GigaWire - More Info
Reply 21 of 46
December 23, 2001 4:22AM
Gigawire does not transfer electricity through space.
It is not some form of warp drive.
It is not a transporter that can beam people to the moon.
It's an APPLE product, so don't expect too much. My bet is that it is some form of data transmission technology that uses WIRES. Probably will complement Firewire, rather than actually succeeding it. It will be used in a variety of different applications.
Reply 22 of 46
December 23, 2001 5:26AM
From what I have heard, it is a technology that allow a high tranfer of data between the CPU, and the motherboard
Reply 23 of 46
December 23, 2001 9:36AM
i did a search on the U.S. Trademark Electronic Search System on:
The description part of the database entry is the following...
"IC 038. US 100 101 104. G & S: Telecommunication services; cellular telephone communication; Communication by computer terminals, communication by telephone, facsimile transmission; providing of electronic mail (E-Mail); computer aided transmission of messages and images; communication between computer peripherals and devices; information about telecommunication.
IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: electrical and electronic equipment; computer hardware; computer firmware; computers; computer peripheral devices; handheld computers; telephones, mobile telephones, communication devices; telecommunications equipment and devices; wireless information devices; computer software programs; computer operating system programs; computer utility programs; computer application programs; computer software for the design, development, modeling, simulation, compiling, de-bugging, verification, construction and interfacing of electrical and electronic equipment, integrated circuits, cables and connectors all for use with computers, telecommunications equipment and devices, or computer peripheral devices; parts and fittings for all the aforesaid goods."
Reply 24 of 46
December 23, 2001 9:57AM
Is there a difference between frequency and data transfer speeds? The article mentions 5 GHz as the frequency (like my phone has a 2.4 GHz frequency), but does that have anything to do with the amount of data that gets carried across, or just hows often the thing says "hello" to either end?
Me = ignoramus.
Reply 25 of 46
December 23, 2001 10:02AM
It is very cool to see so many Tesla fans on AI. So as long as we are talking about wireless data transmission, anyone want to bring up J.D. Bell's theorem?
Reply 26 of 46
December 23, 2001 10:03AM
[quote]Originally posted by BuonRotto:
<strong>Is there a difference between frequency and data transfer speeds? The article mentions 5 GHz as the frequency (like my phone has a 2.4 GHz frequency), but does that have anything to do with the amount of data that gets carried across, or just hows often the thing says "hello" to either end?
Me = ignoramus.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Frequency and data transfer speeds (bandwidth) are distinct, although not entirely unrelated. The higher the frequency, the easier it is to get enough bandwidth to transmit at a high data rate.
The problem with Apple coming up with a marvelous wireless data link working at very high data rates is that it can'y really do it without letting anybody know, as the bandwidth is allocated, and independently in most countries at that, it would have to get authorisation from at least the US, EU, and japanese communication authorities before launching that, or it would limit it's marvelous new system to just one country.
Reply 27 of 46
December 23, 2001 3:02PM
first : there is AM radio that works without batteries. so YES, you can transmit eletric power through thin air. it's called "eletro magnetic waves".. the problem is that to transmit enough energy to power a device, could cause you brain damage.
second : the highest the frequency you work in, more allocation zones you have, and more bandwidth you have per channel (allocation zones). so , if you are working in 5ghz frequency , you can transmit more bits per second. in digital comunication, the zeros and ones are encoded in a senoidal wave. this wave is irradiated through the antennas. the higher the frequency, more zeros and ones can fit the wave at the same period of time...
i think airport works at 2.4 ghz, that is a free frequency. it means you don't need a license to use it , if you equipament is low power..
900 mhz works the same way. thats why you have cordless phones working at 900mhz, and nobody has a license.
i think 5ghz is another free frequency, but I am not sure.
regarding other countries... there are only 3 trendsetting places : US, Japan and Europe... the other places adopts one of those trends..
Here in brasil we usually adopt US standards. so I don't think it's a problem to sell high frequency equipament, 'cause the free frequency in US is the same free frequency in other places..
correct me if I am wrong ....
Reply 28 of 46
December 24, 2001 8:07PM
[quote]Originally posted by zac4mac:
<strong>RF-ID badges, the ones you use to get the door to open at work. The ones I worked on had an EEPROM core that could be reprogrammed. When the card is in range, it receives a steady carrier pulse from the host interface that is used to power up the chip and spit out it's unique code string. Best range we could get was four feet. Small stuff tho, very low power. You ain't gonna run an external CDR wirelessly...
If you've ever opened up an RF-ID badge, there's a large loop of wire connected to a small smart-card-esque chip. the badge-reader generates a magnetic field that induces a current in the wireloop inside the badge, and so the chip has enough power to send back a signal. There's a limitation to this technology though. Any stronger and the magnetic field would start wiping credit cards, etc.
Reply 29 of 46
December 24, 2001 8:39PM
Well I was thinking about this a little bit, I don't think gigawire is the next firewire, Mainly cuz, all the peripheral companies would be developing gigawire capable stuff, and with all those companies devloping gigawire compatible stuff wouldn't we know about it? sure its not that hard to keep a secret amongst one or two companies, but dozens of companies? especially with the information hungry crowd. but then again only two things REALLY benefit from gigawire(assuming its a 1.6 gbps capable wire)thats external HDs and digital movie cameras, there have been rumors of an apple branded digital camera, Perhaps they plan on releasing a digital movie camera using gigawire and being able to sync up with imovie and final cut pro.
this all assuming gigawire is the next firewire(which is suppose to be 800 mbps and scalable to 3.2 gbps transers)
Reply 30 of 46
December 24, 2001 9:38PM
Developers have already been told to get their stuff ready for 1394b at WWDC 2001. Apple also offered specifications to developers.
[edit: so whatever 1394b is called doesn't really affect the developers till they start packaging. that said, i still think gigawire isn't 1394b.]
[ 12-24-2001: Message edited by: catalyst ]</p>
Reply 31 of 46
December 24, 2001 10:25PM
Many years ago radio stations had broadcasting towers that were so powerful the lights in nearby homes didn't go off when they were turned off. They just dimmed. Fun fact.
[ 12-24-2001: Message edited by: apple_otaku ]</p>
Reply 32 of 46
December 25, 2001 8:35PM
Gigawire won't be Firewire 2.0. A change in name confuses customers. Every time Apple comes out with a new iMac, they don't change the name. It's the same thing, only better. That's just my opinion.
Reply 33 of 46
December 25, 2001 9:20PM
Reply 34 of 46
December 26, 2001 12:31AM
[quote]Originally posted by InsideAppler:
LAN for Maybe hmmmmmmm?
Reply 35 of 46
December 26, 2001 12:46AM
It's not for LAN. Gigabit ethernet and future 10Gigabit Ethernet or more then whats neccessary for LANs.
Gigawire is likely a fiber optic cable that Apple will over with Firewire 2 for 1.6gb/sec data transfer between devices.
The Firewire spec calls for speeds up to 3gb/sec I believe using fiberoptic cable and the name gigawire makes sense for that purpose and the description in the trademark site
Reply 36 of 46
December 26, 2001 7:22AM
Well we know that to achieve 1.6Gb and 3.2Gb speeds over firewire you need fiber instead of normal copper. So it makes sense like applenut says that it's the name of the port for the new firewire. I would guess Apple would include 2 copper ports and one new "Gigawire" port for the new connection.
Reply 37 of 46
December 26, 2001 7:57AM
just make gigawire backwards compatible <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Reply 38 of 46
December 26, 2001 9:28AM
They should call it FiberWire.
I don't like "GigaWire".
Reply 39 of 46
December 26, 2001 10:42AM
[quote]Originally posted by Smircle:
As Firewire 2.0 is supposed to work over glassfiber and Cat-5 Ethernet cables, it would be only straightforward to make it run over wireless as well - but only as _one_ of serveral media, the preferred still being FW cables.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That makes the most sense to me, in the very same way Ethernet has those exact same options: sooner or later, some Apple Engineer/Marketing Maven must've went "Hmmmm, I wonder if we can do the same thing with Firewire?"
Thus, here we are.
Or rather, I think it'll be a rather happy place once we get there.
Reply 40 of 46
December 26, 2001 11:39AM
[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
The Firewire spec calls for speeds up to 3gb/sec I believe using fiberoptic cable and the name gigawire makes sense for that purpose and the description in the trademark site</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think you need to read to description of Gigawire at the trademark site again. It has nothing to do with Firewire. It is the total opposite of Firewire. It has to do with wireless communications.