R
RWhite
Well-known member
Regarding laptops, either get a Firewire port, or just wait until USB 2.0, which is actually FASTER than Firewire. Of course there is also a Firewire 2 coming out....
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
B
brzilian
New member
USB 2.0 may be faster on paper than Firewire (480Mbits/sec vs. 400Mbits/sec for Firewire), but I have read a couple articles which state that USB's transfer protocol is not as efficient as Firewire's.
I think Firewire is still a superior interface for high data rate applications. After all, its primary application on Macs was for DV.
USB was only intended to be a replacement for the aging serial port...
I think Firewire is still a superior interface for high data rate applications. After all, its primary application on Macs was for DV.
USB was only intended to be a replacement for the aging serial port...
S
Steve Walker
New member
brzilian said:USB 2.0 may be faster on paper than Firewire (480Mbits/sec vs. 400Mbits/sec for Firewire), but I have read a couple articles which state that USB's transfer protocol is not as efficient as Firewire's.
I think Firewire is still a superior interface for high data rate applications. After all, its primary application on Macs was for DV.
USB was only intended to be a replacement for the aging serial port...
It looks like actual USB devices on the market run at less than 12Mb/s and the 480Mb/s is only theoretical. See this link at http://www.usb.org/faq/ans2.html. Actual firewire products on the market do run at 400 Mb/s such as the Motu 896. In the real world firewire is 33 (400/12) times faster than USB.
S
SalJustSal
New member
Steve,
Your link was dead.
USB 2.0 is new technology and is supposed to go up to 480 mbits per second.
The 12 mbits per second is USB 1.0 which is the standard right now.
I don't know how marketable USB 2.0 is right now, but I've seen drive enclosures with them integrated, so I'm guessing 2.0 is a reality and not theoretical.
brzilian - what you said about the efficiency of USB 2.0 is interesting, do you have any links to those articles?
-Sal
Your link was dead.
USB 2.0 is new technology and is supposed to go up to 480 mbits per second.
The 12 mbits per second is USB 1.0 which is the standard right now.
I don't know how marketable USB 2.0 is right now, but I've seen drive enclosures with them integrated, so I'm guessing 2.0 is a reality and not theoretical.
brzilian - what you said about the efficiency of USB 2.0 is interesting, do you have any links to those articles?
-Sal
B
brzilian
New member
This is part of an article from the Maccentral Online website:
While FireWire sounds like USB on steroids, the technologies serve different purposes. FireWire -- a much cleaner and more advanced spec than USB -- is for peripherals that need maximum bandwidth. USB is a medium bandwidth connection for peripherals such as digital still cameras, monitors, keyboards and mice.
But with USB 2.0 looming on the horizon, will FireWire wilt and fade? Possibly, but not likely. Our prediction (that is, the prognosis of Yours Truly) is that, even if version 2.0 does what's being promised -- and that's probably not going to happen anytime soon -- it and FireWire will coexist peacefully. It seems doubtful that USB 2.0 will encroach too much on digital video and audio territory that FireWire has slowly but surely conquered.
Why? FireWire can transfer data point-to-point (one device to another) while USB requires the computer to server as a go-between. In other words, moving data with USB means you have to move it from one doohickey to your computer, then transfer it from the computer to the other doohickey. FireWire can move data directly from one device to another.
Plus, as we mentioned, FireWire will soon hit speeds of 800 Mbps, late this year or early in 2001. And there's speculation of speeds of up to 1.6 Gbps a year or two down the road.
So expect USB and FireWire to live together, if not in harmony, at least in some sort of truce.
An analogy would be the difference between PIO (Programmed I/O) transfer mode and theDMA transfer mode when talking about HD's.
USB requires the computer to do the handshaking while Firewire is more efficient and peripherals don't need to be "coached"
While FireWire sounds like USB on steroids, the technologies serve different purposes. FireWire -- a much cleaner and more advanced spec than USB -- is for peripherals that need maximum bandwidth. USB is a medium bandwidth connection for peripherals such as digital still cameras, monitors, keyboards and mice.
But with USB 2.0 looming on the horizon, will FireWire wilt and fade? Possibly, but not likely. Our prediction (that is, the prognosis of Yours Truly) is that, even if version 2.0 does what's being promised -- and that's probably not going to happen anytime soon -- it and FireWire will coexist peacefully. It seems doubtful that USB 2.0 will encroach too much on digital video and audio territory that FireWire has slowly but surely conquered.
Why? FireWire can transfer data point-to-point (one device to another) while USB requires the computer to server as a go-between. In other words, moving data with USB means you have to move it from one doohickey to your computer, then transfer it from the computer to the other doohickey. FireWire can move data directly from one device to another.
Plus, as we mentioned, FireWire will soon hit speeds of 800 Mbps, late this year or early in 2001. And there's speculation of speeds of up to 1.6 Gbps a year or two down the road.
So expect USB and FireWire to live together, if not in harmony, at least in some sort of truce.
An analogy would be the difference between PIO (Programmed I/O) transfer mode and theDMA transfer mode when talking about HD's.
USB requires the computer to do the handshaking while Firewire is more efficient and peripherals don't need to be "coached"
J
Jamie Jukosky
New member
Here's some info from the technical "Support" of MOTU (which I should add is very slow responding) on the 828 and hard drives.
"MOTU tested VST and Glyph Project Firewire drives. At max input/output, the 828 use less than 100Mbps (less than 1/4 full Firewire bandwidth, 400Mbps). Assuming the FW drive has acceptable multimedia specs, there's no reason why you couldn't use it as a record and playback destination for digital audio."
"MOTU tested VST and Glyph Project Firewire drives. At max input/output, the 828 use less than 100Mbps (less than 1/4 full Firewire bandwidth, 400Mbps). Assuming the FW drive has acceptable multimedia specs, there's no reason why you couldn't use it as a record and playback destination for digital audio."