• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

VIA CEO wants USB 2.0 killed off

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
i agree, get rid of ALL legacy devices onboard and offer them on 3rd party add-in cards for the ol' schoolers who still require them...

it'll force the creatures to move into the future (even if they can't afford it and have to whore themselves/children/etc)...

honestly, how much would a legacy card cost?...few bucks.

5 USB, 1 keyboard, 1 parallel (eventually down the poop hole too)...or 3 USB, 2 firewire, 1 keyboard
or 5USB and 2 firewire, 1 keybaofrd..
 


<<

<< Firewire is in even more of a minority than SCSI. >>



Actually, Firewire is under the umbrella of SCSI-3 standards. >>


What I'm saying is of the people here on the BBS, how many use SCSI? And then how many use Firewire devices. Most likely an even smaller percentage than those that use SCSI.
 
SCSI has been out for a much longer time that firewire, and SCSI has internal uses as well, unlike firewire. External CDRWs are mostly used for laptops. A USB CDRW is pretty crappy to use.

And I do believe those figures myself will be wrong, but its a worst case scenario. I do fully expect some sort of raise in CPU usage though, its only natural. And I definitely think USB is great, I dont want serial or parallel anything. But USB 2.0 is unnecessary at this point.
 


<< SCSI has been out for a much longer time that firewire, and SCSI has internal uses as well, unlike firewire. >>



Actually firewire can be internal as well. My firewire card comes with 2 external and 1 internal connector. There are some internal firewire drives out now, should be more in the future.



<< And I do believe those figures myself will be wrong, but its a worst case scenario. I do fully expect some sort of raise in CPU usage though, its only natural. And I definitely think USB is great, I dont want serial or parallel anything. But USB 2.0 is unnecessary at this point. >>



My thoughts exactly. I always thought USB was for slow peripherals and firewire was for fast stuff. Ever since I first heard about USB 2.0, I thought it was the stupidist thing, and I still think that.
 
NFS4, you're defending USB for nothing.

You pay out the a$$ for Firewire.

its as simple as this. Firewire can be made as cheap as USB, if it is implimented on the southbridge. the devices don't cost any more then they would when using USB, really. when you use USB, I think you pay Wintel (just a guess actually), when you use IEEE1394, you don't pay anyone, and you get to call it what you want. 😛

anywho, I don't even USE USB, so 😛 again.

Besides, it's not like USB is hogging all of my CPU. I have a 933MHz Duron and the many USB devices that I have don't bog down my system.

true, but there are those of us who would rather not have to buy another CPU for the sake of pluging in a Game controller.

plus it hurts my RC5 speed.. oh I forgot, your computer heats your room up too much..

If a USB 2.0 device offering speeds comparable to Firewire is half the price AND USB 2.0 host controllers comes integrated into my motherboard...

that sentence doesn't make sense.. you're saying that automatically USB 2.0 is going to be 1/2 price compared to firewire? how much does a USB 2.0 card cost?

I don't see any chipsets with USB 2.0 yet..

For all of you jumping with joy over Firewire, what exactly are you gonna use it for?

same thing we can use USB for, only we can also connect HDTVs, and stereo equipment as well for extra features..

As far as taking up the CPU, I think that when we have 1 - 1.5GHz machines that you could spare a little.

well I guess thats why people try to run as few programs and services at once as possible eh?

Sending 110MB worth of WMA's, files, folders, and games for my iPAQ to my desktop, CPU utilization hovered between 0% and 6%.

must-have taken a while though..

But what are the chances that I am going to find someone else with a Firewire port on their computer??

higher if you'd just support it for crying out loud. it's good technology, it just needs people to support it.

Nobody said that it was the best, just that it is the most common and accepted mode of transport.

what we here want is the best that we can get. Firewire has an edge over USB 2.0 when it comes to features, we support the better product, otherwise we end up with another MS vs no-one scenario.

as for mice and keyboards, just leave them on the PS2 bus, and use PS2Rate (though I'd wish there was a better way of increasing sample rate, I absolutely hate having to run extra programs)! perfect compatability with all programs and OSs, good speed, no worries. you don't get any advantage when going from PS2 to USB at all.
 
&quot;You pay out the a$$ for Firewire.&quot;


<< its as simple as this. Firewire can be made as cheap as USB, if it is implimented on the southbridge. the devices don't cost any more then they would when using USB, really. when you use USB, you pay Wintel, when you use IEEE1394, you don't pay anyone, and you get to call it what you want. 😛 >>


Firewire CAN be made as cheap like you said, if it's implemented in the SB...but you don't see manufactuers doing it do you?? That's why it costs so much to integrate it into motherboard. Motherboards that use onboard Firewire have to use a rather expensive two chip solution. USB has always been an integrated solution.

And what with the whole anti Wintel/NVidia thing?? Does everyone always have to put some other company in their crosshairs?? Or is it just a popular thing these days to pick on Andy and Bill?


&quot;Besides, it's not like USB is hogging all of my CPU. I have a 933MHz Duron and the many USB devices that I have don't bog down my system.&quot;


<< true, but there are those of us who would rather not have to buy another CPU for the sake of pluging in a Game controller. >>


But if it's not hogging the CPU, then why would you need another processor in the first place?


&quot;If a USB 2.0 device offering speeds comparable to Firewire is half the price AND USB 2.0 host controllers comes integrated into my motherboard...&quot;


<< that sentence doesn't make sense.. you're saying that automatically USB 2.0 is going to be 1/2 price compared to firewire? how much does a USB 2.0 card cost? >>


I'm just saying the USB 2.0 would most likely be integrated into the Southbridge once/if it becomes established (like the current USB 1.1 spec and unlike current Firewire implementations).


&quot;For all of you jumping with joy over Firewire, what exactly are you gonna use it for?&quot;


<< same thing we can use USB for, only we can also connect HDTVs, and stereo equipment as well for extra features.. >>


The fact of the matter is, how many people here actually use Firewire?


&quot;As far as taking up the CPU, I think that when we have 1 - 1.5GHz machines that you could spare a little.&quot;


<< well I guess thats why people try to run as few programs and services at once as possible eh? >>


I run as many programs as possible with my memory configuration and don't even think twice about services, eh 😉


&quot;Sending 110MB worth of WMA's, files, folders, and games for my iPAQ to my desktop, CPU utilization hovered between 0% and 6%.&quot;


<< must-have taken a while though.. >>


About 6 minutes. Wouldn't be very long with USB 2.0.


&quot;But what are the chances that I am going to find someone else with a Firewire port on their computer??&quot;


<< higher if you'd just support it for crying out loud. it's good technology, it just needs people to support it. >>


It ain't my fault that it isn't widely supported 😉 I'm not the one pushing the little green button
 
NFS4, I really don't understand why you're defending USB... The fact is that firewire is a better technology, and if it were widely spread, it wouldn't cost a penny more than USB 2.0. At this point, neither are integrated into motherboards, and it's just a matter of time until one of them is accepted as a standard. So why not pick the better technology?

Of course not many people use firewire right now, that's because there aren't a whole lot of devices and you have to buy the controller. Integrating it into motherboards would encourage the manufacturers to introduce more devices to the market, and people would buy them. I know I'd be running a SCSI hard drive if most motherboards came with a SCSI controller at no extra price.
 


<< NFS4, I really don't understand why you're defending USB... The fact is that firewire is a better technology, and if it were widely spread, it wouldn't cost a penny more than USB 2.0. At this point, neither are integrated into motherboards, and it's just a matter of time until one of them is accepted as a standard. So why not pick the better technology?

Of course not many people use firewire right now, that's because there aren't a whole lot of devices and you have to buy the controller. Integrating it into motherboards would encourage the manufacturers to introduce more devices to the market, and people would buy them. I know I'd be running a SCSI hard drive if most motherboards came with a SCSI controller at no extra price. >>


It's not that I'm defending it...it's just that people don't give the standard enough credit. Yet, they will flock to Firewire as being so much better b/c it is technically superior.

I'm just stating that as it stands now, Firewire is NOT penetrating into &quot;our&quot; market. USB has been for a while and continues to do so.

Trust me, if Firwire was integrated into every motherboard, I'd be using it. But that time hasn't come and until then I will be using USB. Just as I continue to use IDE over SCSI.

And the chances are much greater that USB 2.0 will become integrated like USB 1.1 than Firewire will.
 
It ain't my fault that it isn't widely supported 😉 I'm not the one pushing the little green button

lol..

yeah, you see your humor. I'm just hoping the rest of the people reading this see that too. notice the 😉

But if it's not hogging the CPU, then why would you need another processor in the first place?

wrong perspective. look at it from this: I'm running my K6-2 400@420. IF the interface was designed better (or if it was Firewire instead of USB), then I wouldn't have to worry about the above mentioned slowdown, would I?

The fact of the matter is, how many people here actually use Firewire?

well, if any people here use them, it would be for removeable hard drives, CDROMs and CDRWs, scanners Video cameras.. things like that are widely available now..

what firewire needs to do in order to gain popularity, is gain support for the little things, which is where USB gets all its support. Joysticks, printers, mice, keyboards etc.

I run as many programs as possible with my memory configuration and don't even think twice about services, eh 😉

check out
This thread

3 votes for 0
4 votes for 1
2 votes for 2
0 votes for 3
6 votes for 4
4 votes for 5
4 votes for 6
4 votes for 7
and things start to trail off from there.

what do YOU have?
 
Trust me, if Firwire was integrated into every motherboard, I'd be using it.

again, theres only one way to get a standard to be a standard, and that is simply to support it.

even if you don't buy it, the more people who show interest in something, the more likely it will have interest shown by a company who is capable of making devices for it.
 


<< check out
This thread

3 votes for 0
4 votes for 1
2 votes for 2
0 votes for 3
6 votes for 4
4 votes for 5
4 votes for 6
4 votes for 7
and things start to trail off from there.

what do YOU have? >>


I have 4 icons in the task area beside the clock. I have 2 &quot;official&quot; programs in the startup folder. Looking under regedit though, I have 15 items starting up upon booting into Windows. These range from NAV to Microsoft ActiveSync to my printer software to Window Critical Update, etc. You get the idea.
 
I get the idea that you actually don't run too many programs (well, I consider what I run as too many, I'd rather have 2 or so).

except for the services, that is..
 
Reminds of the VHS vs Betamax issue, in the end VHS won even though betamax was a better format since it was used by more people and accepted as standard. Then again DVD is taking over VHS.
 
This is the best debate I've read in a while. Pretty entertaining guys.

I recently bought a digital camcorder, (Sony Digital 8), and of course, it has Firewire but not USB support (only for digital stills; not video transfer). So that means I have to get a firewire card. Not only that, I was told that I have to get a SCSI interface or else my transfer is going to start dropping frames. What the hell! I more or less have to buy a new computer now (or spend a chunck of money upgrading) to edit home movies?!

I wish (and I think everyone else here does too) that Firewire and SCSI were integrated into MB's.

The SiS 735 chipset, if I'm not mistaken, has firewire built in. If it's reasonably priced (i.e. less than $250) I'd rather go with that than buy a Firewire card.

Since there are so many firewire supporters here, and I assume out there in droves, then these boards should sell like hotcakes (not to mention that the chipset anihilated all its competitors in the benchmarks and has a reputation for being less expensive than its competitors too). That will send a message to board makers everywhere and we may yet see firewire standard on MB's sooner than you'd expect.

(I won't hold my breath though for on board SCSI, although they are pretty standard on SMP boards... hmmm good excuse to buy one... but it's got to have firewire too. I'd spend $300 on a board like that.)😀
 


<< The fact of the matter is, how many people here actually use Firewire? >>



How many people here use USB 2.0 devices??



<< I'm just stating that as it stands now, Firewire is NOT penetrating into &quot;our&quot; market. USB has been for a while and continues to do so. >>



Firewire support will be coming soon on motherboards. But why does everyone whine about having to buy a controller card? You don't whine about buying a separate sound or video card, or a NIC.



<< I recently bought a digital camcorder, (Sony Digital 8), and of course, it has Firewire but not USB support (only for digital stills; not video transfer). So that means I have to get a firewire card. Not only that, I was told that I have to get a SCSI interface or else my transfer is going to start dropping frames. What the hell! I more or less have to buy a new computer now (or spend a chunck of money upgrading) to edit home movies?! >>



Why would you have to buy a SCSI card for a Firewire camera? That makes no sense. And if you think that adding a card to a computer means you have to &quot;buy a new computer now&quot; then you don't know much about computers.
 
Since everyone else is quoting I'm just going to make vague references to what others have said instead. 🙂

Someone said if motherboards had SCSI built in they'd be using it. I don't get this. The cost of a decent scsi controller is a little of nothing compared to the cost of the devices you'll hook up to it. That's like saying you'd buy a Ferarri instead of tan minivan because it comes with better windshield wipers. First oil filter will wipe out those savings.

And since the vast majority have little or no use for integrated SCSI, IMO it shouldn't be built in. IDE hauls the kids around just fine, and if you want better it's available for you.

There was a &quot;how many use firewire&quot; with a &quot;how many use USB2&quot; reply. Apples to tunafish unless they integrate firewire in such a way that it supports USB 1 and 1.1 devices.

Now whether USB should have been integrated in the first place is up for debate. Since when it was, obviously nobody was using it so it didn't meet my criteria. As it is meant as a replacement for the serial, parallel and PS2 ports, then yes, it made sense at the time. Replace 3 with 1 using no more resouces, less actually, at a greater speed. That we still have serial, parallel and PS2 shows how slow we X86ers adapt to change.

If firewire peripherals are priced the same as USB ones of whatever version, then yes, toss the few USB toys we've picked up the last couple of years and just use firewire. I personally don't see this happening, SCSI is still twice as much or more per meg for HD's - yes, with faster performance, but if that performance mattered so much to the market SCSI would be standard. It isn't. We're X86ers and let's not forget that. We're about price, reverse compatability, price, upgradability, price, and yeah finally, performance. Don't kid yourselves, that's the PC market.

&quot;How fast can I go?&quot; &quot;How much money ya got?&quot;

If you want the performance, you're going to pay for it. Think of it like this, if SCSI would have been integrated into our boards years ago, you know what we'd have? SCSI narrow then, and still today. &quot;It's got SCSI! (the cheapest we could build in)&quot; Want to have years of flakey built in Firewire giving the public an impression of what it is? Then later chipset manufacturers holding back on supporting the next generation because it costs them more or is hard to implement? Firewire supporters should be those most against integration if they want it to succeed, or at least that's my view.

--Mc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top