Microsoft Announces $299.99 Surface Thunderbolt 4 Dock That Connects via USB-C (theverge.com) 64
Microsoft has just officially unveiled the Surface Thunderbolt 4 Dock hours after the device leaked. From a report: Priced at $299.99, the new Surface dock will connect over USB-C instead of the proprietary Surface Connect port. Microsoft is planning to keep selling its Surface Dock 2, complete with the Surface Connect port that's designed for Surface devices that don't have USB-C or Thunderbolt 4. This new Surface Thunderbolt 4 Dock will support devices other than Surface for the first time. You can connect to it via USB-C, and it supports data transfer speeds of up to 40Gbps and 96W charging thanks to Thunderbolt 4. At the front, there is a single USB-C port alongside a USB-A port but sadly no SD card slot. The rear of the Surface Thunderbolt 4 Dock has two USB-C ports, two USB-A ports, a 2.5-gigabit ethernet port, an audio jack, and a security lock slot.
Why is Thunderbolt a thing? (Score:2)
Re:Why is Thunderbolt a thing? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: Why is Thunderbolt a thing? (Score:2)
Re: Why is Thunderbolt a thing? (Score:5, Informative)
Thunderbolt is faster than USBC and has lower latency.
USB-C is a specification that describes a physical port, a port that is not specific to any one protocol. Thunderbolt is a protocol that has at least two physical ports specified for carrying it. Claiming Thunderbolt is faster than USB-C is a rather nonsense statement because to get the speed of Thunderbolt 4 it must use the USB-C physical port to carry the protocol. Thunderbolt also uses the mini-DP port but, unless there's been something new I am not aware of, the speed of the protocol would be limited by the capabilities of that physical port.
The USB spec used to have the physical ports and the protocol in the same specification documents, that is no longer true. They have one spec for the physical ports, and another for the protocol, and so confusingly USB ports don't always carry the USB protocol and the USB protocol isn't always carried on USB ports.
I know tone doesn't translate well over forums like this so don't think I'm trying to be mean, I simply want to correct a misconception on what USB-C means because I have a tendency to be a pedantic ass. Further, I have a tendency for misconceptions on USB to be a particularly sore spot for me for some reason.
Re: Why is Thunderbolt a thing? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This is literally the best explanation I've read on the topic. Thank you for your pedantry.
Re: (Score:2)
USB-C carries many signals. Thunderbolt 4 is PCIe over USB-C. All Thunderbolt 4 is USB-C, but not all USB-C is Thunderbolt 4.
And if you are confused now...you won't be after our next edition of S*O*A*P
Re: (Score:3)
Thunderbolt is PCIE. It can be carried over a USB-C connector.
Re: Why is Thunderbolt a thing? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Many governments have said mobile must use USB C. While most of us know that thunderbolt is just a fancy USB C port I suspect the real story here is that MS, like Apple, is being forced to end is high profit proprietary connector business.
It is not. Precisely zero government requirements relate to peripherals. Microsoft's Surface line has for a long time supported charging from a USB-C device since the Surface connector has from the very beginning been nothing more than USB-C and since their charging bricks have from the very beginning being USB-PD with a proprietary connector. Any Surface device with USB-C already supports charging meeting any government requirement.
Microsoft isn't forced to end it's proprietary connector business, it simpl
Re: (Score:2)
EDIT: The Surface Connector was nothing more than USB. Obviously it wasn't USB-C since that *is* a connector.
Re: (Score:1)
Many governments have said mobile must use USB C. While most of us know that thunderbolt is just a fancy USB C port I suspect the real story here is that MS, like Apple, is being forced to end is high profit proprietary connector business.
We are fortunate to be living in a time when USB is perfect, in it's final form, and that we'll never need another connector. Peak Technology, and it can now be mandated by law by politicians, the arbiters and brain trust of technology. No non compliant connectors, after all, there is no need for them. /s
Oh Frabjous day!
Meanwhile, people like myself would like to present our cable bins, full of all the other final configurations of USB and other cables.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
The EU entities you're whining about rarely mandate anything other than "Industry must settle on a standard". They never say "They must use XYZ". They never say "That standard cannot be changed in the future". They just say "Hey, industry, pick a standard, and all abide by it, and if you change it, abide by that."
The EU has never mandated microUSB, USB-C, GSM, or any of the other technologies it's supposedly mandated.
Ohhh, dood! https://www.bbc.com/news/techn... [bbc.com]
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/2... [cnbc.com]
https://appleinsider.com/artic... [appleinsider.com]
https://www.consilium.europa.e... [europa.eu] It's a USB-C port that must be on phones sold in the European Union in 2024, and it is the law. That is a mandate.
You know, you could do a little research before declaring true statements as "whining". Not sayin' .. just sayin'.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing you linked to says otherwise. The europa.eu letter could be read as claiming that, but it's actually just pointing out that's the effect.
Take it up with the European Parliament. Here's their press releases on the matter. https://www.europarl.europa.eu... [europa.eu]
https://www.europarl.europa.eu... [europa.eu].
At this point, you've doubled down already, gonna go for tripling down? I guess it depends on how foolish you want to look.
Re: (Score:3)
USB-C (as referredf to in this article) is merely a physical plug interface.
The actual data transport is 4 pairs of differential TTL (same as SCSI, but differential SCSI uses 16 or 32 pairs of differential TTL operating at a much lower frequency, and direct keyed rather than encoded transport).
Then there are the various USB data encoding protocols which can be used to encode the binary data traversing the differential connections. These "encodings" are not in any way related to the "physical plug". You co
Re: (Score:1)
USB-C: It's a floor wax *and* desert topping! :)
Re: (Score:2)
RS-232 connector
For a comment that is pointing out that "the protocol isn't the connector" the above was a pretty big one to miss... RS-232 uses DB25 or DE9 connectors. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Not just an Apple thing. I recently got an Intel NUC (my new HTPC, yay!) which has it (but I'll probably just use its HDMI out).
I think it's a thing because it has more bandwidth than USB, but is somehow compatible with it, too. What I can't figure out is why Microsoft releasing docking station (and a surprisingly expensive one) is big news, except that I guess it further mainstreams Thunderbolt?
Re: (Score:2)
for vacations and the like (IE, would like to play games but don't want to pack up my desktop) i use a akitio node with a GTX 1080 gpu on a laptop with an anemic onboard gpu -- it actually performs quite, quite well.
something like 90% of the framerate you'd get running the card directly.
something to consider for your NUC :)
Re: Why is Thunderbolt a thing? (Score:2)
If you're going there, you can get the same-sized case as the whole computer with a NUC extreme (lol)
https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/... [pcmag.com]
Although for some reason the NUC 13 is much larger?
Re: (Score:2)
USB/USB4 are protocols
USB-C is a port. it supports many different protocols over it - including things like HDMI and DisplayPort. It also supports 240W power delivery.
Thunderbolt 3.0 is one of the protocols supported over USB-C. It is basically PCIe over a wire.
USB4 is an incompatible protocol from USB 3.0, and is based on Thunderbolt 3.0. Yeah, the 4 isn't a version number but part of the name - USB4 2.0 is unfortunately a real thing.
Thunderbolt 4.0 is a brand, but it is by Intel. Think of it like AMD Free
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it just Intel/Apple branded USB?
No. No it is not. It's a whole different standard from the signalling upwards. It just happens to share a USB-C connector.
And yet you get a decent dock for a lot less (Score:2)
For example from Lenovo.
Re: (Score:2)
My company uses Lenovo docks and has constant problems with them, crashing, overheating, and they aren't cheap either... $299 is actually a fair price for a decent thunderbolt dock.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For example from Lenovo.
You cannot get a Thunderbolt 4 compatible dock from Lenovo for less. If you don't want Thunderbolt 4 then don't get it, you can get a cheaper dock from Microsoft too if you don't want Thunderbolt 4 and are happy with slower transfer speeds.
Lenovo's cheapest Thunderbolt 4 dock is $40 more expensive than this one.
Just say $300 Microsoft! (Score:2)
All those 9's are annoying! Nines are a marketing mind trick. I don't think they work anymore because everyone knows about it and it makes you look sleazy. But, I could be wrong, many are perhaps still fooled by it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except stores still do stupid searches. Looking for items under $10? They all use a filter of "price < 10" in their searches, which mean a $10 item will not be found by the search. However, a $9.99 item WILL show up. That's why the practice still continues. Of course, back in the 19th century,
Re: (Score:1)
One the flip side, the $10.00 may stand out from the crowd, generating sales that way. "We're straightforward people, none of that '99' gimmick".
You almost had me (Score:2)
Nice headline. My mind went from "A $300 Surface tablet might be a nice entry-level iPad competitor" to "Oh, it's just an overpriced dock" in like a millisecond.
Re: (Score:2)
I was confused on the news too as this doesn't sound like anything to get excited about. Then I realized that the "real news" is that Surface tablets are getting USB-C ports that are Thunderbolt capable. Or at least that's how I interpreted this news.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's really not. Basically any capable dock with Thunderbolt 4 is more expensive than this. It's like saying a Ferrari is a headscratcher. Yeah if you spend all day driving in a school zone you don't need a car that does >350km/h But there are use cases for it.
Docks are expensive, largely because they are damn capable as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, it's just an overpriced dock
Citation needed. What Thunderbolt 4 dock is cheaper? Someone already mentioned Lenovo but it turns out their cheapest Thunderbolt 4 dock is $40 more expensive. Dell's cheapest Thunderbolt 4 dock is $65 more expensive. HP's is $30 more expensive.
Re: (Score:2)
Citation needed. What Thunderbolt 4 dock is cheaper?
Well, I mean overpriced in the sense of things like those fancy automatic vinyl record washing machines. As in, there's probably a use case for it for people who have that kind of budget and a specific need for such a device, but it's not something I'd ever consider buying.
Re: (Score:2)
From a quick search on Amazon: Dell ($230), Kensington ($260), Anker ($180 but a "mini" TB4 dock), CalDigit ($230) and Satechi ($245) all have cheaper TB4 docks from brand names I would consider. Other respectable brands match the $299 price point.
Re: (Score:2)
For $300 it has to do more than USB and display (Score:2)
Almost every dock I'm familiar with just adds some USB ports and a display output or two. MAYBE there's an extra Thunderbolt port. Unless this thing has 10GbE and a couple m.2 or 2.5" drive slots, I can't see how it would be worth $300 vs any number of vastly cheaper options.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't see how it would be worth $300 vs any number of vastly cheaper options.
There's basically no Thunderbolt 4 docks on the market that are under $300. In fact if you compare with Lenovo, Dell, and HP this one here from MS is actually the cheapest. If you don't want Thunderbolt 4 you can get cheaper from Microsoft too.
It doesn't just add USB. It also has 2.5Gig-E ethernet, audio, and unlike cheap docks on the market the display connectors are not complete buckets of shit. I've never used a sub $300 dock and been happy with them and I'm glad my work stopped providing us with cheap s
Re: (Score:2)
Are the graphics port DisplayLink or real graphics?
DisplayLink is basically MPEG-encoded video. You don't want to use DisplayLink when playing videogames.
It's gonna suck (Score:2)
Just about all thunderbolt and USB-C docks suck and they're priced similarly. If Microsoft's didn't suck, it would cost 200 bucks more.
For the cost of a Lenovo notebook (Score:4, Interesting)
With enough ports that you don't even need a dock.
Just a quick warning (Score:1)
In related news, Microsoft just announced they're making a dock! HOW EXCITING. I'll take 100.
Probably valid (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not touching this not because of the price but because it's MS hardware.
At work, MS surface laptops are flacky at best.
At home, a simple MS Keyboard needs F'n drivers to be downloaded!?!? Are you kidding me?
They own the OS and can't embed their own exotic keyboard drivers in the OS!?!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have any problems with the Surface line. I own a couple of Surface Pros and my wife and kid have Surface Laptops.
Story time: When I visited my local COVID-19 vaccination center, I was struck by the fact that every single desk (out of about 200) had a Surface Pro on it, and there was no electrical or network wiring throughout the site as you'd expect.
There was one little miniature rack with all the networking and WiFi equipment in it to serve the whole facility.
That they used Surface Pro told me it
$299 for a dock? (Score:2)
At that price it better let you park a yacht next it.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not out of line [microcenter.com] with other options [microcenter.com].
Docks that have a single cable for multi-display, charging, ethernet, USB-A, and USB-C run about that price. Cheaper options exist [microcenter.com], of course, but most notably, they have to send video signal over USB-C, rather than a native display connector, meaning that you don't get GPU acceleration...and in the case of USB 2.0 [siig.com], you end up with weird shims like DisplayLink that makes even 60fps impossible.
So, is it expensive? Yes. Is it in line with Dell, HP, and Lenovo? Also yes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
First thing, HDMI needs to die. Maybe it was a nice spec and connector at one time but since then we got USB-C and DisplayPort. About the only nice thing about HDMI is it "bridges" the old DVI to the newer DisplayPort. A DisplayPort output with the "DP++" logo means a passive cable will allow it to plug into HDMI. I don't have HDMI displays, unless "display" includes my TV sets, but I do (or at least did, I haven't really thought about it lately) have to deal with DVI displays. With a cheap DP-to-HDMI
Whoa (Score:2)
Look at all the people that don't know what thunderbolt is and didn't spend 10 seconds googling it.
The title summary calling a thunderbolt port a usb-c port: extra classy mods. Don't worry about those pesky details on a tech website.
Is it a full moon or something?
Surface Connect port (Score:2)
I guess the Surface Connect port is officially dead. It was rumored to support external PCIe and eSATA but ended up only being used for the $60 AC adapter and a docking station that was obsolete the moment it was introduced.
Fun fact about that $60 adapter: it has a 1A USB-A charging port that, for whatever reason, can't be used for data.
I'm curious to know what this is for (Score:1)
For all other uses, it is simply a pedestrian superspeed USB hub, the sort that cost about 20 bucks or so.