The IEEE 1394 Trade Association had this response, printed with permission.
"The 3.2 Gigabit version of the FireWire standard is in the final stages for release in early 2008. The new version will use the same connectors and cabling as 1394b, which was revised and updated for 1394b applications and certified for bandwidths up to 10 Gigabits/second. This is targeted for consumer applications providing true whole-home networking and multi-function utility with built-in quality of service required for transporting raw uncompressed video plus dozens of compressed HD video channels. Transporting raw graphics data will create new applications, such as the ability to share graphics resources or redirect desktop computers. FireWire OHCI providers have completed the transition from PCI to PCI Express, paving the way for an easy speed-up from today's FireWire 800 parts. The Trade Association is now reviewing applications for 10 Gigabit versions of 1394, which remains a key element on the road map in order to transport multiple uncompressed HD streams over a network."
"FireWire continues to provide unique benefit. FireWire is peer-to-peer not Master-Slave. It is a network, not a bus or point-to-point. Since 2002, 1394 has been working on CAT5/6 and optical fiber (POF/GOF) at distances of 100 meters between devices. Today, 1394 is working on coax cable for home and automotive installations. And, 1394b is interoperable with existing products including the 100 mbps camcorders."
The IEEE1394 Trade Association representative also pointed put that support in Vista is due out in early 2008 which will, he said, increase penetration in Windows based PCs.
[This article was updated with information from the IEEE1394 Trade Association.]
Firewire ans USB are two very different protocols, and have very different strengths and weaknesses. IMO, one doesn't replace the other. What we are likely to see in the following year in the FW400 connector disappear/replaced by the FW800 one. There are already 6-pin/9-pin cables and adaptors, most Firewire devices have already 2 connectors to facilitate daisy-chaining... I like Firewire a lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by from another forum this morning
Firewire ans USB are two very different protocols, and have very different strengths and weaknesses. IMO, one doesn't replace the other. What we are likely to see in the following year in the FW400 connector disappear/replaced by the FW800 one. There are already 6-pin/9-pin cables and adaptors, most Firewire devices have already 2 connectors to facilitate daisy-chaining... I like Firewire a lot.
FW800 is 1394b. It's a bastard child that was never supposed to be. Years ago, we were supposed to have FW1600 over the same 'ol 4/6 pin connector. It's certainly possible. FW will survive as FW over coax, FW over CAT5, and even as a hybridized FW via IP.
Firewire is the only high-speed serial bus that supports multipoint-to-multipoint. That's a desirable technology. We're just starting to see analog connections being yanked out of AV equipment. . . . wait for it. FW, like the Newton, was just WAY too ahead of its time.
Can someone explain what the difference is between firewire and IEEE 1394. Are they the same?
If they are the same why use the IEEE 1394 terminology?
They are one and the same. IEEE 1394 is the official terminology or 'standard' in the same way Leopard is really OS X 10.5. Sony call their version of IEEE 1394 iLink which sports the mini FireWire interface. A network cable is actualy CAT5/RJ45 etc etc.
They are one and the same. IEEE 1394 is the official terminology or 'standard' in the same way Leopard is really OS X 10.5. Sony call their version of IEEE 1394 iLink which sports the mini FireWire interface. A network cable is actualy CAT5/RJ45 etc etc.
Glad to know. Boy saying IEEE 1394 is a lot easier than Firewire.
Comments
The IEEE 1394 Trade Association had this response, printed with permission.
"The 3.2 Gigabit version of the FireWire standard is in the final stages for release in early 2008. The new version will use the same connectors and cabling as 1394b, which was revised and updated for 1394b applications and certified for bandwidths up to 10 Gigabits/second. This is targeted for consumer applications providing true whole-home networking and multi-function utility with built-in quality of service required for transporting raw uncompressed video plus dozens of compressed HD video channels. Transporting raw graphics data will create new applications, such as the ability to share graphics resources or redirect desktop computers. FireWire OHCI providers have completed the transition from PCI to PCI Express, paving the way for an easy speed-up from today's FireWire 800 parts. The Trade Association is now reviewing applications for 10 Gigabit versions of 1394, which remains a key element on the road map in order to transport multiple uncompressed HD streams over a network."
"FireWire continues to provide unique benefit. FireWire is peer-to-peer not Master-Slave. It is a network, not a bus or point-to-point. Since 2002, 1394 has been working on CAT5/6 and optical fiber (POF/GOF) at distances of 100 meters between devices. Today, 1394 is working on coax cable for home and automotive installations. And, 1394b is interoperable with existing products including the 100 mbps camcorders."
The IEEE1394 Trade Association representative also pointed put that support in Vista is due out in early 2008 which will, he said, increase penetration in Windows based PCs.
[This article was updated with information from the IEEE1394 Trade Association.]
Firewire ans USB are two very different protocols, and have very different strengths and weaknesses. IMO, one doesn't replace the other. What we are likely to see in the following year in the FW400 connector disappear/replaced by the FW800 one. There are already 6-pin/9-pin cables and adaptors, most Firewire devices have already 2 connectors to facilitate daisy-chaining... I like Firewire a lot.
USB is for mice, Firewire is for men!
Firewire ans USB are two very different protocols, and have very different strengths and weaknesses. IMO, one doesn't replace the other. What we are likely to see in the following year in the FW400 connector disappear/replaced by the FW800 one. There are already 6-pin/9-pin cables and adaptors, most Firewire devices have already 2 connectors to facilitate daisy-chaining... I like Firewire a lot.
FW800 is 1394b. It's a bastard child that was never supposed to be. Years ago, we were supposed to have FW1600 over the same 'ol 4/6 pin connector. It's certainly possible. FW will survive as FW over coax, FW over CAT5, and even as a hybridized FW via IP.
Firewire is the only high-speed serial bus that supports multipoint-to-multipoint. That's a desirable technology. We're just starting to see analog connections being yanked out of AV equipment. . . . wait for it. FW, like the Newton, was just WAY too ahead of its time.
If they are the same why use the IEEE 1394 terminology?
Can someone explain what the difference is between firewire and IEEE 1394. Are they the same?
If they are the same why use the IEEE 1394 terminology?
They are one and the same. IEEE 1394 is the official terminology or 'standard' in the same way Leopard is really OS X 10.5. Sony call their version of IEEE 1394 iLink which sports the mini FireWire interface. A network cable is actualy CAT5/RJ45 etc etc.
They are one and the same. IEEE 1394 is the official terminology or 'standard' in the same way Leopard is really OS X 10.5. Sony call their version of IEEE 1394 iLink which sports the mini FireWire interface. A network cable is actualy CAT5/RJ45 etc etc.
Glad to know. Boy saying IEEE 1394 is a lot easier than Firewire.
Glad to know. Boy saying IEEE 1394 is a lot easier than Firewire.
Sony was afraid the Japanese would think Firewire presented some sort of home fire hazard.