USB 2.0 vs. the Future of FireWire
When will Apple/FireWire Consortium (or what ever they are called) going to release FireWire 2?
I was looking at my local CompUSA paper today, I was quite amazed by the number of USB 2.0 drives and CD writers that were being advertised and I thought where was FireWire 2.
While everyone on these forums knows that fundamentally FireWire is a better technology that USB, will this be enough to beat out USB 2.0?
It appears that there are more new PC motherboards shipping with USB 2.0 ports than FireWire ports. Why is this? If this trend continues, is FireWire destine to become the next SCSI?
Any thoughts??
I was looking at my local CompUSA paper today, I was quite amazed by the number of USB 2.0 drives and CD writers that were being advertised and I thought where was FireWire 2.
While everyone on these forums knows that fundamentally FireWire is a better technology that USB, will this be enough to beat out USB 2.0?
It appears that there are more new PC motherboards shipping with USB 2.0 ports than FireWire ports. Why is this? If this trend continues, is FireWire destine to become the next SCSI?
Any thoughts??
Comments
It's funny they still offer DV camcorders on the "accessories" configuration page.
EDIT: Unlikely, but maybe they're waiting for the pending availability of PCI IEEE 1394b cards...
[ 07-28-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>
The FireWire consortium has to do a better job getting FireWire implemented on consumer electronics and not just cancorders. As long as Intel has a vested interest in the success of USB and USB2, then USB/USB2 will continue to advance and become the standard peripherial interface. Unless, that is, FW/FWb can become so pervasive, computer makers have no choice but to offer it on par with USB/USB2, perhaps even promote it's advantages.
Right now, the only FireWire devices are DV camcorders and storage (HDD, CD, CDRW, DVD), and iPod, but USB/USB2 is avaliable on keyboards, mice, speakers, every other MP3 player, CDRW, digital cameras...the list goes on. As long as moye categories of devices use USB/USB2, computer manufactures will gravitate towards and promote USB/USB2.
Apple recently announced a partnership of sorts with Panasonic. If this includes implementing FW in most of Panasonic's consumers devices, I think FW would get an amazing boost. Panasonic could promote a true digital studio/home theater. FW connecting your camcorders, TVs. DVD decks, Mac, stereo components would allow incredible options. Mix your footage from your camcorder and see it right away on your TV,with the sound comig from your stereo system. Plug your iPod directly into you car stereo for instant digital sound. Many other options emerge as well.
I have gone on about this before, but I really think FW onboard all consumer electronic is the only way to truely showcase the power or FW/FWb over USB/USB2
[ 07-28-2002: Message edited by: Tulkas ]</p>
<a href="http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=385380"; target="_blank">Pioneer has products coming already</a>
I hear Denon is coming out with possible FW on their hi end decks in the near future as well.
Another huge boon for FW is nvidias nForce Mobo's. It's built right in along with USB2.
The debate will rage on an on but the SMART consumer will realize that both are needed. FW has benefits that USB can't touch and while that's not enough to make FW the victor..it's enough to keep them in the fight.
Also with Apple's purchase of Zyante you can bet their HW devices will support FW.
Anyway, I noticed that a bunch of HDTV equipment is going firewire. I even saw a promotional ad-poster at an AV store. I think Hitachi was the company involved. It has a before/after sequence, with the before packed with wires in parallel, etc, and the after with just one or two firewire cables daisy chaining to the equipment.
No surprise for me to see the implementation of firewire, but I was impressed with the scale of the ad-poster.
I also, by the way, want that Phillips glass plasma TV. Wow.
<strong>On a technical point, Firewire has four pins and USB has two. . . . so Firewire has twice the potential.
Anyway, I noticed that a bunch of HDTV equipment is going firewire. I even saw a promotional ad-poster at an AV store. I think Hitachi was the company involved. It has a before/after sequence, with the before packed with wires in parallel, etc, and the after with just one or two firewire cables daisy chaining to the equipment.
No surprise for me to see the implementation of firewire, but I was impressed with the scale of the ad-poster.
I also, by the way, want that Phillips glass plasma TV. Wow.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Unfortunately the potential marrieage of FW and HDTV is over.
<a href="http://www.dvhs.co.uk/100046.htm"; target="_blank">The Bastard Son of DVI is born</a>
FW can still be used for many other devices once the encryption standards are made.
Er? FireWire is in every market USB 2 is currently in, and it's much more mature. Just look at the current USB 2 HDDs available, they don't get anywhere near the transfer rates of the Oxford 911 FireWire bridge equipped enclosures.
Why do you want a FireWire keyboard or mouse? In fact, pretty much every PC OEM still tries to sell you a PS/2 ball mouse with USB models as options!
Creative's newest Nomad uses FireWire.
Nikon's D1 series and Canon's EOS-1D use FireWire.
Speakers? FireWire speakers do exist. Look for SoftAcoustik.
Printers? Scanners? They have FireWire models too.
The list goes on.
<strong>
Er? FireWire is in every market USB 2 is currently in, and it's much more mature. Just look at the current USB 2 HDDs available, they don't get anywhere near the transfer rates of the Oxford 911 FireWire bridge equipped enclosures.
Why do you want a FireWire keyboard or mouse? In fact, pretty much every PC OEM still tries to sell you a PS/2 ball mouse with USB models as options!
Creative's newest Nomad uses FireWire.
Nikon's D1 series and Canon's EOS-1D use FireWire.
Speakers? FireWire speakers do exist. Look for SoftAcoustik.
Printers? Scanners? They have FireWire models too.
The list goes on.</strong><hr></blockquote>
My point was that USB2 hasn't been around nearly as long, as as you say is in the same markets. The adoption rate is far higher. With a curve that much steaper, it will over take FW. FW is far more mature, yet is being over taken, that was my point.
I wasn't saying that I would want FW on mice of any other low speed device. However, the pervasiveness of USB, even just the name, means that consumers will recoqnise it over FW.
It's just a matter of timing. Look at where USB 2 has made inroads, it's the same old shit, HDDs, CD-RWs, mass storage devices. Want to know why? That's the only stuff that needs the throughput of USB 2 right now.
Do you see more than a couple of USB 2 printers? What about scanners? No. You know why? They don't need the capabilities of USB 2.
The only reason why there are so many USB 2 mass storage products out already is because FireWire introduced the consumer to affordable+usable external mass storage. Before FireWire, your option was SCSI or USB 1.1.
It looks like USB2.0 will certainly take over the high-speed 'CONSUMER' 'computer' peripheral. Scanners/printers/MP3 and external drives for sure, and also digital still cameras ('cause they also NEED a computer). It reaches forward and back (2 tiers of compatibility) and so manufacturers don't have to spring for a second port option. They will reach more PC users as a result, and thusly they'll reach more overall users, mac be damned, leave it to the specialists and the high-end.
Video will remain firewire cause it's entrenched, pro still cameras, scanners, external drives, and video capture cause it's just better. m-Lan might help firewire rule audio, but even USB 1.1 has enough bandwidth for the reproduction of 192/24 audio formats (they take about 9Mbps, just under the USB 1.1 limit).
Apple would do well to incorporate USB2.0 or they're going to unwittingly corral their users into a situation where even 'consumer' mac users are limited to specialist hardware and/or expensive pro stuff. Not good either way, not for mac and not for home computing in general. Blame fvcking INTEL, BASTARDS!!!
So, if Apple won't include USB2.0 we're going to need options on the mac. Faster firewire would help make it more attractive (but again) mostly to high-end periph makers -- firewire raids and HD cams could certainly use 1600Mbps and faster. And there is a big pro market for those things. Between 1600-3200Mbps you could even start to bridge 64bit PCI for OUTBOARD video processors. Would be great for the MOBILE production/on site broadcasting markets. But it doesn't do much to boost adoption for consumer devices.
3rd party solutions?
That's a wierd situation. Only pro users can get one, and they need it least. Current firewire is better for their uses, and faster firewire would be a boon.
What we need is a copany like Griffin to make a compact inline 6pin firewire to USB2.0 bridge chip. While USB 2.0 has a technically faster peak output, firewire has a much better sustained performance, and the difference is close enough that it ought to be possible to bridge USB2.0 to firewire at close to full USB2.0 speeds (with the possible added benefit of a degree of CPU independence not natively available with USB???) Users of consumer macs could get these, and then buy much cheaper USB2.0 devices for their macs. Again... scanners, still cams, external burners, MP3 players, etc...
I have an Epson 2450 Scanner that has USB2/FW.
For the first 2 months I used the FW port and thought that it read much faster than my old serial scanner. Just for kicks I thought I would try it using my USB port. Well when I hooked up the scanner to the USB it read even faster.
At first I didn't believe it. But after comparing over 40 different picture scans I have concluded that the USB2<->USB connection runs faster than the FW<->FW.
I would have understood if it I had a USB2 port but I don't.
So I have not been sold on how good FW throughput really is... yet. <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
<strong>Just to throw in my two cents...
I have an Epson 2450 Scanner that has USB2/FW.
For the first 2 months I used the FW port and thought that it read much faster than my old serial scanner. Just for kicks I thought I would try it using my USB port. Well when I hooked up the scanner to the USB it read even faster.
At first I didn't believe it. But after comparing over 40 different picture scans I have concluded that the USB2<->USB connection runs faster than the FW<->FW.
I would have understood if it I had a USB2 port but I don't.
So I have not been sold on how good FW throughput really is... yet.
Wouldn't base my results off of one product. Drivers Drivers Drivers. You mileage will ALWAYS vary.
True convergence will require devices to communicate and many different speeds. Firewire can handle that with Asynch thru...USB cannot. However it's foolish to think FW will EVER overtake USB. The cheapest stuff always seems to be crammed down peoples throughts.
<strong>Er. I don't think so.
It's just a matter of timing. Look at where USB 2 has made inroads, it's the same old shit, HDDs, CD-RWs, mass storage devices. Want to know why? That's the only stuff that needs the throughput of USB 2 right now.
Do you see more than a couple of USB 2 printers? What about scanners? No. You know why? They don't need the capabilities of USB 2.
The only reason why there are so many USB 2 mass storage products out already is because FireWire introduced the consumer to affordable+usable external mass storage. Before FireWire, your option was SCSI or USB 1.1.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree with you that it is a matter of timing. but that if not the only factor nor, I think, the most important. If Intel decides to go with on board USB2 on their boards, do you really think FW has a chance? I can almost guarantee that consumer DV camcorders would start to ship with USB2 ports in addition to the FW ports, eventually going to only USB2. HDD and other storage media companies would also look at USB2 as the path of least resistance. All of these would go toward USB2, because their market is consumers and it's easy to sell your product when you don't have to convince your customer to add a card to use your product. As you said, FW introduced consumers to inexpensive external storage, and USB2 could easily take over in this area. FW needs to move into new areas in order to advance.
As you also said, before FW SCSI was the only other real option for exernal storage. well, Apple put SCSI onboard, Intel put USB onboard..where is scsi now? relegated to the very high end. I would hate to see a technolgy with as much potential constrained to highend products only. FW has the potential to become a unifier of home electronics..USB2 doesn't have this potential. This is true convergence without the hokey "all-in-one computer/TV/stereo etc" that was being pushed as the next big thing a few years ago. But, if FW is sidelined for USB2 on most home computers, then there would be fewer compelling reasons to start integrating FW into home electronics.
I am not saying in anyway that FW is dying. I am saying that if the FW consortium doesn't do more to get FW into new markets and products, then USB2 will begin to dominate for computer related high speed peripherials, and this will inturn make FW onboard home electronics less attractive to manufactures. This will then relegate FW to professional products only.
in every benchmark firewire still beats USB 2.0.
i'm not worried about firewire going anywhere.
you should look next time you're reading a 2.0 box. USB has a "max" throughput of 480. fireiwire has a sustained 400.
Sony goes for Beta and gets clobbered (at least in the consumer space)
IBM goes for MicroChannel and gets clobbered.
Intel goes proprietary with USB2.0 (vs firewire) and actually has a shot. And, unlike the other 2 examples, they have the inferior solution. Even M$ didn't go for it a first, but now builders are coming around to it. Nope, I really think there is a school of thought that wants 'computer' devices to speak a different language entirely from 'consumer' devices. This philosophy does not want interoperability to be seamless out of the box. They want it proprietized. That way you have to shell out $$$ everytime you want computers and 'devices' to talk to each other. Otherwise you must buy 'peripherals' designed specifically for computer use.
You can't get a device that charges over the USB port. You can't get a higher power device that runs through USB power. You can't really have any possibility for a cheap drive that connects directly to your miniDV camera without a computer. Firewire is vastly superior, but it just might get shafted by Intel on this one. And we'll all lose if that happens.
We need a couple of things.
1.) the fastest firewire spec right now, no incremental BS -- both for PC's and macs. At 400MB (3200Mbps) one channel could effectively bridge PCI cards. We could see more truly expandable ***small*** computers. Instead of adding a card, you just add a 'module' (PCI card bridged in a slim box) for whatever need you might have. Great for A/V right up to the pro uses. Might as well write a scheme for firewire based clustering too. 3200Mbps would be about 3 times faster than gigabit ethernet and much much cheaper than the next step up (10GB ethernet). A lot of clustering applications could get some good use out of it.
2.) For Mac users, we need a slim inline firewire to USB2.0 bridge. Apple may not go for it, but other manufacturers are, and there are just too many macs out there that can't be upgraded.
Now that Apple has released Rendezvous, wouldn't it be better/easier to have a 1 Gigabit Ethernet connection to everything instead of Firewire?
Intel already has two reference boards with USB 2. The floodgates seemed to have opened only a sliver.
I guarantee you consumer DV cams will not use USB 2 without also using FireWire. USB 2 is a very 'dumb' technology. It's not Isochronous or peer-to-peer. Have you seen the FireWire HDD based backpacks that you can attach directly to camcorders? that would be much harder with USB 2. Look at the HDDs again. You get more for your money with FireWire. Almost every FireWire HDD has a second FireWire port for daisy-chaining devices. I haven't purchased a FireWire hub even though I have 3 HDDs, a CD-RW drive, a Dazzle analog->DV converter, MiniDV camera and iPod all connected at the same time. Also look at USB 2's power capabilities. USB 2 can provide something abysmal like 5 watts vs at least 10x that with FireWire.
[quote]As you also said, before FW SCSI was the only other real option for exernal storage. well, Apple put SCSI onboard, Intel put USB onboard..where is scsi now? relegated to the very high end. I would hate to see a technolgy with as much potential constrained to highend products only. FW has the potential to become a unifier of home electronics..USB2 doesn't have this potential. This is true convergence without the hokey "all-in-one computer/TV/stereo etc" that was being pushed as the next big thing a few years ago. But, if FW is sidelined for USB2 on most home computers, then there would be fewer compelling reasons to start integrating FW into home electronics.<hr></blockquote>
What is the price difference between a FireWire HDD and a USB 2 HDD? There isn't one. SCSI was much more expensive than anything else. Your comparison of SCSI and USB 1.1 is flawed. They were used for different things. Neither was used by the average consumer for connecting mass storage devices.
[quote]I am not saying in anyway that FW is dying. I am saying that if the FW consortium doesn't do more to get FW into new markets and products, then USB2 will begin to dominate for computer related high speed peripherials, and this will inturn make FW onboard home electronics less attractive to manufactures. This will then relegate FW to professional products only.<hr></blockquote>
Like DVD+RW vs DVD-RW, it's too late for DVD+RW to force DVD-RW out. DVD-RW isn't budging.
My concern is only that USB2 could knock out FW simply with the perception that USB2 is more pervasive and therefore a suitable replacement or substitute. I don't think it even come closes to the abilities or FW, but historically in the home electronics and PC industry, a superior product will lose ground to an inferior on with better marketing.
Look at VHS vs BetaMax, SCSI vs IDE, QuickTime vs Real, MS vs Apple. In each of these cases, the superior product, each with a head start in the market, is not nearly as pervasive as the iferior one with better marketing. Inertia drives sales, and I don't want to see FW succumb to USB2. FW will not be supplanted by USB2 any time soon, but the FW consortium must make headway in making FW so pervasive in the mindshare of consumers and manufactures that USB2 would stay an distant second as a consideration as a standard interface. The only way I see this is to move into new markets. Yes, FW is available on more devices, but it must continue to become available on even more. Other wise I think it will be relegated to highend only, which to me would be a waste or it's potential.