USB catching up to FW...until FW2
I guess FW is only kinda like this, it doesnt need a computer does it? But can it liek print stuff from a camera ?
<a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1040-960014.html?tag=fd_lede"; target="_blank">http://news.com.com/2100-1040-960014.html?tag=fd_lede</a>;
It seems they are getting smarter and starting to see that not needing a computer is a good idea. USB 2 should have been like this from the start.
Now to explain the '...until FW2'
Where is FW 2?! <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
[ 09-30-2002: Message edited by: ast3r3x ]</p>
<a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1040-960014.html?tag=fd_lede"; target="_blank">http://news.com.com/2100-1040-960014.html?tag=fd_lede</a>;
It seems they are getting smarter and starting to see that not needing a computer is a good idea. USB 2 should have been like this from the start.
Now to explain the '...until FW2'
Where is FW 2?! <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
[ 09-30-2002: Message edited by: ast3r3x ]</p>
Comments
Anyone with half a brain has to look at this industry as one of the most bassackward out there.
Even if you add portability USB is still behind Firewire technically(Isychonous capabilities).
Frankly I'm tired of this industry reinventing the wheel at every turn.
Frankly I'm tired of this industry reinventing the wheel at every turn.</strong><hr></blockquote>
True that. I kno this isn't how capitalism works and I am 100% glad that the US is how it is, but if all these companies worked together instead of competed, we'd be years ahead of where we are now.
-Then again most of these companies are based in other contries now, and you could easily run into the problem that there would be no competition so R&D and growth wouldn't have to be as much because you have no choice
Go to a CompUSA store and try to find an external FW CD burner...they're all USB2 now. I'm betting that all the "consumer" digital cameras will have USB2, not FW. Intel sells a lot of mobos and chipsets that set the standards pretty much in the pc world, and Intel doesn't use FW. I'm hoping we'll have the best of both on the Mac, FW2 and USB2. It will still give the Mac an edge because FW hard disk performance should be better than any 2 drive.
Can we go DV camera direct to FW DVD-R? Sony will stick around with FW as long as Apple wants to I'd figure.
[QB]These days a $500 digital camera is really a couple thousand, since I would need to drop moiney on a computer (pretending for a moment that I didn't have a good number of them at the house). I know people at work that have a hard time syncing their digital cameras w/ computers because they don't know how to use windows and simply don't have the money to drop on a mac just for camera use.QB]<hr></blockquote>
No offense, but if you don't have a computer to use with the digital camera just go buy one that uses film! While digital camera's do have some advantages like preview, delete, more photo's, they do have disadvantages like battery life and generally less quality than a good film camera.
One of the purposes of a digital camera is to be able to catalog and save photo's on a computer. Email them, put them on the web, manipulate them and print them. Yes you don't need a computer to have a digital camera, but my opinion is that if you don't have a computer and buy a digital camera it makes as much sense as buying a snowmobile while living in Florida.
<strong>Go to a CompUSA store and try to find an external FW CD burner...they're all USB2 now. </strong><hr></blockquote>
<a href="http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code=288795"; target="_blank">http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code=288795</a>;
<strong>
<a href="http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code=288795"; target="_blank">http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code=288795</a></strong><hr></blockquote>;
haha...aaannndd nice one
Do you really think these guys have invested all of this money, just to turn tail and give control of their future livelihoods to Intel?
To paraphrase the old Apple badge, USB2002 = FireWire1998; except that it is a typically half-assed, botched knock-off job from people who are more interested in controlling the market than innovating for the future.
Can you run TCP/IP over USB? Just a question, argue amongst yourselves.
You know something, I might be becoming more intolerant as I get older
<strong>Go <a href="http://www.havi.org/"; target="_blank">here</a> to find out why FireWire is here to stay.
Do you really think these guys have invested all of this money, just to turn tail and give control of their future livelihoods to Intel?
To paraphrase the old Apple badge, USB2002 = FireWire1998; except that it is a typically half-assed, botched knock-off job from people who are more interested in controlling the market than innovating for the future.
Can you run TCP/IP over USB? Just a question, argue amongst yourselves.
You know something, I might be becoming more intolerant as I get older
Awesome
<hr></blockquote>
Again. Go into a CompUSA *STORE* and try to find a FW burner or much of FW anything. Very little, even in the Mac section.
I don't think FW is going to go away either. It just won't reach the critical mass it needs to become cheap and ubiquitous.
<strong>
Again. Go into a CompUSA *STORE* and try to find a FW burner or much of FW anything. Very little, even in the Mac section.
I don't think FW is going to go away either. It just won't reach the critical mass it needs to become cheap and ubiquitous.</strong><hr></blockquote>
How do define critical mass? If you are using ports installed, surely the fact that HAVi's aims are to put FireWire ports on all new domestic AV equipment is going to dwarf the USB installed base.
Even more importantly, the vast majority of all of those HAVi ports are going to get used; apart from
keyboard, mouse, joystick and the occasional scanner, how many USB ports get used, and how many of these devices - apart from the scanner - have any use for the bandwidth of USB 2.0?
The problems with USB is that it will land up having its natural constituency eroded, in the same way as BlueTooth and by the same products.
New PAN (personal area network) technologies such as ZigBee and yet another version of 802.11 (I forget the exact suffix), will operate at higher speeds and greater range than BlueTooth, and at higher speeds than USB 1.0, which will free nearly all input devices from wired shackles.
Without that natural market, USB has to become a faster technology hence USB 2.0: but USB 2.0 is not a great solution for high-bandwidth convergence applications AND it requires a computer acting as a bus controller, both of these negatives do not apply to FireWire.
And your point still doesn't answer the extensibility of FireWire: 1600 mbits over fibre coming within a few years, alongside the ability to use FireWire as a means to transport IP packets will make FireWire a superb medium for integrated domestic networks, capable of transporting audio, video, telephony and standard data.
As far as I know USB 2 is even SLOWER than USB 1.1 under som circumstances.
USB 2 might be faster than FW on the paper, but not in real life (as someone stated before me).
Yes. Don't most DSL and cable modems have both an Ethernet (RJ-45) AND a USB port on them these days?