Good question. It seems like USB 2 is getting a lot of attention and being marketed as faster than firewire. Firewire / Apple needs to respond soon, since USB is already out. The slow response is hurting them again.
They will squander their presence with Firewire all because they are too cheap to add Firewire2 to their motherboards. 2 years from now it will be USB 2, and Apple will be playing catch-up in yet another piece of hardware.
This is ridiculous! Apple should be LEADING THE WAY with Firewire2, but instead they're wasting precious lead time. Isn't Apple the company that brought Firewire into the mainstream? Sure could fool me the way they sit on the current mobo design like it was made out of gold and gems.
<strong>Watch, Apple is going to totally fsck it up!
They will squander their presence with Firewire all because they are too cheap to add Firewire2 to their motherboards. 2 years from now it will be USB 2, and Apple will be playing catch-up in yet another piece of hardware.
This is ridiculous! Apple should be LEADING THE WAY with Firewire2, but instead they're wasting precious lead time. Isn't Apple the company that brought Firewire into the mainstream? Sure could fool me the way they sit on the current mobo design like it was made out of gold and gems.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I must say, your wild mood swings between pessimism and optimism never cease to entertain me
one positive thing this week...the 1394 trade association decided to formally adopt the name "firewire". this means that there is one unified name now, not i-link, not 1394, but firewire. it's about time and i think it will really help solve much of the confusion surrounding the standard. now if we can get 800mb/s throughput..we'll really own the market segment!
Doesn't Apple own the trademark "Firewire" does this mean that the IEEE trade association paid Apple some cash, or has worked out a modest licensing fee? I know that Sony (iLink) and Creative (SB1394) both gave ieee1394a their own name to avoid this little trademark snafu. The industry still widely refers to the port as firwire but the name is actually an Apple property. Could mean a little cash for Apple.
On another note 800Mbps is a step best skipped. It doesn't provide enough bandwidth for Native HD DV (which needs 1200Mbps.) Native HD DV (1920x1080@24P) would be a good fundtionality to support considering DV's biggest supporter has been video/film. The current 400Mbps is enough for Compressed HD DV, so there's really no point in upgrading that. That leaves the next step up in firewire evolution, 1600Mbps, which cover Native HD (1920x1080) and still have some bandwidth left over.
I read somewhere that the firewire 1394b spec is supposed to have support for both 800 and 1600Mbps and that it would depend on manufacturers and the implementation.
Can someone explain? Is this the copper versus fiber issue? What the heck will a fiber plug look like? I'd guess that a fuber plug would have a regular copper line (for 800Mbps and bus power)paired to a fiber line for higher speed. But I thought fiber wasn't really an issue untill we get to 3200Mbps and/or for longer runs, and that copper was fine even for higher speed provided cables were not longer than a few feet.
<strong>Doesn't Apple own the trademark "Firewire" does this mean that the IEEE trade association paid Apple some cash, or has worked out a modest licensing fee? I know that Sony (iLink) and Creative (SB1394) both gave ieee1394a their own name to avoid this little trademark snafu. The industry still widely refers to the port as firwire but the name is actually an Apple property. Could mean a little cash for Apple.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple just made the Trademark "Firewire" available for free to the 1394 trade association to promote the name with the standard. Now anyone who uses the IEEE 1394 standard can use the name for free.
Comments
Anyway, I think everyone has it set in their minds that FireWire is for video, transferring large files... just faster.
Maybe GigaWire will be a way to connect the RackMount servers amongst themselves.
They will squander their presence with Firewire all because they are too cheap to add Firewire2 to their motherboards. 2 years from now it will be USB 2, and Apple will be playing catch-up in yet another piece of hardware.
This is ridiculous! Apple should be LEADING THE WAY with Firewire2, but instead they're wasting precious lead time. Isn't Apple the company that brought Firewire into the mainstream? Sure could fool me the way they sit on the current mobo design like it was made out of gold and gems.
<a href="http://www.ti.com/sc/docs/news/2001/01160.htm"; target="_blank">http://www.ti.com/sc/docs/news/2001/01160.htm</a>;
?
Availability
The new 1394b devices are expected to be available in volume production quantities during the second half of 2002.
?
Note: IEEE-1394b = Firewire 2
<a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001635"; target="_blank">http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001635</a>;
Apple are a bunch of f**** clowns for not already rolling out something which we don't know exactly what it is!
<strong>Watch, Apple is going to totally fsck it up!
They will squander their presence with Firewire all because they are too cheap to add Firewire2 to their motherboards. 2 years from now it will be USB 2, and Apple will be playing catch-up in yet another piece of hardware.
This is ridiculous! Apple should be LEADING THE WAY with Firewire2, but instead they're wasting precious lead time. Isn't Apple the company that brought Firewire into the mainstream? Sure could fool me the way they sit on the current mobo design like it was made out of gold and gems.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I must say, your wild mood swings between pessimism and optimism never cease to entertain me
[ 05-09-2002: Message edited by: Flounder ]</p>
On another note 800Mbps is a step best skipped. It doesn't provide enough bandwidth for Native HD DV (which needs 1200Mbps.) Native HD DV (1920x1080@24P) would be a good fundtionality to support considering DV's biggest supporter has been video/film. The current 400Mbps is enough for Compressed HD DV, so there's really no point in upgrading that. That leaves the next step up in firewire evolution, 1600Mbps, which cover Native HD (1920x1080) and still have some bandwidth left over.
I read somewhere that the firewire 1394b spec is supposed to have support for both 800 and 1600Mbps and that it would depend on manufacturers and the implementation.
Can someone explain? Is this the copper versus fiber issue? What the heck will a fiber plug look like? I'd guess that a fuber plug would have a regular copper line (for 800Mbps and bus power)paired to a fiber line for higher speed. But I thought fiber wasn't really an issue untill we get to 3200Mbps and/or for longer runs, and that copper was fine even for higher speed provided cables were not longer than a few feet.
I dunno, confused.
<strong>Doesn't Apple own the trademark "Firewire" does this mean that the IEEE trade association paid Apple some cash, or has worked out a modest licensing fee? I know that Sony (iLink) and Creative (SB1394) both gave ieee1394a their own name to avoid this little trademark snafu. The industry still widely refers to the port as firwire but the name is actually an Apple property. Could mean a little cash for Apple.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple just made the Trademark "Firewire" available for free to the 1394 trade association to promote the name with the standard. Now anyone who uses the IEEE 1394 standard can use the name for free.
Still, a little exchange of possibles fees, for a clearer branding strategy and increased mind-share is not bad.
[ 05-12-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>