I'm sorry I misread your post.  If UAD hasn't released drivers for Windows.  Focusrite's new Clarette is also Mac only, so there may be something to the driver issue.  I'll have to research that.
 
That being said you are out of luck as far as Sonar is concerned, because even running bootcamp you still need Windows drivers.

DD,
 
You almost had me with the HP (got stoked when I saw the web page).... not really that much cheaper than a MAC PRO configured with the same Horse Power. But my issue is that MS has not developed low level standards for TB yet?  Is this part of the 2 year exclusivity or just slow handing?  Not sure, but UAD has announced the EXPANDED concept that only runs on TB2 on a MAC for now.... who knows how much longer it is going to be for a WIN driver for UAD.... hence my question to run SONAR on a MAC (if possible) and why I want out of the WINTEL world.
 
 

CakeAlexS
Thunderbolt 2 for PC:
 
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2687971/belkins-pricey-thunderbolt-2-dock-embodies-pc-users-apathy-toward-thunderbolt.html
 

I'm afraid that article contains very little accurate factual information.  Apple locked everyone out of ThunderBolt which hastened the adoption of USB3 (which was a bit of a mess to be quite honest).  Apple scuttled ThunderBolt for PC and the market simply moved on to the available alternative.  People made do.
 
If the cost of TB pushed the prices up of Apples gear, people had no choice, they had to pay the premium for the product, used or not.  There were at least two generations of PCs that could not access the tech and it's created a chasm that may never be bridged.
 
EDIT: This article is nearer the truth:
http://news.techeye.net/business/how-apple-and-intel-killed-thunderbolt

BRuys, it's even more complex than that.  What happened is Apple took Intel's design for Light Peak, which was an optical cable solution to extend PCIe, and Apple took it and figured out a way to convince Intel to package light peak with their crappy proprietary mini display port standard, and thus took a technology that was meant to be open to all hardware and gave us the next "firewire" headache, a proprietary implementation of Intel's design.
 
This is why they locked out the PC market, because they were able to package it with a cheaper copper solution that worked with their stupid mini-display port so you had to pay a licensing fee to Apple to use it.
 
Of course Apple has the music industry held by the onions so all of the vendors that were coming out with new Thunderbolt interfaces are doing them Apple exclusive because that's where the money is, for Thunderbolt.  Meanwhile 5Gbps USB 3.0 would be plenty fast and low latency enough to meet most of the demands of their customers and be able to offer it at a better price point, but they went for a niche market that is about to come tumbling down.
 

jkleban
DD,
 
You almost had me with the HP (got stoked when I saw the web page).... not really that much cheaper than a MAC PRO configured with the same Horse Power. But my issue is that MS has not developed low level standards for TB yet?  Is this part of the 2 year exclusivity or just slow handing?  Not sure, but UAD has announced the EXPANDED concept that only runs on TB2 on a MAC for now.... who knows how much longer it is going to be for a WIN driver for UAD.... hence my question to run SONAR on a MAC (if possible) and why I want out of the WINTEL world.
 

 
I don't have enough information to know why they can't write ASIO drivers for Thunderbolt interfaces, and if what they told you was true about standardization.  Intel actually writes the Windows driver for the thunderbolt controller, so how the sound card manufacturer writes the ASIO driver to make .DLL calls to the controller, I don't know.
 
I can tell you that Apple and Intel came up with a very proprietary solution that is very expensive, and that locked alot of folks out of that market.  So if you're going to go TB, you're going to have to go Mac for the time being it seems.
 

The reality is that current usb2.0 interfaces (can) have great latency and throughput.
 
TB is a solution for a problem that doesnt exist. 
 
 

200bpm
The reality is that current usb2.0 interfaces (can) have great latency and throughput.
 
TB is a solution for a problem that doesnt exist. 
 
 

Wrong. Every usb 2 interface (all  about 3 of them) that has good latency has it at expense of cpu usage, a pci or pci-e card with the same latency uses way less cpu.

Thunderbolt provides access to the PCIe bus.  That's it folks!
Nothing more... nothing less
 
With a PC tower/rack, we've got PCIe slots... so Thunderbolt offers no performance advantage.
With a new Mac Pro "Cylinder", there are no PCIe slots... so Thunderbolt is an absolute must.
 
We're at an awkward "in-between" moment.
Thunderbolt development for Mac is ahead of PC (for the moment)... out of complete necessity.
IMO, It was a dumb move for Apple to completely eliminate PCIe slots (without more time to transition).
Thunderbolt peripherals offer no performance advantage (compared to PCIe) and they're more expensive.
 
Thunderbolt is the current market buzz-word... with audio-interface ads touting huge bandwidth advantage vs. USB.
That's all fine and well... but most audio interfaces (including higher-end units from RME) are nowhere close to saturating the USB2 bus.
 
I personally don't want to see PCIe slots completely disappear in one-fell-swoop (a la Mac).
If you're going to eliminate a major bus protocol, it needs to be done SLOWLY (a la PCI slots).
 
IMO, The Thunderbolt situation has been handled poorly by all involved.

• Apple pushed the issue by eliminating PCIe slots on their new Mac Pro.
• MicroSoft is in "wait-and-see" mode.
• UA and MOTU are pushing new Thunderbolt audio interfaces... at a time when support for PC is lagging. Instead of offering top-notch USB2/3 performance (like RME), if you're a PC user, you take a performance hit.

Greeny
 
Wrong. Every usb 2 interface (all  about 3 of them) that has good latency has it at expense of cpu usage, a pci or pci-e card with the same latency uses way less cpu.

With a current generation machine, this is absolutely false.
CPU use is almost nil.
I can post some video examples if you want to see side by side comparison.

200bpm
The reality is that current usb2.0 interfaces (can) have great latency and throughput.
 
TB is a solution for a problem that doesnt exist. 

+1000
 
Thunderbolt is essentially e-PCIe
A god-send for small form-factor machines (laptops, mini-ITX) that would otherwise not have access to the PCIe bus... but no real advantage with a tower/rack machine.