Apple and USB 2

neocitronneocitron
Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
the reason apple will not include usb 2.0 is that apple will hold on till firewire 2 (which can transer like 1.2 gigs a sec). and that apple will always try to be different. Always. they will lead their own way they will think different they will try to be as friendly to the PC as possible yet as different as they can.

thats just apple. rather than follow... they make their own path. agree?



[edit: i'm tired of poor grammar]



[ 06-25-2002: Message edited by: Jonathan ]</p>
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 35
    eupfhoriaeupfhoria Posts: 257member
    yes, but they still use a monitor and a keyboard. They still have CD-RW drives.



    There are things every computer needs, soon, USB 2.0 will be one of those things. Apple can still have firewire 2 on the same comp, they have different uses.
  • Reply 2 of 35
    gamblorgamblor Posts: 446member
    I think Apple will adopt USB2 as soon as there is a compelling reason to do it. The only real place USB2 is going to make inroads is with consumer printers and scanners, and maybe cameras and MP3 players. Firewire (gotta get used to calling it that ) will remain the interface of choice for video, external harddrives, and pro still cameras, because it's already there.



    I don't think Apple chooses the hardware they do just to be different-- they've always got a compelling reason for their choices. SCSI allowed multiple devices to be daisychained to a single, quick port; ADB & USB allow(ed) multiple slower peripherals connected to the machine without a whole lot of fuss. Besides, Apple has abandoned alot of stuff that set them apart from other computer manufacturers-- SCSI, Nubus, ADB, and their funky serial ports. At one point, all of them had advantages over their PC counterparts, but as those advantages disappeared, Apple adopted the PC standards. I don't see that trend changing any time soon.
  • Reply 3 of 35
    mac voyermac voyer Posts: 1,294member
    They have adopted Bluetooth and there is no compelling for that.
  • Reply 4 of 35
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    USB 2 is making huge inroads into the storage space. If I walk into a Circuit City, Best Buy or Fry's, I can find USB 2 HDDs, CD-RW drives, DVD-RW drives, keychain flash drives, etc.



    I've also seen a USB 2 analog video converter, a USB 2 printer, etc. And because USB 2 is backward and forward compatible, there is a bit of an advantage of FireWire, which moves from a 6-pin socket to a 9-pin socket. We'll need new cables to connect our devices should we lose the older FireWire ports.



    And since the newest Intel chipsets now have USB 2 included, all PC OEMs will be selling PCs with 4+ USB 2 ports.



    Apple needs to get IEEE 1394b out if it wants supremacy back. It'll take a while for other hardware makers to adopt it, unlike USB 2.



    What FireWire has going for it:



    isosynchronous bandwidth

    peer-to-peer

    it carries much more power

    many devices have an extra port for daisy-chaining.
  • Reply 5 of 35
    progmacprogmac Posts: 1,850member
    [quote]Originally posted by neocitron:

    <strong>the reason apple will not include usb 2.0 is that apple will hold on till firewire 2 (which can transer like 1.2 gigs a sec). and that apple will always try to be different. Always. they will lead their own way they will think different they will try to be as friendly to the PC as possible yet as different as they can.

    thats just apple. rather than follow... they make their own path. agree?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    i know apple was why usb became so popular, but wasn't it on PCs first? my sister has a gateway from '96 that has it...
  • Reply 6 of 35
    zosozoso Posts: 177member
    [quote]Originally posted by neocitron:

    <strong>apple will always try to be different. Always. they will lead their own way they will think different they will try to be as friendly to the PC as possible yet as different as they can.

    thats just apple. rather than follow... they make their own path. agree?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    No.



    You look like you time-traveled from the 80s : thank God Apple is no longer affected by the Not Invented Here syndrome. Intel invented (or greatly contributed to) the PCI bus and USB. Apple uses both. Would you rather see something else, maybe a proprietary solution, instead of those worldwide standards?

    Apple will adopt USB 2, probably together with a new FireWire revision to keep FW in the top-performer spot. It'd be foolish not to include USB 2 in the next (or the one after that) motherboard revision.



    ZoSo
  • Reply 7 of 35
    pi radianspi radians Posts: 56member
    [quote]Originally posted by sickmiller:

    <strong>



    i know apple was why usb became so popular, but wasn't it on PCs first? my sister has a gateway from '96 that has it...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    And don't you let anyone tell you differently! USB has been on certain PCs for a while. Sure they weren't ever used and the drivers for it only came out on the second release of Win95, but those pesky little ports were there.



    The interesting thing was that USB is a mear rip-off of what ADB was supposed to be. Which is why it was so natural for Apple to start using it.
  • Reply 8 of 35
    toasttoast Posts: 25member
    If you look at how many firewire devices there were compared to USB devices before USB2 was around, then you will see that in the long term apple wouldnt lose out by not having USB2.

    Also, unlike alot of Apple products, firewire is very widely regarded (even by the PC community) as being better than USB. And so there is a wider demand for it. Infact even alot of PC users still prefer firewire to USB2, kind of surprising.

    Apple not having USB2 wouldnt really be a huge loss, it wouldnt really change someones decision to buy a mac just because there isnt a huge performance gain. There are as many firewire devices out there as there are USB2 so not much loss there.

    Also wth firewire2 being backwards compatible (apparently) then it will kick the **** all over USB2.



    In summary i just dont think there is a wider variety of devices for USB2 over firewire. Firewire is widely regarded as being good.

    There isnt a huge performance gain over firewire, especially with the new Oxford911 chip I do actually believe firewire is slightly faster.

    I dont think USB2 has an edge over firewire as it is, and with Firewire2 coming out soon its days are pretty numbered.
  • Reply 9 of 35
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    There's also no reason to hold back USB 2. With 2.5% of the worldwide market, Apple will hardly influence the success or failure of USB 2. The more options the better, though Apple would hopefully deno a better version of FireWire at MacWorld Expo.
  • Reply 10 of 35
    kukukuku Posts: 254member
    Except it takes money to change. Money that may matter in the end.



    It "may" be wiser to catch the "next" wave then hitch on anything thing that comes along.



    Firewire is still the better choice for any usb2 product, so all they're doing is putting down money on what might be a miss hit.



    ~Kuku
  • Reply 11 of 35
    bartobarto Posts: 2,246member
    Apple is probably going to update all the I/O all at once, if rumors/common sense are to be believed.



    Either we get a totally new motherboard this Macworld, or we get a desktop-varient of the xserve motherboard if a totally new mobo isn't ready yet.



    Apple hasn't updated anything else in the past 18 months, so it's not just FireWire 800Mb they're holding out on. Also, TI had a FireWire 800Mb controller out last year.



    Barto
  • Reply 12 of 35
    neutrino23neutrino23 Posts: 1,562member
    I now have a FW hard drive, a FW video camera, a FW printer (EPSON), and my wife will soon by a FW scanner (EPSON) and my next digital camera will have a FW connector. Why do I need USB 2?
  • Reply 13 of 35
    neocitronneocitron Posts: 10member
    u still have to remember apple has to think of bieng simple example. the average user would be like "what the fark??? usb 2.... firewire? whats what why cant it just be one?" thats what apple is thinking right now i bet. and usb 2 is ONLY 80 mbs faster than Firewire.. il take that rather than confusion.... anyday
  • Reply 14 of 35
    blackbird-lcblackbird-lc Posts: 6member
    I hope Apple deosn'tuse USB 2.0. It was a blatent attempt by intel to avoid using apple's products at any cost, and it never would have succeeded had it not been intel sticking it on all their motherboards. It's barely faster theoretically, and slower sustained. And remember iMac and eMac users, if apple adopts USB 2.0, firewire will die for anything besides digitla video. With no USB 2.0 or PCI, you'll be unable to buy peripherals. plus it will add to the price of the macs that use it. I say keep it as it is.
  • Reply 15 of 35
    badtzbadtz Posts: 949member
    current apple's have usb ports anyway. why not just replace them wit usb2 ports? [since it's backwards compatible]. that way, we get the best of everything..........



    i'm not sure if that's a smart thing on apple's part though.......
  • Reply 16 of 35
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    Badtz, I agree with you. Just replace USB with USB 2. The ports are backwards compatible, and it just makes Macs look better overall to include USB 2 ports.



    [quote]They have adopted Bluetooth and there is no compelling for that. <hr></blockquote>



    That's what you think.
  • Reply 17 of 35
    toasttoast Posts: 25member
    [quote]Originally posted by neocitron:

    <strong>u still have to remember apple has to think of bieng simple example. the average user would be like "what the fark??? usb 2.... firewire? whats what why cant it just be one?" thats what apple is thinking right now i bet. and usb 2 is ONLY 80 mbs faster than Firewire.. il take that rather than confusion.... anyday</strong><hr></blockquote>



    The interesting thing about USB2 and its devices is alot of the time it isnt actually faster than Firewire. I believe this is down to taking up more CPU cycles and also the Oxford 911 chipset just being quite fast.

    I agree with you, firewire already has a fanbase. These people wont pay alot of money for a new device just to get USB2, and new users wont want USB2 just because the Firewire name is in my opinion bigger.



    It would be better to stick with Firewire, it does make it simpler, and there are some really good devices with the firewire interface (iPod,archos mini HD).
  • Reply 18 of 35
    bartobarto Posts: 2,246member
    True. USB 2 is MUCH slower than FW. FW is peer-to-peer, USB 2 sends signals between devices device-computer-device.



    USB 2 is CPU intensive (don't know why).



    USB 2 has a much slower sustained transfer rate.



    But average Joe sees "400 v 480", same as they think a 1.4GHz Pentium III-S is slower than a 1.8GHz Celeron. Sad.



    Barto.
  • Reply 19 of 35
    kukukuku Posts: 254member
    Some people are still forgetting when you change anything, it costs money.



    USB to usb2 is not a trivial thing. Someone is going to eat the payment, whether it's the company or the consumer.



    It's a benifit to have(as more options) but why pay for it if it's minimal. Be rational, if you can't pay, don't ask.



    ~Kuku



    [ 06-21-2002: Message edited by: Kuku ]</p>
  • Reply 20 of 35
    mrbilldatamrbilldata Posts: 489member
    At least it does not matter if you have USB 1.1 or 2.0 ports/peripherals because of the forward/backward compatability. Though you will not get the higher throughput, you also do not have to buy anything if you don't want to.



    On the other hand, when Apple goes Firewire 2, everyone with Firewire devices will either need a Firewire adapter or both types of connector ports. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
Sign In or Register to comment.