←back to thread

204 points WithinReason | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.746s | source
Show context
yjftsjthsd-h ◴[] No.40712649[source]
So I guess what this makes me wonder is: Why are we using electrical signals to connect the data lanes between components and computers these days, rather than moving everything to optical for data movement (obviously power would stay electrical, but that's already on separate lines)? I assume there's an element of cost, and once the photons get where they're going they have to be turned back into electrical signals to actually be used until such time as we get around to getting pure light based computers working (someday but not yet...), but that must not overwhelm the advantages or we wouldn't be looking at this being developed.
replies(7): >>40712677 #>>40712948 #>>40713112 #>>40713271 #>>40717224 #>>40717847 #>>40720156 #
1. cma ◴[] No.40712677[source]
Since thunderbolt is related to PCIe, there's this that goes into copper vs optical there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)#Copper...
replies(1): >>40712989 #
2. watersb ◴[] No.40712989[source]
Intel's product name foe Thunderbolt was initially was "Light Peak".
replies(1): >>40714401 #
3. throwaway48476 ◴[] No.40714401[source]
I believe it was originally supposed to be optical.