that are making Apple’s Thunderbolt cables cost $49. Like many retailers, Apple knows that cables and accessories (and RAM upgrades) are a great place to stretch profit margins. A quick search of the Apple store for cables and adapters will turn up dozens of genuine Apple offerings ranging in price from $19 on up to $99. So, taken in context, the Thunderbolt cable is actually a mid-priced cable from Apple, not an expensive one. It also means that cheap unbranded alternatives could quite realistically be sold for around $15, ICs and all.

    Regarding your HDMI cable experience, Category 1 or “Standard” HDMI cables are only rated for 1080i60, whereas Category 2 or “High Speed” cables will do 1080p60, 4K, 3D, Deep Color, etc. Older cables weren’t marked as such, and thus YMMV.
  • snakeInTheGrass - Friday, July 15, 2011 - link

    Yeah, the SCSI cables were $75+ easily, you needed terminators, and do you remember the fine SCSI1/2/3 connector differences so you needed adapters or cables with different ends depending on the devices. I still have probably what WAS $500 of cables in my closed.

    Inflation adjusted, these $50 cables are about the equivalent of $15 cables back in those days, so frankly they don't sound too bad, especially considering the fact that it's industry leading performance right now.

    As for comparing to Monster cables, these Thunderbolt cables have controllers built into them and presumably do have to meet tighter tolerances than USB, particularly as they carry 2 x 10Gbps data streams. But you're right that Monster cables are a rip off.
  • flowynn - Friday, July 8, 2011 - link

    I remember those days well. My need for speed SCSI habit was insanely expensive.
  • MonkeyPaw - Friday, July 8, 2011 - link

    It reminds me of FB-DIMMs, an expensive solution that uses additional energy, and the components cost more than devices it replaces. Controllers in the cables AND on the motherboard and peripherals? Maybe the optical solution will make more sense.
  • CrimsonFury - Monday, July 11, 2011 - link

    I thought the initial copper cables didn't need any controllers in them? The impression I got from earlier articles was that Intel said their Thunderbolt implementation could scale to optical in future for greater speeds by releasing optical cables with a copper to optical controller in each end of the cable once controller costs had come down from mass production.
  • MobiusStrip - Tuesday, July 12, 2011 - link

    No, they need optical in the ports and wires.

    By reneging on the light in "Light Peak", Intel effectively killed it. Who knows why they're playing dumb in pretending that they're going to get the industry to adopt Thunderbolt and then turn around and adopt an optical solution right afterward. Just idiotic.
  • André - Friday, July 8, 2011 - link

    I find it especially funny considering that all current Thunderbolt solutions (A/V equipment or storage enclosures) are all in excess of $999 to begin with.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now