AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › USB 3 test spec to be in Apple's hands by June
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

USB 3 test spec to be in Apple's hands by June - Page 3

post #81 of 123
3/11/09 at 2:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

That's the term that matters now "consumer" port.

It will hang on for a while in the pro space.

Sure. But given how well the Canon HF10 performed, I think that we can safely say that AVCHD will overtake HDV in the consumer space given most consumers don't edit. And the Sony SR12 is no slacker either.
Reply
Reply
post #82 of 123
3/11/09 at 2:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Sure. But given how well the Canon HF10 performed, I think that we can safely say that AVCHD will overtake HDV in the consumer space given most consumers don't edit. And the Sony SR12 is no slacker either.

I see that already.
Reply
Reply
post #83 of 123
3/11/09 at 3:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

No. It works over Ethernet.

Sure it does, but ethernet is no where near as plug and play as firewire
Reply
Reply
post #84 of 123
3/11/09 at 3:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Sure it does, but ethernet is no where near as plug and play as firewire

Why not?

I plug the two machines into my network, and it works. Or I use a standard Ethernet cable into both for where there's no network, and it works.

How much easier does it have to get?

It can now be done with an external SATA drive with certain cards.
Reply
Reply
post #85 of 123
3/11/09 at 3:40pm
nevermind, maybe I misunderstood the context of the conversation.
Reply
Reply
post #86 of 123
3/13/09 at 7:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

How would you handle power or charging?

It doesn't matter.

I'm thinking of things like printers and scanners.
Or being able to sync your iPhone or iPod without having to charge it (and thus messing up your battery maintenance plan).

Right now, we use BlueTooth for a lot of this, but Wireless USB is supposed to be faster. So, the charging methodology would be the same as for BT.

13" MBP 2.53GHz C2D, 21.5" Alu iMac 3.06GHz C2D, 24" Alu iMac 2.8GHz C2D, 15" MBP 2.2GHz i7 (work)
AppleTV: 320GB, 2; TC 500GB; iPad 32GB; iPhone: 3G 8GB, 4 32GB; iPod: 30GB 5G, 80GB Classic, 2GB...

Reply

13" MBP 2.53GHz C2D, 21.5" Alu iMac 3.06GHz C2D, 24" Alu iMac 2.8GHz C2D, 15" MBP 2.2GHz i7 (work)
AppleTV: 320GB, 2; TC 500GB; iPad 32GB; iPhone: 3G 8GB, 4 32GB; iPod: 30GB 5G, 80GB Classic, 2GB...

Reply
post #87 of 123
3/13/09 at 7:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tshort View Post

It doesn't matter.

I'm thinking of things like printers and scanners.
Or being able to sync your iPhone or iPod without having to charge it (and thus messing up your battery maintenance plan).

Right now, we use BlueTooth for a lot of this, but Wireless USB is supposed to be faster. So, the charging methodology would be the same as for BT.

Who uses Bluetooth for printing and scanning? Maybe BT is used for printing from PDAs and cell phones when there is nothing complex to print. but I'd hate to use it for anything else!

I don't see what this fascination with wireless is all about. Your printer and scanner are nearby, why would you want to have a less reliable way to use them?
Reply
Reply
post #88 of 123
3/13/09 at 7:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tshort View Post

It doesn't matter.

I'm thinking of things like printers and scanners.
Or being able to sync your iPhone or iPod without having to charge it (and thus messing up your battery maintenance plan).

Right now, we use BlueTooth for a lot of this, but Wireless USB is supposed to be faster. So, the charging methodology would be the same as for BT.

Printing and scanning can already be done over WiFi right now if it has to be wireless. You'll probably be waiting a couple years to get a decent selection of devices compatible with Wireless USB.

I don't think special battery maintenance is nearly as important now, not in the sense that you have to discharge it completely every time, Apple recommends a complete discharge only once a month.
Reply
Reply
post #89 of 123
7/7/09 at 9:55am
USB 3.0 could be on Macs by this fall. Still no word on where Firewire 3200 is hiding.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #90 of 123
7/7/09 at 1:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

USB 3.0 could be on Macs by this fall. Still no word on where Firewire 3200 is hiding.

I think Apple's going to "flip a switch" and the iMac, Mac Pro, Macbook Pro will suddenly become FW3200 </dream>
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #91 of 123
7/8/09 at 8:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

UBS 3 is overhyped.

I think those banking with them would agree.
Reply
Reply
post #92 of 123
7/11/09 at 12:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

I think those banking with them would agree.

Heh! Very good.
Reply
Reply
post #93 of 123
7/12/09 at 8:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

I think Apple's going to "flip a switch" and the iMac, Mac Pro, Macbook Pro will suddenly become FW3200 </dream>

Not unless chipsets have secretly been in the wild. That being said, since the connectors are the same as FW800, all Apple would need to do is swap out the chipset and add new drivers.
Reply
Reply
post #94 of 123
7/12/09 at 8:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

Not unless chipsets have secretly been in the wild. That being said, since the connectors are the same as FW800, all Apple would need to do is swap out the chipset and add new drivers.

Apple's very conservative this way. I'm not so sure they would want to be the first, esp. if the costs are higher.

In addition, they may actually favor USB 3.
Reply
Reply
post #95 of 123
7/12/09 at 8:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

Not unless chipsets have secretly been in the wild. That being said, since the connectors are the same as FW800, all Apple would need to do is swap out the chipset and add new drivers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Apple's very conservative this way. I'm not so sure they would want to be the first, esp. if the costs are higher.

In addition, they may actually favor USB 3.

I wonder if there is much point to extending Firewire, double the doubt if that's going to be their attitude. They expanded 800 to the rest of their product line way too late for it to matter in terms of keeping it viable. FW devices are not easy to find in retail, 800 is almost online-only. But if Apple won't push FW3200, I just don't see anyone else supporting it at all.
Reply
Reply
post #96 of 123
7/12/09 at 9:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I wonder if there is much point to extending Firewire, double the doubt if that's going to be their attitude. They expanded 800 to the rest of their product line way too late for it to matter in terms of keeping it viable. FW devices are not easy to find in retail, 800 is almost online-only. But if Apple won't push FW3200, I just don't see anyone else supporting it at all.

Apple has always acted ambivalent about FW, even in the very beginning. It seems to me that once their big plans for it fell through, with their biggest backer, Intel, deciding, early, to not want to charge the $0.25 per port fee, and deciding that FW was inimical to their own plans, Apple lost interest. I think they felt that they would get big bucks from this, and once they saw it wouldn't happen, they didn't care as much.

FW has lagged behind their once ambitious schedule. It took too long to get 400 up and running properly. 800 should have been out four years ago, 1600 two years ago, and we should have seen 3200 sometime in 2009.

Apple's failure to get the HDD manufacturers on board with native devices also came as a hard blow. FW has never been all that satisfactory for storage. It's been a compromise at best, with mediocre reliability.

While effective speeds have been significantly higher than USB 2, the popularity of the latter for external storage shows just how much most people care.

My San Disk FW 800 CF card reader gives about 40MB/s from an Extreme IV card, while a USB 2 reader only gives about 25MB/s. But do most people care enough to spend the extra $25 for the reader, even if they're using Macs with FW 800? No. Most will save the $25 and go the slower route. With PCs without the FW on the mobo, people are even less likely to want to go to the trouble and expense of spending $25 for a FW 800 card.

USB 3 will be more expensive than USB 2, but It will still be found on all mobo's by 2011.

The truth is that its performance will be more than good enough at a realistic transfer rate of over 400MB/s. Theoretical is 640MB/s. We may even see close to 500MB/s.

Most people will want an extra USB 3 port than a FW 1600 or 3200 one.
Reply
Reply
post #97 of 123
7/12/09 at 10:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

deciding that FW was inimical to their own plans, Apple lost interest. I think they felt that they would get big bucks from this, and once they saw it wouldn't happen, they didn't care as much.

Thank Apple for the built in dictionary , for those moments when you're like huh?. Nice job Wordsmith


Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

The truth is that its performance will be more than good enough at a realistic transfer rate of over 400MB/s. Theoretical is 640MB/s. We may even see close to 500MB/s.

Most people will want an extra USB 3 port than a FW 1600 or 3200 one.

Yes and speaking of ports I believe that both FW and USB have let consumers down with flaky daisychaining (FW) and USB hubs that simply do not want to work with some devices. The only choice is once again port proliferation on the computer for stability. Sigh.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #98 of 123
7/12/09 at 3:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Thank Apple for the built in dictionary , for those moments when you're like huh?. Nice job Wordsmith

I thought the sentence made sense. But, now I see how it can be misconstrued.


I should have simplified it a bit.

"Once their biggest backer, Intel, quickly lost interest, not wanting to charge the $0.025 ports fees, and deciding that it was inimical to their own interests, Apple saw their big plans for FW falling through. At that point, Apple lost interest.

Quote:
Yes and speaking of ports I believe that both FW and USB have let consumers down with flaky daisychaining (FW) and USB hubs that simply do not want to work with some devices. The only choice is once again port proliferation on the computer for stability. Sigh.

Yes, that's been a big problem for both. I've seen people claim they've had over a dozen devices connected and working well in a chain, but I've never seen it in "real" life, only in claims made online.
Reply
Reply
post #99 of 123
7/12/09 at 6:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Apple has always acted ambivalent about FW, even in the very beginning. It seems to me that once their big plans for it fell through, with their biggest backer, Intel, deciding, early, to not want to charge the $0.25 per port fee, and deciding that FW was inimical to their own plans, Apple lost interest. I think they felt that they would get big bucks from this, and once they saw it wouldn't happen, they didn't care as much.

FW has lagged behind their once ambitious schedule. It took too long to get 400 up and running properly. 800 should have been out four years ago, 1600 two years ago, and we should have seen 3200 sometime in 2009.

Apple's failure to get the HDD manufacturers on board with native devices also came as a hard blow. FW has never been all that satisfactory for storage. It's been a compromise at best, with mediocre reliability.

While effective speeds have been significantly higher than USB 2, the popularity of the latter for external storage shows just how much most people care.

My San Disk FW 800 CF card reader gives about 40MB/s from an Extreme IV card, while a USB 2 reader only gives about 25MB/s. But do most people care enough to spend the extra $25 for the reader, even if they're using Macs with FW 800? No. Most will save the $25 and go the slower route. With PCs without the FW on the mobo, people are even less likely to want to go to the trouble and expense of spending $25 for a FW 800 card.

USB 3 will be more expensive than USB 2, but It will still be found on all mobo's by 2011.

The truth is that its performance will be more than good enough at a realistic transfer rate of over 400MB/s. Theoretical is 640MB/s. We may even see close to 500MB/s.

Most people will want an extra USB 3 port than a FW 1600 or 3200 one.

FW1394b just made it into the Linux 2.6.30 kernel by default. With new Macs now having FW800 and Linux pushing FW800 I expect more generic PCs to include FW800 ports, by default.
Reply
Reply
post #100 of 123
7/12/09 at 6:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

FW1394b just made it into the Linux 2.6.30 kernel by default. With new Macs now having FW800 and Linux pushing FW800 I expect more generic PCs to include FW800 ports, by default.

I'm not so sure. It still costs more, and I'm seeing newer boards from the major third party board manufacturers not including them on any other than their performance enthusiast boards.

The need for FW is rapidly diminishing. That doesn't mean that no one will want it for a time yet, but most people won't.
Reply
Reply
post #101 of 123
7/12/09 at 7:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I thought the sentence made sense. But, now I see how it can be misconstrued.


It made total sense. It's just a word I had never seen before and happily found the definition using the built in dictionary. You used it correctly as far as I can tell. I just love words and so when new ones pop in I notice.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #102 of 123
7/12/09 at 8:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I'm not so sure. It still costs more, and I'm seeing newer boards from the major third party board manufacturers not including them on any other than their performance enthusiast boards.

The need for FW is rapidly diminishing. That doesn't mean that no one will want it for a time yet, but most people won't.

Keep thinking it is rapidly diminishing. It's not, it's just being redirected to far more specific markets that aren't jimmy, bobby, susie and their digital camcorders.
Reply
Reply
post #103 of 123
7/12/09 at 9:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

FW1394b just made it into the Linux 2.6.30 kernel by default. With new Macs now having FW800 and Linux pushing FW800 I expect more generic PCs to include FW800 ports, by default.

This is the crux of the problem. Firewire's always one step behind where it should be.

Apple's own product line JUST got FW800 across the board.
And, as you point out, Linux is now on the train as well.

Problem is, this is where things should have been two years ago.
Snow Leopard and Linux hardware should be giving us FW3200 this year. Not 800.

Given the time getting to 800 has taken, I think FW3200 has no chance of gaining significant ground before USB 3 appears.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #104 of 123
7/13/09 at 8:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Keep thinking it is rapidly diminishing. It's not, it's just being redirected to far more specific markets that aren't jimmy, bobby, susie and their digital camcorders.

More specific markets MEANS that it's diminishing.

If Jimmy, Bobby and Susie are not needing it for their digital camcorders as they did two years ago, and as a result, less computers come equipped with it, then it's diminishing.

We're seeing a retrenching of the market for FW. That's pretty clear.

When it first came out, I was one of its biggest supporters. But now, I've left it except for minor devices such as my flash card reader. My two four drive towers are sitting idle, just like my old SCSI towers before.

My pro level Canon camcorders still use FW, that's true, but newer models will either not, or will give us a choice. I fully expect to not be using tape the next generation.

Most people would rather see fewer different ports, and more of one kind. As performance rises, the differences will become less important.

FW 3,200 has a theoretical limit of 400 MB/s. USB 3 has 640 MB/s as a theoretical limit. If we get 90% of FW's limit, we will see 360 MB/s. If we get 70% of USB 3's , we get 448 MB/s.

No matter how we look at that, FW won't be looking down on USB this time. The other advantages are just needed for a small subset of users. With more devices using direct transfer to the computer, or flash cards for storage, FW's need will continue to diminish. Even in the pro audio industry, FW is used because of its higher transfer rates more than for any other reason. USB 3 will end that need. We know that USB can work well with video, so that's another nail in FW's coffin.

With a number of computer manufacturers beginning to offer E-SATA, and with the new version offering 750 MB/s transfer rates with power over the line, where exactly does this leave FW?

With a small, diminishing market.
Reply
Reply
post #105 of 123
7/13/09 at 8:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

This is the crux of the problem. Firewire's always one step behind where it should be.

Apple's own product line JUST got FW800 across the board.
And, as you point out, Linux is now on the train as well.

Problem is, this is where things should have been two years ago.
Snow Leopard and Linux hardware should be giving us FW3200 this year. Not 800.

Given the time getting to 800 has taken, I think FW3200 has no chance of gaining significant ground before USB 3 appears.

Apparently, FW 3,200 won't even appear until after USB 3 is on many computers, and devices.
Reply
Reply
post #106 of 123
7/28/09 at 9:48pm
"Firewire is far superior to USB in real-world tests. Even Firewire 400 is far superior to USB 2, and Firewire 3200 has been out for months now. ..."

" ... Snow Leopard and Linux hardware should be giving us FW3200 this year. ..."

" ... Most people will want an extra USB 3 port than a FW 1600 or 3200 one. ..."

" ... The development of USB 3.0 without the "intelligent perhiperal" element is a dealbreaker for me. ..."

I never really understood why the perception is that USB and FireWire were somehow competing protocols. There are several distinct differences that give USB an advantage and several more than make FireWire a superior performer ... and there are a few tasks that neither USB nor EtherNet can do.

USB has its place on the desktop = mice, keyboards, joysticks, printers, scanners ... any and all of which really don't need speeds beyond ~ 9600 baud. (Moving your joystick really, really fast = <4800 bps.) The connection to "dumb", slow peripherals is the USB arena.

FireWire has a unique and higher performance place in the interconnect of "smart" peripherals ... multiple disc arrays, high performance multi-media, peer to peer CPUs, co-processing and multi-processing without handshaking, independent co-related processing, double duplex override and process control ... multi-channel machine vision.

As for clock speeds ... well, everybody now needs USB for the human interface, but not a really, really fast USB ... not a "need" anyway. There are specialized areas where there is no good substitute for FireWire and the faster the better. As clock speeds increase FireWire is faster than just about anything else, because of FWs peer to peer nature and slim address protocol, the FireWire advantage increasing with clock speed.

Over fiber, an interesting disadvantage for USB appears. Because of the "top down" nature of the protocol, extra processors are needed in the data stream to extend USB beyond ~ 150 feet. Not so for FireWire. In fact all FireWire 100/200/400/800/1600 can extend beyond a quarter mile over fiber, easily and relatively inexpensively, making massive processing of on-demand video server farms possible. And (in Korea) there are bench prototype fiber laser transceivers passing 16 channel, FW3200, bidirectionally over a single fiber, 4 miles long, with an effective through put in excess of 5000 MegaBytes per second = 40,000 Mbps = 40 Gigabps (something neither SATA, EtherNet, USB, Fiber Channel, what have you ... can do) ... in both directions.

Its really all a matter what the consumer or the engineering department wants ... "or" being Exclusive Or, not and/or.
Warning: FireWire evangelist on board
Reply
Warning: FireWire evangelist on board
Reply
post #107 of 123
7/28/09 at 9:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastEddy View Post

Over fiber, an interesting disadvantage for USB appears. Because of the "top down" nature of the protocol, extra processors are needed in the data stream to extend USB beyond ~ 150 feet. Not so for FireWire. In fact all FireWire 100/200/400/800/1600 can extend beyond a quarter mile over fiber, easily and relatively inexpensively, making massive processing of on-demand video server farms possible. And (in Korea) there are bench prototype fiber laser transceivers passing 16 channel, FW3200 over a single fiber, 4 miles long, with an effective through put in excess of 5000 MegaBytes per second = 40,000 Mbps = 40 Gigabps (something neither SATA, EtherNet, USB, Fiber Channel, what have you ... can do).

Wow, I knew Firewire was good, but wow! ~5GB per second? That's unbelievable.
Reply
Reply
post #108 of 123
7/28/09 at 10:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastEddy View Post

"Firewire is far superior to USB in real-world tests. Even Firewire 400 is far superior to USB 2, and Firewire 3200 has been out for months now. ..."

" ... Snow Leopard and Linux hardware should be giving us FW3200 this year. ..."

" ... Most people will want an extra USB 3 port than a FW 1600 or 3200 one. ..."

" ... The development of USB 3.0 without the "intelligent perhiperal" element is a dealbreaker for me. ..."

I never really understood why the perception is that USB and FireWire were somehow competing protocols. There are several distinct differences that give USB an advantage and several more than make FireWire a superior performer ... and there are a few tasks that neither USB nor EtherNet can do.

USB has its place on the desktop = mice, keyboards, joysticks, printers, scanners ... any and all of which really don't need speeds beyond ~ 9600 baud. (Moving your joystick really, really fast = <4800 bps.) The connection to "dumb", slow peripherals is the USB arena.

FireWire has a unique and higher performance place in the interconnect of "smart" peripherals ... multiple disc arrays, high performance multi-media, peer to peer CPUs, co-processing and multi-processing without handshaking, independent co-related processing, double duplex override and process control ... multi-channel machine vision.

As for clock speeds ... well, everybody now needs USB for the human interface, but not a really, really fast USB ... not a "need" anyway. There are specialized areas where there is no good substitute for FireWire and the faster the better. As clock speeds increase FireWire is faster than just about anything else, because of FWs peer to peer nature and slim address protocol, the FireWire advantage increasing with clock speed.

Over fiber, an interesting disadvantage for USB appears. Because of the "top down" nature of the protocol, extra processors are needed in the data stream to extend USB beyond ~ 150 feet. Not so for FireWire. In fact all FireWire 100/200/400/800/1600 can extend beyond a quarter mile over fiber, easily and relatively inexpensively, making massive processing of on-demand video server farms possible. And (in Korea) there are bench prototype fiber laser transceivers passing 16 channel, FW3200, bidirectionally over a single fiber, 4 miles long, with an effective through put in excess of 5000 MegaBytes per second = 40,000 Mbps = 40 Gigabps (something neither SATA, EtherNet, USB, Fiber Channel, what have you ... can do) ... in both directions.

Its really all a matter what the consumer or the engineering department wants ... "or" being Exclusive Or, not and/or.

Of course they're competing. There is so much overlap in usage that competition can't be helped. They both compete with SATA in external storage.

This is the nature of the beast. It has more than one action.
Reply
Reply
post #109 of 123
7/28/09 at 10:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

FW 3200 has NOT been out for months. The spec was released, as was the USB 3 spec, several months ago. Please get your facts straight.

iIT SOUNDED SO COOL >>>>out for months !!!!

Apple techies tell me that fire wire will be gone in a few years. Apple wants to be mainstream .

The side of a laptop is the most expensive real estate in the world . Staying on the side is no easy feat .
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #110 of 123
7/28/09 at 11:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post


iIT SOUNDED SO COOL >>>>out for months !!!!

Apple techies tell me that fire wire will be gone in a few years. Apple wants to be mainstream .

Apple Techs to avoid taking advice from IMO. If Apple wanted FW gone they wouldn't have added FW back to the Macbook pro.

Jesus how many freakin' times does a person have to explain things to people with thick craniums.

USB - host based. Requires a computer in the chain and will inherently use more CPU

Firewire- peer to peer connection that offers low latency without the need for a computer inline.

As FastEddy says the two connection types are complementary as much as they compete. There's no value in standardizing on USB IMO.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #111 of 123
7/29/09 at 9:19am
" ... Of course they're competing. There is so much overlap in usage that competition can't be helped ... They both [also] compete with SATA in external storage. ... "

" ... the two connection types are complementary as much as they compete. ..."

" ... knew Firewire was good, but wow! ~5GB per second? ..."

Of course, of course ... Yes these all compete for desktop connections. And for the consumer desktop USB is dominant, understandable.

Best performance over short distances = less than 10 feet = SATA.
Universal appeal, drives, burners, mice, keyboards over short distances less than 10 feet = USB.
Best performance over extended lengths > 30 feet = FireWire.
Best performance for specific scenarios like co-processing, multi-processing = FireWire.

===
FW800 = ~ 800 mbps = ~ 0.8 gbps.
FW3200 = ~ 3.2 gbps
16 channel multiplexed FW3200 = 16 times ~3.2 gbps = very approximately 40 gbps = very experimental using multiple sources, prototype chip sets, multiple laser transceivers of different color pairs = not nearly ready for prime time ... but it works. (A similar scenario can push (and pull) Display Port / HDMI / Dual Link DVI / HD video and audio out to 1/4 mile over a single fiber, in production and available late this summer. )
Warning: FireWire evangelist on board
Reply
Warning: FireWire evangelist on board
Reply
post #112 of 123
7/29/09 at 9:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Apple Techs to avoid taking advice from IMO. If Apple wanted FW gone they wouldn't have added FW back to the Macbook pro.

Jesus how many freakin' times does a person have to explain things to people with thick craniums.

USB - host based. Requires a computer in the chain and will inherently use more CPU

Firewire- peer to peer connection that offers low latency without the need for a computer inline.

As FastEddy says the two connection types are complementary as much as they compete. There's no value in standardizing on USB IMO.

USB CPU consumption used to be an issue, but I can't say I recall it being a problem lately. All this peer controller does for most people is increase the device cost. FW 800 across the product line will probably help availability in the short term, but other than for specialized needs, I wonder how FW will fare.
Reply
Reply
post #113 of 123
7/29/09 at 9:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

USB CPU consumption used to be an issue, but I can't say I recall it being a problem lately. All this peer controller does for most people is increase the device cost.

Yes but it enables hardware features that Professionals need like Pro Canon Cameras with powered FW for attaching drives and accessories.

Almost invariably the people saying "Firewire is going to go away" are oblivious to the penetration of FW within Pro Audio and Video verticals.

Will FW 3200 see the light of day? Hopefully.

I'm happy to see both but USB isn't going to eradicate the need for Firewire anytime soon
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #114 of 123
7/29/09 at 9:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Yes but it enables hardware features that Professionals need like Pro Canon Cameras with powered FW for attaching drives and accessories.

Almost invariably the people saying "Firewire is going to go away" are oblivious to the penetration of FW within Pro Audio and Video verticals.

Will FW 3200 see the light of day? Hopefully.

I'm happy to see both but USB isn't going to eradicate the need for Firewire anytime soon

That's why I said "most people". Most people don't do pro video.
Reply
Reply
post #115 of 123
8/6/09 at 11:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Yes but it enables hardware features that Professionals need like Pro Canon Cameras with powered FW for attaching drives and accessories.

Almost invariably the people saying "Firewire is going to go away" are oblivious to the penetration of FW within Pro Audio and Video verticals.

Will FW 3200 see the light of day? Hopefully.

I'm happy to see both but USB isn't going to eradicate the need for Firewire anytime soon

Yes, they said the same thing about RS-232, but where is that today?

Even on the few pieces of equipment that still have it, it's almost never used.
Reply
Reply
post #116 of 123
8/7/09 at 10:57am
" USB CPU consumption used to be an issue, but I can't say I recall it being a problem lately. ..."

An insignificant issue = USB has its own 32 bit processor connected to the desktop computer / CPU host bus, so performance degradation, if noticeable, of the CPU and bus is pretty much same, same compared to other interfaces like EtherNet and FireWire or whatever. Thus CPU performance through modern USB 1.1, 2.0 or 3.x is not an issue. (The older Apple keyboard/mouse interfaces did have a small problem, a performance issue, being 8 bit, but not any of the new stuff.)

" ... Will FW 3200 see the light of day? ..."

FW3200 is on the lab bench, anyway. Texas Instruments is "sampling" the chips to interested manufacturers. Note that "pure" FireWire to fiber optic interface is a reality ... there just needs to be customers interested in peer to peer over distance at speeds greater than any other hardware protocol. Apple invented FireWire ... but they "don't talk about future products".

" ... Yes, they said the same thing about RS-232, but where is that today? ..."

Well, it is still the interface of choice in oil field exploration = long lines to sensors that are relatively lightning strike resistant. If you have ever seen oil field exploration in action like in the Great Plains of South Dakota = six or so, five hundred foot long, twisted pair with shield copper connectors (just like antenna) feeding a bunch of RS-232 audio sensors ("dirt sonar"), laid out in a big circle with the engineer and his computer in the center ... well, lightning strike is the most significant cause of death among these oil field engineers, so they all see RS-232 as the "fuse" in the circuit.

And there is a whole bunch of factory floor equipment that is interfaced via RS-232 ... programmable industrial sewing machines, to name one category.
Warning: FireWire evangelist on board
Reply
Warning: FireWire evangelist on board
Reply
post #117 of 123
8/7/09 at 11:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastEddy View Post

" ... Yes, they said the same thing about RS-232, but where is that today? ..."

Well, it is still the interface of choice in oil field exploration = long lines to sensors that are relatively lightning strike resistant. If you have every seen oil field exploration in action like in the Great Plains of South Dakota, six or so, five hundred foot long twisted pair with shield copper connectors feeding a bunch of RS-232 audio sensors ... well, lightning strike is the most significant cause of death among these oil field engineers, so they all see RS-232 as the "fuse" in the circuit.

And there is a whole bunch of factory floor equipment that is interfaced via RS-232 ... programmable industrial sewing machines, to name one category.

Those are important fields, but they are pretty well served with devices designed for rugged use. Factory lines also have their own communication standards too. For hobbyist use, I'm content with a USB to RS232 adapter. It worked pretty well when I was using it. I even have a Bluetooth to RS-232 adapter, I never used it though.

I would think that optical might be more desirable where lightning strikes were a concern.
Reply
Reply
post #118 of 123
8/7/09 at 4:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Those are important fields, but they are pretty well served with devices designed for rugged use. Factory lines also have their own communication standards too. For hobbyist use, I'm content with a USB to RS232 adapter. It worked pretty well when I was using it. I even have a Bluetooth to RS-232 adapter, I never used it though.

I would think that optical might be more desirable where lightning strikes were a concern.

In many of these cases, even where fasteddie is mentioning, 232 has long been replaced by 485.

but then again, even that's dying out in the oil industry and other places. I have a number of pieces of older pro video and audio decks I never parted with. They have them. Few modern units do though.

SDI replaced much of this years ago on the high end. Some of my stuff has SDI for high end use, 232 or 485 for control (some have 232 and 485), and one also has FW400 for low end video in.

I haven't used these things for years, they're in plastic covered boxes in the attic, along with my computer collection.
Reply
Reply
post #119 of 123
8/9/09 at 6:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I'm not so sure. It still costs more, and I'm seeing newer boards from the major third party board manufacturers not including them on any other than their performance enthusiast boards.

The need for FW is rapidly diminishing. That doesn't mean that no one will want it for a time yet, but most people won't.

+1. I think in 5 years time we'll see no more FW.
Reply
Reply
post #120 of 123
8/19/09 at 12:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGSStateStudent View Post

+1. I think in 5 years time we'll see no more FW.

Apple screwed itself. Again.

Just like with the digital camera, the PDA, the PC itself, etc.

FW can be used between devices with no need for a computer in between and it is extremely reliable in terms of speed. I think it'll be around for a while but be seen on less PCs, particularly laptops.

Hey FastEddy are you in a profession that works in the "field"? Might I ask what you do? That's interesting to hear about lighting! I am an environmental scientist and I have to say serial and parallel are widely used on field equipment. Like water quality equipment like YSI, Quanta, etc. Perhaps it is more reliable than USB or FW or something. Of course in the office a USB adapter usually ends up being used anyway.
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › USB 3 test spec to be in Apple's hands by June