Re: FireWire going the way of SCSI and ADB?

On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 12:17:07 -0500, ZnU <znu@xxxxxxxxxxxx> chose to
bless us with the following wisdom:

>In article <8ndnp1tm1atv6mfgpc8polkm410g3qjglq@xxxxxxx>,
> Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 22:59:44 -0500, ZnU <znu@xxxxxxxxxxxx> chose to
>> bless us with the following wisdom:
>>
>> >In article <pan.2005.12.11.00.22.20.62000@xxxxxxxxx>,
>> > Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 08:01:29 -0700, Steve Carroll wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > In article <1dmkp15vvlnl976qafl419t1kigpro730v@xxxxxxx>,
>> >> > Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 16:39:47 -0700, Steve Carroll <noone@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> >> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >In article <h65kp1pj3ll8mfgjechv5d05fv3f77cdec@xxxxxxx>,
>> >> >> > Josh McKee <jtmckee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 22:14:48 GMT, George Graves
>> >> >> >> <gmgraves@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >In article <1134165372.034668.26450@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>> >> >> >> > tom_elam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> May be
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=57
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> T~
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >I don't see how Apple can drop Firewire. It's needed for digital
>> >> >> >> >video
>> >> >> >> >at the very least. I can see them dropping it in some, low-end
>> >> >> >> >models,
>> >> >> >> >but even so, I'd miss the Firewire "drive mode" that Mac portables
>> >> >> >> >can
>> >> >> >> >boot into. It sure made transfers easy. I know that this could be
>> >> >> >> >done
>> >> >> >> >with USB2 as well, but I'm sorry, I don't care what the propaganda
>> >> >> >> >might
>> >> >> >> >be, USB2 is not as fast as Firewire 400!
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> LOL. Of course not George! All the evidence to the contrary be
>> >> >> >> damned.
>> >> >> >> Just like with the CD.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Josh
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Evidence like damn near every consumer/prosumer vidcam currently
>> >> >> >shipping with FW? You know... like George alluded to above? That kind
>> >> >> >of
>> >> >> >evidence?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Every Mac used to ship with a floppy drive. I guess that means that
>> >> >> will never end either, eh Steve?
>> >> >
>> >> > When is USB2 going to replace FW as the defacto standard in all these
>> >> > vidcams?
>> >>
>> >> The Everio series from JVC that uses a HD to record instead of a tape use
>> >> USB 2.0. They don't evn have a Firewire conection on them. The process has
>> >> already started it seems.
>> >
>> >There is no 'process' here. It's true, if a camera has a hard drive,
>> >rather than tape, that relaxes the need to do reliable real-time
>> >transfers -- that's the only thing that allows these cameras to use USB
>> >at all.
>>
>> http://www.choice.com.au/viewArticle.aspx?id=104527&catId=100274&tid=100008&p=
>> 2 "In addition to their fast speeds, FireWire and Hi-Speed USB share
>> some other common characteristics: Plug and play connectivity: both
>> standards allow you to plug and unplug devices without turning off or
>> rebooting your computer. Both are compatible with Mac and Windows.
>> Both guarantee a certain minimum data transfer rate. This is
>> beneficial for time-sensitive data such as digital video, which can
>> result in annoying gaps and pauses when it's transferred at low or
>> inconsistent speeds."
>
>USB bandwidth falls off quite a bit for such transfers, however. Read
>the docs. FireWire can use up to 80% of full bandwidth for isochronous
>transfers. USB 2.0 can use about 40%.

Nonetheless, its still adequate for consumer video transfers without
forcing people to buy a Firewire card and cable.

>
>> > But clearly you *want* a camera to be able to do such transfers,
>> >even if it does have a hard drive.
>>
>> USB 2.0 does that. USB OTG will be peer to peer.
>
>USB OTG is not here yet, and may not actually end up being any cheaper
>than FireWire.

USB's already wider adoption will provide a leg up for it when it does
get here unless the costs are greatly out of proportion.

>
>> > You might leave it off low-end models to save a couple of bucks,
>> > but that's hardly the start of an industry trend.
>>
>> Keep on whistling. That graveyard has to end sometime. 8)
>
>FireWire is already twice as fast as USB -- more like four times as fast
>for real-time transfers.

Something that's likely to go back and forth as things advance.

> It's a more flexible specification. It's
>already widely adopted in the consumer electronics industry.

It is? Who uses it besides video cameras? Apple doesn't even use it
for iPods anymore. The only place I've ever seen much use of Firewire
devices is inside Macdom. This is largely because Apple deliberately
crippled their implementation of USB 2.0. Why did they do that if
Firewire has such a tremendous leg up?
The one place I've actually seen Firewire become firmly entrenched is
in the newer industrial automation control systems. Its used
extensively there to let various components of the system talk to each
other.
Once something gets widely used in that world it stays. I expect that
there will be knife fights over the last batch of available Firewire
components by industrial systems company buyers 20 years after no one
else uses Firewire. 8)

>You guys claimed USB 2.0 would kill FireWire,

Actually you guys claimed that Firewire would lead to USB 2.0 being
stillborn. Didn't quite work out that way, did it?

> and it barely had any impact on FireWire at all.

Firewire would have had to have an impact first. So far, outside of
external periphereal for Macs and video cameras its a no-show for the
average consumer. USB 2.0 is used for everything else.

> Why is it we're always waiting for the *next* version of USB, which will *really* do it?

I don't recall anyone ever saying that Firewire would be 'killed off'.
And just what do you want? Firewire went from having the high speed
external peripheral market all to itself to practically becoming an
non player except in a couple of areas with the arrival of USB 2.0.

>> >(It's also worth noting that the Everio cameras you're looking at, in
>> >addition to lacking FireWire, also shoot directly in MPEG-2, which is
>> >really not at all an ideal format for original video capture or for
>> >editing.)

--
"Maybe atheists would have an easier time winning
acceptance if they didn't act like such jerks all
the time."

James Taranto Best Of The Web 12-02-2005
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Did Apple design Firewire?
    ... example, HD Cameras. ... FireWire has it, USB does not. ... go check that USB 2 spec again while you are at it. ... You do get several hits with the terms 'USB port fail video camera' ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Kaufberatung
    ... USB kennt zwar auch einen isochronen Modus, ... Das Polling wird vom Controller erledigt, und isochrone Transfers haben ... Fehler können auch bei Firewire auftreten, ...
    (de.comp.hardware.misc)
  • Re: FireWire going the way of SCSI and ADB?
    ... >>> The Everio series from JVC that uses a HD to record instead of a tape use ... >>> USB 2.0. ... They don't evn have a Firewire conection on them. ... USB bandwidth falls off quite a bit for such transfers, ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: External Drive Crashing ... AGAIN
    ... the USB interface is still not working properly. ... This makes me think that either the firewire cable is faulty ... power problem. ... connection that I have been using. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)
  • Re: Networking and External USB HardDrives?
    ... >> to get a firewire interface, ... >> invariably much faster than USB, ... Your typical HD is FASTER than the USB interface, ... you can use the firewire ports on the PC. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.network_web)