What Gives? Is FW 1600 or 3200 next?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
There's a Firewire conference going on in China now, and one of the sponsors has unveiled a faster version of Firewire, FW1600. They claim new products are being designed with the new spec now.



Thing is, as we've discussed in the past, Firewire seems set to move to 3200 in the next year.



So what's the point of moving Firewire peripherals to 1600 and then 3200 in the same year?



Who masterminded this idea? This has the makings of a disaster for FW, and I have a feeling that the upcoming USB3 will gain from the confusion created here.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 31
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post


    There's a Firewire conference going on in China now, and one of the sponsors has unveiled a faster version of Firewire, FW1600. They claim new products are being designed with the new spec now.



    Thing is, as we've discussed in the past, Firewire seems set to move to 3200 in the next year.



    So what's the point of moving Firewire peripherals to 1600 and then 3200 in the same year?



    Who masterminded this idea? This has the makings of a disaster for FW, and I have a feeling that the upcoming USB3 will gain from the confusion created here.



    Technical merits notwithstanding, isn't USB marginalizing firewire?



    With USB 3 on the way will it matter?
  • Reply 2 of 31
    futurepastnowfuturepastnow Posts: 1,772member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by backtomac View Post


    Technical merits notwithstanding, isn't USB marginalizing firewire?



    With USB 3 on the way will it matter?



    No, it won't matter. Firewire is a dead standard.
  • Reply 3 of 31
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,324moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post


    No, it won't matter. Firewire is a dead standard.



    In computer peripherals maybe but I've yet to see mainstream video cameras change to USB.



    It would be nice if they picked one standard and went with it but I don't see it happening.



    I agree it would be stupid to do 1600 then 3200 because it would cause the same problems with FW 400 and 800. There are so few devices using FW 800 that it makes those devices more expensive. They should just do FW 3200 and skip 1600 altogether.
  • Reply 4 of 31
    usb was standard for low speed devices and firewire was for high speed.



    and fire 800, 3200 and maybe 1600 will use the same ports and cables
  • Reply 5 of 31
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    In computer peripherals maybe but I've yet to see mainstream video cameras change to USB.



    DV cameras only use about 40 Mbps of bandwidth; that's why they never adopted FW800 and they certainly don't need a faster speed. I think all the AVCHD cameras use USB and it's only a matter of time until they take over. One of the touted features of Firewire was its good real-time (isochronous) support, but now real-time is considered slow; tapeless camcorders can download footage faster than real-time.



    The only real use for FW800 is hard drives and a few high-end video boxes; I don't think that small market justifies adopting a new version of Firewire.



    I agree with FuturePastNow: There's no demand for FW1600 or FW3200.
  • Reply 6 of 31
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,839member
    I continue to dream about someone like LaCie introducing a competitor to the Drobo that automagically mirrors your hard drive AND does TIme Machine backups at the same time.



    Don't try to tell me we don't need a faster standard for that.
  • Reply 7 of 31
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wmf View Post


    DV cameras only use about 40 Mbps of bandwidth; that's why they never adopted FW800 and they certainly don't need a faster speed. I think all the AVCHD cameras use USB and it's only a matter of time until they take over. One of the touted features of Firewire was its good real-time (isochronous) support, but now real-time is considered slow; tapeless camcorders can download footage faster than real-time.



    The only real use for FW800 is hard drives and a few high-end video boxes; I don't think that small market justifies adopting a new version of Firewire.



    I agree with FuturePastNow: There's no demand for FW1600 or FW3200.



    There is no demand until you create a demand. I'm not saying I know what's coming, but if Apple puts FW1600/3200 in a Mac, they may have something up their sleeve.
  • Reply 8 of 31
    royboyroyboy Posts: 458member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Outsider View Post


    There is no demand until you create a demand. I'm not saying I know what's coming, but if Apple puts FW1600/3200 in a Mac, they may have something up their sleeve.



    Ah yes! Creating demand. That's how successful companies get you to want to buy something you never even thought about or knew you needed. Apple is good at creating demand for new products. Most Mac enthusiast are waiting for the next new product from Apple.
  • Reply 9 of 31
    mr. memr. me Posts: 3,221member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by backtomac View Post


    Technical merits notwithstanding, isn't USB marginalizing firewire?



    ...



    There is an entire Universe outside desktop computers. Most users are aware that DV camcorders use FireWire, but that is only the tip of the iceberg. Every HDTV-capable set top box is required by law to offer FireWire.
  • Reply 10 of 31
    slewisslewis Posts: 2,081member
    Null.
  • Reply 11 of 31
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by backtomac View Post


    Technical merits notwithstanding, isn't USB marginalizing firewire?



    With USB 3 on the way will it matter?



    USB 3 is 2 years out and the higher latency and lower power capabilities of USB 3 make Firewire S3200's superior in bandwidth sustainability, cabling and power capabilities you can run over FW.
  • Reply 12 of 31
    royboyroyboy Posts: 458member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    USB 3 is 2 years out and the higher latency and lower power capabilities of USB 3 make Firewire S3200's superior in bandwidth sustainability, cabling and power capabilities you can run over FW.



    The "best" does not always win. If that was the case, then Mac's would dominate and Windows machines would be........
  • Reply 13 of 31
    akacakac Posts: 512member
    You forget audio. Audio is big on firewire. No audio pro uses USB.
  • Reply 14 of 31
    futurepastnowfuturepastnow Posts: 1,772member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    USB 3 is 2 years out and the higher latency and lower power capabilities of USB 3 make Firewire S3200's superior in bandwidth sustainability, cabling and power capabilities you can run over FW.



    And yet, Firewire will still only be used by perhaps 5% of computer users. I'll be generous and guess that 10-15% of Mac users need it.



    Pros who need FW ports can always use PCIe or Expresscard to add them. For almost everyone else, that FW port is just a waste of space that could be used for another USB port.
  • Reply 15 of 31
    megawattmegawatt Posts: 35member
    Firewire ports are a must for Audio/Video Professional users. Apple targets these users specifically, and as such will not remove firewire ports from their Pro machines, forcing people to buy additional cards.
  • Reply 16 of 31
    slewisslewis Posts: 2,081member
    Null.
  • Reply 17 of 31
    mr. memr. me Posts: 3,221member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post


    And yet, Firewire will still only be used by perhaps 5% of computer users. ...



    That's a false metric. So nearly 100% of Mac users use USB--for mice and keyboards [ignoring Bluetooth]. USB is simply not a substitute for the things that FireWire does well. Whether it is 50%, 5%, or 0.5%, FireWire will be around until something better replaces it--and that ain't USB.
  • Reply 18 of 31
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slewis View Post


    If Apple is looking to remove more ports they could switch over IEEE 1394c, Firewire 800T and then enhance that standard to reach 1600/3200 Mbit/s speeds with an adapter and cable. 800T let's you use an RJ45 and Category 5e cables and it could potentially be built into the Ethernet port so that the same port has 2 different functions. It might not matter much short term but long term they could use it to remove the Firewire port on Macbooks, and then maybe long term replace all of their Firewire ports on their computers with this.



    Sebastian



    For cryin' outloud folks, the Chairman of the FireWire Trade Association is chaired by Apple.



    http://www.1394ta.com/Contact/Board/



    Whatever Apple decides about FireWire I'm sure they are on the leading edge for what Industry wants from it.
  • Reply 19 of 31
    slewisslewis Posts: 2,081member
    Null.
  • Reply 20 of 31
    glossgloss Posts: 506member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post


    And yet, Firewire will still only be used by perhaps 5% of computer users. I'll be generous and guess that 10-15% of Mac users need it.



    Pros who need FW ports can always use PCIe or Expresscard to add them. For almost everyone else, that FW port is just a waste of space that could be used for another USB port.



    Doesn't change the fact that it's still a superior standard. I wouldn't consider buying an external HD without a Firewire connection, and every camcorder on the planet right now uses FW rather than USB. If you want to edit video, the likelihood is that you want FireWire.
Sign In or Register to comment.