5 Gbps theoretical, maybe 2 in real life? I still find it hilarious that Apple is being sued for the iPhone 3G not always achieving advertised speeds, and yet I know of not a single lawsuit against Intel for USB (or even Apple for Firewire) not reaching it's promised transfer rates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
While no standard has really ever used its full theoretical speed. The problem with 802.11n is the fact that there is no internet service provider that even provides service anywhere near its theoretical speed.
Sure, but when Time Machine is backing up my MBP it sure is nice to have that extra speed! I also don't think g would keep up with streaming DVDs from the server to my TV.
I still find it hilarious that Apple is being sued for the iPhone 3G not always achieving advertised speeds, and yet I know of not a single lawsuit against Intel for USB (or even Apple for Firewire) not reaching it's promised transfer rates.
That has always confounded me. Apple has been advertising and specing speeds in simple terms, like "twice a s fast" without really stating anything specific, but every other cellphone wil list the theoretical speed of their radios, like "HSDPA: 7.2Mbps", yet they don't seem to get sued. I just dont get it.
lolz at that video... "It's the most wonderful mouse you've ever used"
Brings back some good memories though
Haha, yeah. It was one of the worst Mac mice ever.
I also like how his first point about designing the iMac was the slow speed of the typical consumer PC processor, using "last year's" technology. Fast forward to now, and Dell could easily make the same claim against Apple's consumer computers using last year's laptop processors.
USB3 has fixed many efficiency problem that plagued USB 2. Although there are still areas Firewire wins, the economy of scale and ubiquity makes it a big plus.
The Maximum speed showed by Intel, using PRE Production Testing Hardware and Early BETA software showing transfer speed of somewhere between 340 - 380 MBps. I think that is not bad, although i was expecting 400MBps+. Intel said they could see 400MBps+ in the final version of USB 3.
The only, and final problem is CPU resources usage. Although an Hardware accelerated XCHI interface would improve the situation. It seems NO ONE single manufacturer or Chipset wants to do it. Which is rather annoying.
Hey..someone from Ketchikan, Alaska. I'm from Wrangell. Cool.
I'm excited for USB 3. I'm not religious about the FW vs USB debate as long as we keep getting faster speeds. I enjoy the FW800 on my iMac for hard drives, but it's a pretty chunky port. If USB 3 keeps the ports and cables the same, that will be an advantage.
I can appreciate the Target Disk Mode warriors' cries for keeping FW alive, but USB is the future. The sooner we adapt, the better. There will be new tools in our troubleshooting arsenal in the future.
Can't wait to have a backup finish in mere seconds!
oh yeah, i knew that part, however i was wondering if it would be possible for Apple to sell a USB 3.0 cable for the older devices (ipod/iphones) and have those connect from the older device into the new computer with usb3.0 ports to make a fast connection, or will the older devices not work with the ports that area on them?
That was what I was saying. You don't need a USB 3 to USB 2 cable, or adapter. The USB 2 cable plugs into a part of the USB 3 socket, and works just like any other USB 2 cable, speed and all.
Will we see USB3 to Firewire and USB3 to eSATA adapters?
This USB3 sounds like the real deal in terms of a versatile, one-port-fits-all solution, and I hope that Apple can make the most of it.
It's particularly important to have versatile I/O when Apple still seems to think it's acceptable to ship a pro laptop with only three serial ports. I have four on my current MBP 15 (obviously two firewire and two USB) and I use them all. But with the continuation of the drop hinge at the back for the display preventing any use of the back for I/O, and the new design of the base with side-saddle optical drive and battery and hard drive shutting off any access toward the front of the computer, we really are limited to what Apple can fit on the left hand side of the computer, and that's three serial ports on the 15 inch and four on the 17.
Hopefully Apple will redesign the display hinge on the pro laptops in order to open the back up again for I/O use, and we won't be worrying about this. But I suspect USB3 is the way for Apple to get out of this bind and get away with limited numbers of ports in their dogged adherence to the current form factor of their computers.
If there will be a call for such adapters, they will be made.
Considering that real world speed tests show USB 2.0 delivering no more than half of its promised speed, any bets on how much of this promised 5 gigabits USB 3 will actually have? I think it'll be noticeably slower than Firewire 3200, whenever these new devices start shipping that is.
Also, now that Apple has shipped a new Mini, with Firewire 800 no less, can we stop with the "firewire is dying" meme? Only the MacBook and MacBook Air lack firewire, and neither has the space for it.
USB 3 isn't just a faster version of 2. Go the the USB site and read for yourself.
As I said, the specs have been approved, just as has the specs for USB 3.
But nothing will come out in HARDWARE for some time. Approving the specs is the first step in the process. The second step is approving the silicon level II specs. Then a chip must be designed and taped. Then it must be finalized. Then it must be approved. Then it must be designed into a Standard config. board. Then the Level III specs have to be shown to function. Then that must be approved. Then manufactures can begin designing it into their products.
We won't see FW 3200 at least until the end of 2009, and possibly, not until 2010. We may, or may not, see 1600 before that.
That was what I was saying. You don't need a USB 3 to USB 2 cable, or adapter. The USB 2 cable plugs into a part of the USB 3 socket, and works just like any other USB 2 cable, speed and all.
well what im wondering is what happens when you use an older device with a USB 3 cable and a computer with USB 3, with the device go as fast as USB 3, or does the device need to be new?
well what im wondering is what happens when you use an older device with a USB 3 cable and a computer with USB 3, with the device go as fast as USB 3, or does the device need to be new?
Asked and answered.
If your older device has a USB 2 port, you can hook it using a cable with an appropriate end for your USB 2 device and an appopriate end for the USB 3 computer. (I am not familiar with whether or not the two ends will be the same.)
You will, however, only be able to communicate at USB 2 speeds.
So, the answer is still NO. It will not go as fast. Both devices will need the USB hardware.
If your older device has a USB 2 port, you can hook it using a cable with an appropriate end for your USB 2 device and an appopriate end for the USB 3 computer. (I am not familiar with whether or not the two ends will be the same.)
You will, however, only be able to communicate at USB 2 speeds.
So, the answer is still NO. It will not go as fast. Both devices will need the USB hardware.
the answer i got was "that the cable would still connect to both" i knew that, i was wondering what the speed was, yes you just NOW answered that, but that does not mean you have to be a dick.
The only, and final problem is CPU resources usage. Although an Hardware accelerated XCHI interface would improve the situation. It seems NO ONE single manufacturer or Chipset wants to do it. Which is rather annoying.
Probably because that would make the chipset even more expensive than a Firewire chipset. Instead they will bog down our CPUs and system busses shuffling all the data around. Then again, with multiple cores and ever faster busses, perhaps it won't be as big an issue as in the past.
Migration assistant over ethernet sucks beyond belief. The old computer has to be running 10.4.11 with the updated migration assistant. Not to mention if your 10.4 install is plagued by this bug it won't work at all.
I've used it a lot, and it works perfectly.
Sure, it needs 10.4 11. So what?
Never had that problem. Never heard of anyone who did have that problem.
Firewire has plenty of its own problems. I stopped using it almost two years ago for storage, and good riddance!
well what im wondering is what happens when you use an older device with a USB 3 cable and a computer with USB 3, with the device go as fast as USB 3, or does the device need to be new?
As has been said, use a USB 2 cable for UAB 2 devices. I would imaging that there will be adapter cables, but I can't see the point to them.
This isn't like 1394a, with one type of cable and socket, and 1394b, with another.
The USB 2 cable simply fits into the USB 3 socket.
A USB 3 plug can't fit into a USB 2 socket.
What this means is that a USB 2 device will work at USB 2 speeds as I said before.
There is never any way that a device designed to run at the slower speed can ever run at the faster one. The electronics are different.
USB uses optical wires for its speed, but the older USB 2 cables can be used, as the ports have a dual functionality. You can plug either the new optical cable in or the older USB 2. Only USB 2 speeds will be available from the USB 2 cable.
I don't get this. I don't see any mention of "optical wires" (?!) on their site. Only electrical.
It's certainly not in their Cable and Connector presentation:
I don't know why they didn't mention it there, but the standard has optical or copper. I should have mentioned that. The optical links will come a bit later. Sorry, I get so excited about that, I sometimes forget the more mundane.
But nothing will come out in HARDWARE for some time. Approving the specs is the first step in the process. The second step is approving the silicon level II specs. Then a chip must be designed and taped. Then it must be finalized. Then it must be approved. Then it must be designed into a Standard config. board. Then the Level III specs have to be shown to function. Then that must be approved. Then manufactures can begin designing it into their products.
We won't see FW 3200 at least until the end of 2009, and possibly, not until 2010. We may, or may not, see 1600 before that.
This is the much-needed info missing from the article.
I'm surprised FW3200 isn't much further ahead in this process. After all, its basic design has been bandied about for some time.
I was hoping we'd see FW3200 on Macs and devices by Fall 2009.
If FW3200 is coming out the same year as USB3 it will be judged an epic failure.
Comments
While no standard has really ever used its full theoretical speed. The problem with 802.11n is the fact that there is no internet service provider that even provides service anywhere near its theoretical speed.
Sure, but when Time Machine is backing up my MBP it sure is nice to have that extra speed! I also don't think g would keep up with streaming DVDs from the server to my TV.
I still find it hilarious that Apple is being sued for the iPhone 3G not always achieving advertised speeds, and yet I know of not a single lawsuit against Intel for USB (or even Apple for Firewire) not reaching it's promised transfer rates.
That has always confounded me. Apple has been advertising and specing speeds in simple terms, like "twice a s fast" without really stating anything specific, but every other cellphone wil list the theoretical speed of their radios, like "HSDPA: 7.2Mbps", yet they don't seem to get sued. I just dont get it.
lolz at that video... "It's the most wonderful mouse you've ever used"
Brings back some good memories though
Haha, yeah. It was one of the worst Mac mice ever.
I also like how his first point about designing the iMac was the slow speed of the typical consumer PC processor, using "last year's" technology. Fast forward to now, and Dell could easily make the same claim against Apple's consumer computers using last year's laptop processors.
The Maximum speed showed by Intel, using PRE Production Testing Hardware and Early BETA software showing transfer speed of somewhere between 340 - 380 MBps. I think that is not bad, although i was expecting 400MBps+. Intel said they could see 400MBps+ in the final version of USB 3.
The only, and final problem is CPU resources usage. Although an Hardware accelerated XCHI interface would improve the situation. It seems NO ONE single manufacturer or Chipset wants to do it. Which is rather annoying.
Not really wanting to drag up THIS famous thread but... USB is still shite compared to FireWire
except for the fact that it gets the job done AND it works with EVERYTHING.
I'm excited for USB 3. I'm not religious about the FW vs USB debate as long as we keep getting faster speeds. I enjoy the FW800 on my iMac for hard drives, but it's a pretty chunky port. If USB 3 keeps the ports and cables the same, that will be an advantage.
I can appreciate the Target Disk Mode warriors' cries for keeping FW alive, but USB is the future. The sooner we adapt, the better. There will be new tools in our troubleshooting arsenal in the future.
Can't wait to have a backup finish in mere seconds!
oh yeah, i knew that part, however i was wondering if it would be possible for Apple to sell a USB 3.0 cable for the older devices (ipod/iphones) and have those connect from the older device into the new computer with usb3.0 ports to make a fast connection, or will the older devices not work with the ports that area on them?
That was what I was saying. You don't need a USB 3 to USB 2 cable, or adapter. The USB 2 cable plugs into a part of the USB 3 socket, and works just like any other USB 2 cable, speed and all.
Will we see USB3 to Firewire and USB3 to eSATA adapters?
This USB3 sounds like the real deal in terms of a versatile, one-port-fits-all solution, and I hope that Apple can make the most of it.
It's particularly important to have versatile I/O when Apple still seems to think it's acceptable to ship a pro laptop with only three serial ports. I have four on my current MBP 15 (obviously two firewire and two USB) and I use them all. But with the continuation of the drop hinge at the back for the display preventing any use of the back for I/O, and the new design of the base with side-saddle optical drive and battery and hard drive shutting off any access toward the front of the computer, we really are limited to what Apple can fit on the left hand side of the computer, and that's three serial ports on the 15 inch and four on the 17.
Hopefully Apple will redesign the display hinge on the pro laptops in order to open the back up again for I/O use, and we won't be worrying about this. But I suspect USB3 is the way for Apple to get out of this bind and get away with limited numbers of ports in their dogged adherence to the current form factor of their computers.
If there will be a call for such adapters, they will be made.
Considering that real world speed tests show USB 2.0 delivering no more than half of its promised speed, any bets on how much of this promised 5 gigabits USB 3 will actually have? I think it'll be noticeably slower than Firewire 3200, whenever these new devices start shipping that is.
Also, now that Apple has shipped a new Mini, with Firewire 800 no less, can we stop with the "firewire is dying" meme? Only the MacBook and MacBook Air lack firewire, and neither has the space for it.
USB 3 isn't just a faster version of 2. Go the the USB site and read for yourself.
1394 2008 was IEEE approved 10-21-08, which includes S3200:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freea...number=4659231
As I said, the specs have been approved, just as has the specs for USB 3.
But nothing will come out in HARDWARE for some time. Approving the specs is the first step in the process. The second step is approving the silicon level II specs. Then a chip must be designed and taped. Then it must be finalized. Then it must be approved. Then it must be designed into a Standard config. board. Then the Level III specs have to be shown to function. Then that must be approved. Then manufactures can begin designing it into their products.
We won't see FW 3200 at least until the end of 2009, and possibly, not until 2010. We may, or may not, see 1600 before that.
That was what I was saying. You don't need a USB 3 to USB 2 cable, or adapter. The USB 2 cable plugs into a part of the USB 3 socket, and works just like any other USB 2 cable, speed and all.
well what im wondering is what happens when you use an older device with a USB 3 cable and a computer with USB 3, with the device go as fast as USB 3, or does the device need to be new?
well what im wondering is what happens when you use an older device with a USB 3 cable and a computer with USB 3, with the device go as fast as USB 3, or does the device need to be new?
Asked and answered.
If your older device has a USB 2 port, you can hook it using a cable with an appropriate end for your USB 2 device and an appopriate end for the USB 3 computer. (I am not familiar with whether or not the two ends will be the same.)
You will, however, only be able to communicate at USB 2 speeds.
So, the answer is still NO. It will not go as fast. Both devices will need the USB hardware.
Asked and answered.
If your older device has a USB 2 port, you can hook it using a cable with an appropriate end for your USB 2 device and an appopriate end for the USB 3 computer. (I am not familiar with whether or not the two ends will be the same.)
You will, however, only be able to communicate at USB 2 speeds.
So, the answer is still NO. It will not go as fast. Both devices will need the USB hardware.
the answer i got was "that the cable would still connect to both" i knew that, i was wondering what the speed was, yes you just NOW answered that, but that does not mean you have to be a dick.
kthxbia
The only, and final problem is CPU resources usage. Although an Hardware accelerated XCHI interface would improve the situation. It seems NO ONE single manufacturer or Chipset wants to do it. Which is rather annoying.
Probably because that would make the chipset even more expensive than a Firewire chipset. Instead they will bog down our CPUs and system busses shuffling all the data around. Then again, with multiple cores and ever faster busses, perhaps it won't be as big an issue as in the past.
Migration assistant over ethernet sucks beyond belief. The old computer has to be running 10.4.11 with the updated migration assistant. Not to mention if your 10.4 install is plagued by this bug it won't work at all.
I've used it a lot, and it works perfectly.
Sure, it needs 10.4 11. So what?
Never had that problem. Never heard of anyone who did have that problem.
Firewire has plenty of its own problems. I stopped using it almost two years ago for storage, and good riddance!
well what im wondering is what happens when you use an older device with a USB 3 cable and a computer with USB 3, with the device go as fast as USB 3, or does the device need to be new?
As has been said, use a USB 2 cable for UAB 2 devices. I would imaging that there will be adapter cables, but I can't see the point to them.
This isn't like 1394a, with one type of cable and socket, and 1394b, with another.
The USB 2 cable simply fits into the USB 3 socket.
A USB 3 plug can't fit into a USB 2 socket.
What this means is that a USB 2 device will work at USB 2 speeds as I said before.
There is never any way that a device designed to run at the slower speed can ever run at the faster one. The electronics are different.
USB uses optical wires for its speed, but the older USB 2 cables can be used, as the ports have a dual functionality. You can plug either the new optical cable in or the older USB 2. Only USB 2 speeds will be available from the USB 2 cable.
I don't get this. I don't see any mention of "optical wires" (?!) on their site. Only electrical.
It's certainly not in their Cable and Connector presentation:
http://www.usb.org/developers/presen...ector_Ling.pdf
I don't get this. I don't see any mention of "optical wires" (?!) on their site. Only electrical.
It's certainly not in their Cable and Connector presentation:
http://www.usb.org/developers/presen...ector_Ling.pdf
I don't know why they didn't mention it there, but the standard has optical or copper. I should have mentioned that. The optical links will come a bit later. Sorry, I get so excited about that, I sometimes forget the more mundane.
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/09...b_3_announced/
But nothing will come out in HARDWARE for some time. Approving the specs is the first step in the process. The second step is approving the silicon level II specs. Then a chip must be designed and taped. Then it must be finalized. Then it must be approved. Then it must be designed into a Standard config. board. Then the Level III specs have to be shown to function. Then that must be approved. Then manufactures can begin designing it into their products.
We won't see FW 3200 at least until the end of 2009, and possibly, not until 2010. We may, or may not, see 1600 before that.
This is the much-needed info missing from the article.
I'm surprised FW3200 isn't much further ahead in this process. After all, its basic design has been bandied about for some time.
I was hoping we'd see FW3200 on Macs and devices by Fall 2009.
If FW3200 is coming out the same year as USB3 it will be judged an epic failure.