Why most new PCs have USB 2.0 but not Firewire builtin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Editor www.nutritionsoftware.org
  • Start date Start date
A voice of reason on usenet.

Thanks

Keith> There's a place for both. If you're using a digital video
Keith> camcorder the only meaningful option is IEEE-1394 as Firewire
Keith> is correctly called, because that's the defacto industry
Keith> standard.

Keith> By the same token if you're using external hard drives you're
Keith> better off with Firewire than USB because you can capture
Keith> directly to the drive from your camcorder without sucking up
Keith> CPU cycles which can be important for video.

Keith> --Keith

 
I doubt that Apple had any expectation that firewire would become the
peripheral bus of choice as opposed to USB
Click to expand...

Wasn't firwire also orginally emant to be a low-cost high-speed
network solution? Which then niftly was used by Sony etc as an ideal
thing to transport high-speed data around. Firewire can handle tcp/ip

cheers

-martin-
 
Finally, yeah.

Firewire worked fabulously for many years before USB finally became at all
functional. The only reason USB even remained in the market is because of
the dominant position of Wintel, which is able to shove deficient and
defective technologies down our throats. Now, users say, what's the
problem-- USB works fine! Yes, now it finally does. By preventing real
competition, Intel and Windows were able to finally correct the deficiencies
in USB without losing any customers.

There must be days when the business staff at Intel and Microsoft actually
get a little weepy at the touching loyalty of their customers, in the face of
their monumental failures, incompetences, and exaggerations. "You people out
there are are just too good to be true! We love you!"

Regardless, I'm glad to hear that USB finally works.
 
There must be days when the business staff at Intel and Microsoft actually
get a little weepy at the touching loyalty of their customers, in the face of
their monumental failures, incompetences, and exaggerations. "You people out
there are are just too good to be true! We love you!"
Click to expand...
Nelson Mandella is now working in their Public Relations department?
 
Hi Bill
By preventing real
competition, Intel and Windows
Click to expand...

That's so true, I almost forget,
it was that pesky Bill Gates and Andy Grove who
told Steve Jobs to kill the Mac clone
market, and thereby erase any
chance of free-market OS competition.

Thanks for the reminder !

Stan
 
Nelson Mandella is now working in their Public Relations department?


___
Click to expand...

They can have him, Mandella , the wonderfull humanitarian (not) that he claims
to be basically said the people who died in 9/11 deserved it.
 
There must be days when the business staff at Intel and Microsoft actually
get a little weepy at the touching loyalty of their customers, in the face of
their monumental failures, incompetences, and exaggerations. "You people out
there are are just too good to be true! We love you!"
Click to expand...

Do you have any idea how annoyed and disappointed I've been with Microsoft
of the years?
I am no Microsoft loyalist...
But--I am willing to identify improvements when they are clear and
substantial.

When the programs I prefer become available on a different OS that is
better...and that doesn't cripple me with incompatibilities, I'll be first
in line to buy it adn throw out my MS OS.
 
"Bill Van Dyk" wrote ...
Firewire worked fabulously for many years before USB
finally became at all functional. The only reason USB
even remained in the market is because of the dominant
position of Wintel, which is able to shove deficient and
defective technologies down our throats. Now, users say,
what's the problem-- USB works fine! Yes, now it finally
does.
Click to expand...

As a hardware designer, I can assure you that where IEEE
1394 is great for a few bus devices running high rates, USB
is much better for multiple low- to moderate-rate devices.

If IEEE 1394 were the ultimate all-purpose bus, why was
Apple, inventor of Firewire (IEEE 1394) one of the very
first to use USB for keyboards and mice? (Even before
"Wintel" IIRC)
By preventing real competition, Intel and Windows
were able to finally correct the deficiencies in USB
without losing any customers.
Click to expand...

LOL! They don't sell Apple on your planet? :-)
 
Richard Crowley said:
"Bill Van Dyk" wrote ...

As a hardware designer, I can assure you that where IEEE
1394 is great for a few bus devices running high rates, USB
is much better for multiple low- to moderate-rate devices.
Click to expand...

FireWire (AKA IEEE 1394a or Sony iLink) was never meant to
serve low-speed devices such as a keyboard or mouse. It's
also a more expensive technology to implement.
If IEEE 1394 were the ultimate all-purpose bus, why was
Apple, inventor of Firewire (IEEE 1394) one of the very
first to use USB for keyboards and mice? (Even before
"Wintel" IIRC)
Click to expand...

Apple has always had a more "coherent" plan. That - and
there aren't a half-dozen motherboard manufacturers who
are competing on price.

The other thing is that USB 2.0 has some serious compatability
issues with high-speed mode. I can't get my 2.0 hub to
connect to my 2.0 card, although it works fine out of my
1.1 ports. However - that would defeat the purpose wouldn't
it?
 
y_p_w said:
"Richard Crowley" <[email protected]> wrote in message

FireWire (AKA IEEE 1394a or Sony iLink) was never meant to
serve low-speed devices such as a keyboard or mouse. It's
also a more expensive technology to implement.
Click to expand...

Right. The price difference isn't all that significant on a $1000
camcorder, but it sure is on a $10 mouse (where also the speed is totally
overkill)! A low-cost serial bus technology will always have a place as
long as their are cheap peripherals that need to be connected to the PC
(e.g. mice, keyboards, even those really cheap memory card readers). We've
almost always had at least 2 different connections available, a "cheap slow"
one and a "expensive fast" one. It used to be serial and SCSI. Now it is
USB and 1394.
 
Right. The price difference isn't all that significant on a $1000
camcorder, but it sure is on a $10 mouse (where also the speed is totally
overkill)! A low-cost serial bus technology will always have a place as
long as their are cheap peripherals that need to be connected to the PC
(e.g. mice, keyboards, even those really cheap memory card readers). We've
almost always had at least 2 different connections available, a "cheap slow"
one and a "expensive fast" one. It used to be serial and SCSI. Now it is
USB and 1394.
Click to expand...

I thought that Apple had a design for a real cheap, real slow connector designed
for stuff such as keyboards when they were working on Firewire. I suppose USB
replaced it.
 
y_p_w said:
"Richard Crowley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
Click to expand...
Apple has always had a more "coherent" plan. That - and
there aren't a half-dozen motherboard manufacturers who
are competing on price.
Click to expand...

Which is one of the main reasons that PC's have such a large market share.
If Apple had licensed its technology, instead of keeping it for themselves,
I think Macs would be the standard. And Steve Jobs would be in the position
Bill Gates is in today.
 
Which is one of the main reasons that PC's have such a large market share.
If Apple had licensed its technology, instead of keeping it for themselves,
I think Macs would be the standard. And Steve Jobs would be in the position
Bill Gates is in today.
Click to expand...

I think Jobs would also have to do a little extra back stabing to outdo
Billy boy. Apple's whole selling point is that since they make the
software and the hardware, there are no conflicts. What version is
MacOs at now? 18.265? I hear they almost have it right.
 
Richard Crowley said:
"Bill Van Dyk" wrote ...
Click to expand...
As a hardware designer, I can assure you that where IEEE
1394 is great for a few bus devices running high rates, USB
is much better for multiple low- to moderate-rate devices.

If IEEE 1394 were the ultimate all-purpose bus, why was
Apple, inventor of Firewire (IEEE 1394) one of the very
first to use USB for keyboards and mice? (Even before
"Wintel" IIRC)
Click to expand...

I don't have the technical expertise to address your first statement. You
may well be right - I defer to your self-stated credentials.

As to the second statement, one answer can certainly be found in the
marketing power of the Intel conglomerate. Apple certainly must have
recognized that to implement firewire as a keyboard / mouse bus connection
would have excluded a huge number of hardware developers from the Macintosh
platform. Who was going divert engineering resources to a firewire keyboard
or mouse in lieu of the hugely more marketable PC input device arena? Apple
wanted to get lean, and they had already shed a number of less viable
hardware venues such as laserprinters and monitors. I'm sure they wanted to
step away from Mac-only keyboards and mice and get out of that low-margin
hardware arena as well. They knew they were going to be unable to convince a
broad range of manufacturers to implement firewire-only peripherals so went
with USB to provide Mac users with a much broader range of those low-level
doodads which were sure to be developed for the upcoming Intel USB flood of
devices.

Makes sense to me. To have gone against the tide and persisited in trying to
force a particular hardware peripheral line down Mac users' throats would
have been a big marketing mistake (one that they had made several times in
the past).

HMc
 
By the way, what is the power output of firewire, if any? I mean could
I power my USB toothbrush off a firewire port?
 
NO. Atari Sts or Commodore Amigas would be the standard. They had larger
screens, more applications and were in COLOR.
 
Jon said:
Right. The price difference isn't all that significant on a $1000
camcorder, but it sure is on a $10 mouse (where also the speed is totally
overkill)! A low-cost serial bus technology will always have a place as
long as their are cheap peripherals that need to be connected to the PC
(e.g. mice, keyboards, even those really cheap memory card readers). We've
almost always had at least 2 different connections available, a "cheap slow"
one and a "expensive fast" one. It used to be serial and SCSI. Now it is
USB and 1394.
Click to expand...

But nobody in their right mind would or should lobby for Firewire on a mouse in
the first place. It's stupid, even on $100 mouse - it simply doesn't need the
bandwidth. Usb 1.1 is perfect for mice, keyboards, etc.

The answer is NOT to have a "winner" and a "loser" but to have both technologies
co-exist.

As to serial vs SCSI that was never even remotely an issue. The real battle was
"SCSI vs IDE" and SCSI still outperforms IDE by a considerable margin in heavily
loaded multitasking environments even though an IDE system may "boot faster" the
proof of the pudding is doing multiple simultaneous file searches and trying to
get work done at the same time. But I digress...

--Keith
 
Chris said:
By the way, what is the power output of firewire, if any? I mean could
I power my USB toothbrush off a firewire port?
Click to expand...

Who cares!

It's a meaningless question.

You have the spec, and you design products to meet the spec. End of
discussion.

If you want to see the spec, go to http://www.1394ta.org/

Look there's no reason for a "winner/loser" situation. Some devices benefit
from Firewire, others simply don't need them. Scanners for example since
they're basically a slow mechanical device limited by the speed of the
mechanism don't benefit a lot from Firewire, and CPU cycles aren't that
much of an issue, so it makes sense to use high-speed USB for that.. On the
other hand, 10 megapixel cameras, digital camcorders, external hard drives,
and the like clearly benefit from Firewire.

Your toothbrush benefits from neither.
 
Mine works fine. I'm using most of the USB ports and that includes
scanners (two) and a memory card reader for photography which gets
unplugged and moved from machine to machine while things are running.

That might be because of limits to the PCI interface as regards transfer
rates. Too much data to send through the buss.
Click to expand...

No problem with that. I transfer data from HDs across the PCI buss
and it's far faster than the USB-2. My network *seems* to be faster
than the USB-2.

You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?)
www.rogerhalstead.com
 
Back
Top