2.0 is compatible with the large 1.1 base and is being incorporated onboard to mant new mobos, 1394 has never gotten far in pcs, but has rapidly been incorporated by dv cam makers, wont they switch drop a 1394 and usb implementation for usb 2.0 only?
usb 2.0 or 1394, which will win?
- Thread starter rbhawcroft
- Start date
usb2.0 backwards compatible and apple isn't copyrighting the use of the name usb2.0 unlike "firewire"
RossMAN
Grand Nagus
- Feb 24, 2000
- 79,036
- 443
- 136
Neither, I think they cater to different markets. FireWire is mostly for minidv camcorders and external hard drives/CD-RW drives.
Just in case I'm thinking about purchasing a combo USB 2.0/FireWire PCI card ... so far I've found about 5 at Buy.com, NewEgg.com and Dell.com now I have to find which is the best.
Just in case I'm thinking about purchasing a combo USB 2.0/FireWire PCI card ... so far I've found about 5 at Buy.com, NewEgg.com and Dell.com now I have to find which is the best.
I disagree and I will tell you why, look at the uses for firewire in the past: devices requiring a lot of bandwidth, this was because of the huge speed advantage it had. Now look at usb 2.0 it has sped up dramatically and is backwards compatible. I think usb 2.0 will come out on top.
You are not realizing that the power that separates the two technologies is marketing. Firewire has already been established in a certain niche, and it would take a lot to de-throne it.
sorta like the EBCEDIC dealio with the mainframes instead of using ASCII...
(taking ComSc 101, talked about that last night..
)pretty heated!
apprrently firewire will go to 3Gbps soon, so that will be for semi-professional use.
i dont think anyone would buy a dvcam based on the fact that one had usb2 only and the other had usb2 and 1394, there are other factors like image quality and battery length.
the only reason a 12x bandwidth increase would be good would be for moving fullbandwidth video as opposed to mpeg2, and that would be for semipro use only.
apprrently firewire will go to 3Gbps soon, so that will be for semi-professional use.
i dont think anyone would buy a dvcam based on the fact that one had usb2 only and the other had usb2 and 1394, there are other factors like image quality and battery length.
the only reason a 12x bandwidth increase would be good would be for moving fullbandwidth video as opposed to mpeg2, and that would be for semipro use only.
InverseOfNeo
Diamond Member
- Nov 17, 2000
- 3,719
- 0
- 0
as much as i like firewire,
besides a camcorder, there's not much of a use for it.
as far as i know, no one is using firewire mouse or keyboard.
... if there is a such a thing.
ok... maybe some high end scanners and external storage devices.
i guess, my point is wouldn't there have to be a greater need for the speed to increase?
as of now, even in video capturing (DV), most bottleneck is with cpu speed and HD speed... not necessarily with the transfer speed of dv.
as for usb vs firewire debate, i'm sideing with firewire.
besides a camcorder, there's not much of a use for it.
as far as i know, no one is using firewire mouse or keyboard.
... if there is a such a thing.
ok... maybe some high end scanners and external storage devices.
i guess, my point is wouldn't there have to be a greater need for the speed to increase?
as of now, even in video capturing (DV), most bottleneck is with cpu speed and HD speed... not necessarily with the transfer speed of dv.
as for usb vs firewire debate, i'm sideing with firewire.
USB definately isn't going anywhere, if anything is gonna go it'll be firewire, but I doubt that'll happen either.
RossMAN
Grand Nagus
- Feb 24, 2000
- 79,036
- 443
- 136
No contest .............USB 2.0
because apple is not getting an exorbitant kickback like they are on firewire
because apple is not getting an exorbitant kickback like they are on firewire
I believe IEEE 1394 has lower peak bandwidth than USB 2.0, but it is preferably for devices in need of steady transfer. USB 2.0 is simply an extension to current USB technology and it's still dependent on the host computer. IEEE 1394, also known as FireWire® is SCSI at heart, hence "serial SCSI".
Since USB 1.x is not a self-feeding technology, my mp3 skips, cursor briefly skips and when I'm using USB CD-R, hitting buffer under run or the under run protection on newer ones is much prominent than IDE drives.
Is this something inherent to USB that will haunt USB as long as it is USB or has 2.0 pretty much solved it?
Is this something inherent to USB that will haunt USB as long as it is USB or has 2.0 pretty much solved it?
glenn1
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2000
- 25,383
- 1,013
- 126
USB. Apple shot itself in the foot when it tried charging the insane price it did for other companies to use its standard. What was it they wanted, $5 per implementation or something? By the time they reduced it to a more reasonable price, USB had gotten itself intrenched. Now since USB 2.0 is backwards compatible, that's even more reason to expect that it will be the mass market solution, and Firewire continue to be relegated to a secondary niche in comparison.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter