I just realised, when browsing this useful page on wikipedia about the transfer rates of various devices, that in theory the average user cannot actually take advantage of the thunderbolt interface (which has a 1.25GB/s bit rate). It seems to me that unless you happen to have a (very expensive/ only useful for workstations) PCIe SSD then your SSD will be stuck with a 600MB/s transfer rate (SATA-600). In other words, the almost twice as high bit rate of thunderbolt would be wasted, and more poignantly, be in no way superior to USB 3.0.
Maybe I'm missing out on something here (buffers in system memory perhaps?), but when it comes to transferring large quantities of date it would seem there's no difference whether you use USB 3.0 or Thunderbolt.
They are. There is the yet to release MSI GUS II and a new Vi-dock thunderbolt based eGPU enclosure. Available product include Sonnet expansion chassis and the Pegasus RAID HDD enclosure that use thunderbolt.