Firewire 2 Next?

[MacRumors]

Firewire 2 or 1394b's design standard was approved in March 2002 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/03/20020325195711.shtml). Firewire 2 promises to bring longer device-to-device distances, faster speeds (800MBits/s at the low end), full duplex communication, lower costs and backward compatibility with the original Firewire.

Newsfactor reported (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/05/20020523082020.shtml) in May that Firewire 2 would not likely make it into the most recent PowerMacs.

The most compelling evidence (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/08/20020829215629.shtml) of Apple's work on Firewire 2 comes from an internal Apple PDF which outlined an Apple PowerMac design with Firewire 2 ports included. This PDF was accidently left exposed on Apple's website, and was quickly removed from their site.

Future PowerMac upgrades are not expected until after MacWorld SanFrancisco, but it appears that Firewire 2 is due, and reported to be pending the next revision based on the current whisperings.

[bobindashadows]

This is great, I've been looking out for FW2 in the power macs since that PDF leaked out.. it makes sense that it didn't get put in very quickly after the spec was approved, hopefully we'll see it real soon.

First post?

[medea]

well it's too bad I can't upgrade the firewire port in my iMac, but it's not really neccesary for me either because the speed of firewire is fine for me. Will Firewire2 be backwards compatible like USB2 is (edit: forgive me I missed that in the article at first.)

[Goblin2099]

I wonder what this will mean for the iPod. Rumors have it that the iPod's up for some change at MWSF, I remember reading (although I think it was MOSR) that a major revision is possible. It would seem a shame for a new iPod model to have old firewire if firewire 2 is going to be released shortly thereafter, but it doesn't seem likely that firewire 2 would be debuted on peripherals before computers.

<cross fingers>I supposed Steve could throw in a teaser of "Oh, and they're GigaWire ready" </cross fingers>

[Mac til death]

that's good to hear...

I can't wait to see the things Apple has in store for 2003...

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?threadid=13409


I was a bit thrown back two months ago when I read that Firewire 2 (or gigawire, whatever its named) will run at 3.2 Gb/s, that's just incredible....

[locovaca]

Originally posted by Goblin2099
I wonder what this will mean for the iPod. Rumors have it that the iPod's up for some change at MWSF, I remember reading (although I think it was MOSR) that a major revision is possible. It would seem a shame for a new iPod model to have old firewire if firewire 2 is going to be released shortly thereafter, but it doesn't seem likely that firewire 2 would be debuted on peripherals before computers.

<cross fingers>I supposed Steve could throw in a teaser of "Oh, and they're GigaWire ready" </cross fingers>

Not to burst your bubble, but it wouldn't mean much for an ipod. ipods do not have very fast hard drives, and firewire itself doesn't nearly get saturated with the ipods we have today (they spin, at most at 4200 rpm, and I bet it's slower than that, but I haven't cracked one open to see. By comparison, an IBM 20 gb notebook drive generally tops out at about 20mb/sec sustained, which is half of what firewire can offer). This would be exciting for DV (you can now have higher resolutions download in realtime) and mac to mac firewire networking. Those would be blazing file transfers!

[Steradian]

This is great news, If this rumor turn's out to be true it will have made my week :)
this is incredibly fast, and beat the pants off USB 2.0


PowerBook G4 1ghz

[wrylachlan]

As compared to ethernet what is the cost per Gps throughput? I know that Gigabit ethernet cards are pricey.

Anyone have any ideas how much the enabling chips are going to cost? For that matter what do firewire 1 chips cost?

[arn]

Originally posted by Steradian
This is great news, If this rumor turn's out to be true it will have made my week :)
this is incredibly fast, and beat the pants off USB 2.0


Well, the Firewire 2 specs are public... and will be faster than USB 2.0. Starting at speeds of 800Mbits/s.

arn

[sparkleytone]

i think its pretty well known that down here in what we nonscientists call the REAL WORLD...firewire already beats the pants off of USB2.0

[Steradian]

Hey arn i was under the impression that things that are released to the public like spec's, don't always turn out to be true, (as i am sure you know this is macrumors) so why are you being overly critical?

And

Sparklytone, um USB 2 has the potenial to be faster than 1394(b), but occurs w/ a heavy strain on the processor. I understand that you were Exaggerating, but in the "real world" USB 2.0 is FASTER.



PowerBook G4 1ghz

[p604]

panasonic has a firewire hd deck in the works that will use firewire 2 as per an apple and panasonic agreement. when the final bugs are ironed out, firewire 2 will become de facto.

[strider42]

Originally posted by Steradian

Sparklytone, um USB 2 has the potenial to be faster than 1394(b), but occurs w/ a heavy strain on the processor. I understand that you were Exaggerating, but in the "real world" USB 2.0 is FASTER.



PowerBook G4 1ghz

USB 2 is only slightly faster than firewire right now. (480 mbps vs. 400 mbps), so firewire 2 will be roughly double the speed of of USB 2. and of course those theorectical numbers don't mean much, and that firewire is often times faster than USB 2 right now, despite the slightly slower theorectical max. So no, USB 2 is not faster than 1394b, not by any stretch of the imgination. I suppose they could try to ramp up the speed of USB 2 even higher, but I've never heard of any specs saying it could, and as you point out, the processor strain would only increase.

[tomwillett]

According to this Techtv benchtest, Firewire WAS FASTER then USB 2.0 when using external hard drives.

http://www.techtv.com/screensavers/supergeek/jump/0,24331,3393574,00.html

[Steradian]

My bad I should have been more specific in my statement. I should have said that in genreral a firewire connection is faster than USB 2.0 in most devices. But it is possible that thier is too much uncertainty in the screensavers benchmark test in weither or not the systems they were test had OS's w/ that could take advantige of a faster connection, or what the CPU clock was (in the screensavers test they used a 1.3 or 1.4 ghz pentium system), or what type of computer they had, etc. To my best understand USB 2.0 is currently a little faster in projected output than firewire. I understand that some systems have different reactions to different connections. Ie, the Ipod for windows transfers files over much slower than it's mac counterpart but they still have the same type of connector.

p.s. I am sorry if i make no sense i have had very little sleep in the last 48 hours.

PowerBook G4 1ghz

[strider42]

Originally posted by Steradian
My bad I should have been more specific in my statement. I should have said that in genreral a firewire connection is faster than USB 2.0 in most devices. But it is possible that thier is too much uncertainty in the screensavers benchmark test in weither or not the systems they were test had OS's w/ that could take advantige of a faster connection, or what the CPU clock was (in the screensavers test they used a 1.3 or 1.4 ghz pentium system), or what type of computer they had, etc. To my best understand USB 2.0 is currently a little faster in projected output than firewire. I understand that some systems have different reactions to different connections. Ie, the Ipod for windows transfers files over much slower than it's mac counterpart but they still have the same type of connector.

p.s. I am sorry if i make no sense i have had very little sleep in the last 48 hours.

PowerBook G4 1ghz

You are right that USB 2 has a slightly faster potential throughput than firewire at the moment. USB 2 maxes out at 480 mbps. processor speed won't make that any faster. Firewire is currently at 400 mbps. firewire 2 will be at least 800 mpbs, while also offering distinct advantages over USB 2 (same as firewire does right at the moment, despite its slightly lower theorectical max, which is why firewire will be around for a while).

So USb 2 will never be as fast as 1394b (firewire 2) it will only be half as fast in potential speed.

[arn]

Originally posted by Steradian
Hey arn i was under the impression that things that are released to the public like spec's, don't always turn out to be true, (as i am sure you know this is macrumors) so why are you being overly critical?


Am I being critical? I'm not sure which part you are refering to... but published specs usually don't change much. Besides, there are Firewire 2 devices starting to become available... so the standard is pretty set.

arn

[Steradian]

1394(b) and firewire 2 I don't think are the same.
Strider, your right it will not make it faster, i understand that you cannot change the speed of a connection w/ a faster processor, but w/ a fast processor it put's less of a strain on the processor so it can accomplish the task faster that the currrent firewire.

Ok arn i am just being stupid i need some caffine :)
(a few months (april) ago i saw some projected firewire 2 specs in a pdf file, and they had said that the connection speed would top out at 1.8 gbs, i think i still have the pdf lemme look for it tonight, )



PowerBook G4 1 ghz

[Natron]

Well, it makes since for Panasonic to be making some kind of HD deck and for other devices to be going Firewire 2 (iPod). Steve has to have something he can use to show off Firewire 2 ;)

-Natron

[arn]

Originally posted by Steradian

Ok arn i am just being stupid i need some caffine :)
(a few months (april) ago i saw some projected firewire 2 specs in a pdf file, and they had said that the connection speed would top out at 1.8 gbs, i think i still have the pdf lemme look for it tonight, )


800MB/sec and 1600MB/sec in the intial implementation, but upward limits in the spec us up to 3.2Gbit/sec.

See http://www.1394ta.org/Technology/About/1394b.htm

there's a PDF and links to articles there.

arn

[Skip]

I keep hearing about devices like Mitsubishis high end tv's having Firewire ports on them but I never have heard the marketing behind that. What does Mitsubishi say you can do with a Firewire port on their tv? Or a firewire port on a vcr, dvd player, audio receiver. Obviously if they are taking the time to put these pieces into place has anyone heard how it can be used or are they just there waiting for a solution from Apple or some other computer company that will take advantage of this technology?

[Steradian]

Thanks for the link, i think your going to be right in you assumption that these spec are as real as steve.




PowerBook G4 1ghz

[arn]

Originally posted by Skip
I keep hearing about devices like Mitsubishis high end tv's having Firewire ports on them but I never have heard the marketing behind that. What does Mitsubishi say you can do with a Firewire port on their tv? Or a firewire port on a vcr, dvd player, audio receiver. Obviously if they are taking the time to put these pieces into place has anyone heard how it can be used or are they just there waiting for a solution from Apple or some other computer company that will take advantage of this technology?

one of the proposed uses of firewire was the wiring of home networking.

http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20020506S0041


Rather than waiting for the sometimes hesitant moves of corporations, Snider said the IEEE 1394 Trade Association hopes to pull together new home network designs that take a full advantage of the technology's capabilities. "Our first milestone of the network working group, for instance, will be that we can start giving some guidance to companies interested in building a home network," he said.

While multiple wired and wireless schemes are vying to become the technology of choice for home networking, the association's tasks include "reviewing the use of Internet Protocols over 1394, and investigating how best to co-exist with other standards such as Ethernet," said Michael Teener, plumbing architect at Apple Computer. An originator of FireWire while at Apple in the late 1980s, Teener is chairman of the trade association's new network working group.


Combine this, along with IP over firewire, and Rendezvous... and things seem to be coming togther...

arn

[DaveGee]

Originally posted by Steradian
1394(b) and firewire 2 I don't think are the same.

Okay... lets try this.


================
FireWire aka 1394a:
-------------------------
400Mb/s over 'standard fw' cable up to 4.5 meters long.

================
FireWire2 aka GigaWire? aka 1394b:
-------------------------
100/200/400/800/1600/3200Mb/s over 'standard fw' cable up to 4.5 meters long.

*AND*

100Mb/s over standard unshielded twisted pair (aka ethernet) up to 100 meters long.

*AND*

100/200/400/800/1600Mb/s over POF (plastic fiber) up to 100 meters long.

*AND*

100/200/400/800/1600/3200Mb/s over GOF (glass fiber) up to 100 meters long.
================

3200 is considered 'in the future' but everything I've read (quite a bit over the past two years) all point to 1600Mb/s (aka 1.6G/b or 'GigaWire') being included in the initial rollout. Well the initial APPLE rollout.

Back in the spring TI (the chip maker) was having issues hitting 1.6Gbs 1394b but on or about that time news also hit the street that Apple purchased Zayante (founded by ex-apple guy who INVENTED FW to begin with) oh and Zayante just happens to be in the FW chip market too. (not BIG like TI - but pretty much exclusive FW oriented).

Everything looks good from where I sit (so long as Apple/Zayante can do (has done?) 1.6Gb/s).

Dave

[joed]

Earlier this year the 1394ta's web site had that the first system's will incorporate 1394b at the end this year, that has now been revised to early next year.

I would imaging that we'll see 1394b in the XServe first, which is due early next year. Then we'll see it implemented in subsequent machines (Powermac, powerbook, iMac, iBook, iPod, eMac etc - possibly in that order).

Already, a company has announced 1394b compatible cables. And yes, 1394b is backwards compatible with a plug adaptor.

Also, 1394b is cheaper than 1394a. So hopefully we'll see it implemented in more products (ie non Apple).

[Skip]

Originally posted by arn


one of the proposed uses of fireware was the wiring of home networking.

http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20020506S0041



Combine this, along with IP over firewire, and Rendezvous... and things seem to be coming togther...

arn

Thanks Arn, the home networking idea is pretty excting. What I would be even more interested in would be some software solution that allowed you to control all these devices. Say from my iBook I could Turn on my home stereo, start recording my favorite show from the tv. Maybe a new device is coming to do this or new software, only time will tell.

[Steradian]

I needed to have that cleared up thanks dave.


PowerBook G4 1ghz

[strider42]

Originally posted by Steradian
1394(b) and firewire 2 I don't think are the same.


Yeah, they are the same thing. at least, 1394b is the next incarnation of the 1394 standard which is known as firewire. We don't actually know that apple will call it firewire 2 (might be gigawire, or something else), but when people are tlaking about firewire 2, they mean the 800 mbps firewire, which is 1394b. If you meant firewire 1 (1394), then you are correct, but the fact that USB 2 can be faster in some situations doesn't make it a better standard. Neither standard will ever come close to maxing out their theorectical throughput, and from what I've read about USB 2, its not really a good standard for high speed devices, particular several of them at once.

[Steradian]

I never said that it was a better standard, or meant to imply that but i was mearly stating that In the "real world" firewire (first one) can be slower than USB2. just wanted to clear that up.


PowerBook G4 1ghz

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by Skip
I keep hearing about devices like Mitsubishis high end tv's having Firewire ports on them but I never have heard the marketing behind that. What does Mitsubishi say you can do with a Firewire port on their tv? Or a firewire port on a vcr, dvd player, audio receiver. Obviously if they are taking the time to put these pieces into place has anyone heard how it can be used or are they just there waiting for a solution from Apple or some other computer company that will take advantage of this technology? I have a B&K 307 Receiver that has firewire built in. Supposeldy you can hook up one cable between devices instead of an audio and video cable. No more matching red, white and yellow RCA connections or having SPDIF/s-video etc. All data can be sent through firewire and it'll be a snap to setup.

[hal9000]

"In related news, Apple released IP over Firewire Preview Release. With theoretical max speeds up to 3.2GBits/s and 100meter distances, Firewire 2 (1394b) could prove useful in a local networking connectivity."

How about IP over Firewire 2 as an interface for two-way broadband satellite? Or receive-only satellite streaming content for iTunes and QuickTime?

I hope Firewire 2 can also handle HDTV too.

[Clockwork]

Could it be that Apple pushed the XRaid back from it's initial release date(before christmas) because FW2 was not ready to be implemented. Would it not make sense to include FW2 on the XServe and XRaid systems?

[Mr Jobs]

Originally posted by Clockwork
Could it be that Apple pushed the XRaid back from it's initial release date(before christmas) because FW2 was not ready to be implemented. Would it not make sense to include FW2 on the XServe and XRaid systems?

i think u may be onto something, if u remember back to the first sawtooth g4s apple tried to get internal firewire going for hard disk connection. the speed was a problem back then which is why it never took off, but now with firewire 2...internal and Xternan (pun intended) raid connection for apple servers

[arn]

Originally posted by Clockwork
Could it be that Apple pushed the XRaid back from it's initial release date(before christmas) because FW2 was not ready to be implemented. Would it not make sense to include FW2 on the XServe and XRaid systems?

No - because XRaid uses FibreChannel for fast connectivity

(common misconception)

arn

[FatTony]

There have been some units in this thread describing the speed of FireWire that are misleading.

b = bits
B = bytes
8 bits = 1 byte
FireWire = 400Mb/s = 50MB/s

i.e.: just divide the Mb by 8 to get the MB.

[Dj Kioto]

This also figures into Apple's concepts of ease of use...

Even though the basic set up isn't that ahrd to comprehend either way, I like the thought of plugging five computers via firewire into one firewaire hub to network them, rather than haveing to worry abotu 10bT 10/100bT or gigabit ethernet... routers, WANs, LANs....

just from joe-shmoe-user's point of view it's alot more straight forward for home networking, apple already have airport for wireless networking, but what if joe shmoe cant afford $700 for a base station and 4 airport cards for the 4 macs he has

I think it would make joe a lot less apprehensive about home networking when all he as to worry about is 5 fireware cables and a firewire internet hub or iHub (possible made by apple for instance), rather than 5 cat 5 RJ-45 Ehternet cables, and which 10/100/1000bT Ethernet Routers...

Firewire might also make it easier than ethernet by automatically detecting wether a twisted paur cable is nessecary etc etc

sorry to make this long, I understand it may sound like a stream of thought compostion, well.. it is... I'm just spouting nonsense

[pgwalsh]

This article is very intereting if you want to learn about some of the applications of FireWire.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,87702,00.asp

[strider42]

Originally posted by Steradian
I never said that it was a better standard, or meant to imply that but i was mearly stating that In the "real world" firewire (first one) can be slower than USB2. just wanted to clear that up.


PowerBook G4 1ghz

thats precisely my point. firewire, the one we have right now, has a slower theorectical max than USb 2, but is actually faster in many real world applications. firewire 2 (1394b) will simply blow USb 2 away, even in its first incarnation. I've seen very, very little that has ever suggested that USb 2 gets better real world performance than firewire, and there are a lot of other downsides to USb 2, whcih impact speed. So which is a better standard is very important when discussing real world speed.

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by strider42


thats precisely my point. firewire, the one we have right now, has a slower theorectical max than USb 2, but is actually faster in many real world applications. firewire 2 (1394b) will simply blow USb 2 away, even in its first incarnation. I've seen very, very little that has ever suggested that USb 2 gets better real world performance than firewire, and there are a lot of other downsides to USb 2, whcih impact speed. So which is a better standard is very important when discussing real world speed. Intel has an article in their developer magazine which suggests that FireWire will be used for high speed high bandwidth devices and USB will be use for devices as keyboards, mice, and lower bandwidth devices. Obviously USB 2 could be used for highspeed, but having a separate power cable is a problem.

On another note: I think GigaWire is going to be an application of FireWire 2 as the trademark registration suggests. This seems like the likely choice for the digital hub strategy.

wireless/wired network clustering.

[kylos]

If firewire is going to be expanded to these new purposc SI it will have to Snap in, screw in or use some other permanent connectioN. The current plug is too modular for an integrated solution.

[sehix]

Originally posted by Steradian
Sparklytone, um USB 2 has the potenial to be faster than 1394(b), but occurs w/ a heavy strain on the processor. I understand that you were Exaggerating, but in the "real world" USB 2.0 is FASTER.

In which world, exactly, is 480Mbs faster than 800Mbs? IEEE-1394b is FireWire 2, not FireWire1 (1394a).

USB 2.0 is theoretically slightly faster than FireWire 1, in practice, it isn't; it won't magically be faster than FireWire 2.

[strider42]

I made a post here and wanted to delete it, but it won't let me. It will let me edit the post, but it won't let me delete it. So please ignore this message.

[MasterX (OSiX)]

There seems to be a lot of back and forth, so i'll do my best to list off the specs for these connections:

USB- 12Mbps (apx 1.5 MB/sec).
•Designed to be fast, which it is by comparison (ADB was like 100k/sec or something really weak).
•Provides 2 levels of power (unshure what the volts are) but there's high (allows self-powerd drives) and low (allows low-power devices like keyboard and mice to work, for example your pro mouse off an Apple USB Keyboard).
•Disadvantages, none as far as I can tell, although it works in a lower speed category than other connections listed here.

USB 2- 480Mbps (apx 60 MB/sec). Moderatly unpopular standard devised by Intel so they could put a high-speed interconnect on their own motherboards.
•Not sure about power, I'll assume it's about the same as USB1.
•Disadvantage is a very unstable send rate. You'll notice most USB2 devices which require a stream of data use huge buffers (CD-RW drives with 8MB+). Depending on conditions it *could* be faster than FireWire, but in every practial one it's actually slower. Good news is it's quite cheap.

FireWire- 400Mbps (apx 50 MB/sec). Designed by Apple and implimented as the key in their desktop video strategy.
•Very high self-powered spec. Allows for thigns as demanding as CD-RW drives to work off line voltage and also used to charge iPod (cool!)
•Disadvantages, only included as stock equipment on every Apple (Although most PCs now come with it, although the crappier 4-pin version). Uses short cable length (due to the power I'll assume). Somewhat costly.
•Good news it that it kicks butt and it's constant performance (even send rate) makes it perfect for video (which requires 3.7 MB/sec and no less) which is why it's on every DV camera i know.

FireWire2 (1394b, GigaWire, etc)- 800Mbps (apx 100MB/sec). This is probably the desktop version. Yes it will be enough to send 1080i HDTV signals into your new suite of apps like Final Cut Pro 4.
•Power, my guess is it'll still require a shorter cable for powered operation, but the 100m spec (which would be for networking) will use the same source power, but won't be able to power something on the other end (and thus you'll need to plug it into the receiving computer or a repeater/hub/switch at the 100m point)

If anything's wrong tell me and i'll fix it.

[Steradian]

Why can't you read????? In the post not to far down i clear up my message's intent arg arg arg
I never stated that usb2 would be as fast as or faster than firewire2




PowerBook G4 1ghz

[strider42]

Originally posted by Steradian
Why can't you read????? In the post not to far down i clear up my message's intent arg arg arg
I never stated that usb2 would be as fast as or faster than firewire2




PowerBook G4 1ghz

You said, " i was mearly stating that In the "real world" firewire (first one) can be slower than USB2. just wanted to clear that up.
"

which we are all saying is not true either.

And the terminology you used was incorrect (1394b is firewire 2, while you were using 1394b as firewire 1 it would seem) in some of your posts. this is what lead to the confusion, and your post clearing it up didn't make it all that much more clear what you were trying to say (which if I read correctly, is still incorrect as I stated above)

I'm not trying to be critical, but just trying to make sure we all understand what you are in fact saying and to amke sure that you know what we are saying.

[Steradian]

"can be slower than USB2" in some instances USB2 can be faster than firewire, it dosen't happen very often but i am sure it can happen. But you are right in saying that i used the wrong teminology i guess i was more confusing than a drunk scott's man.
(i posted those post's w/ very little sleep so i understand you confusion)
I am very ready to just drop this whole matter as it has little or no importance to me. Bye the way I love LOTR :)



PowerBook G4 1ghz

[strider42]

Originally posted by Steradian
"can be slower than USB2" in some instances USB2 can be faster than firewire, it dosen't happen very often but i am sure it can happen. But you are right in saying that i used the wrong teminology i guess i was more confusing than a drunk scott's man.
(i posted those post's w/ very little sleep so i understand you confusion)
I am very ready to just drop this whole matter as it has little or no importance to me. Bye the way I love LOTR :)



PowerBook G4 1ghz

Yeah, I know how you feel. It doesn't really matter to me either, but I just kind of got sucked into it. You are correct, in so far as there may be circumstances in which USB 2 is faster than firewire 1, but in any case, it doesn't amount ot much, if any, advantage. OK, thats it. discussion on that point need not continue as far as I'm concerned. I think we are all actually saying the same thing but think we disagree (sometimes the internet doesn't facilitate accurate communication at all)

[MasterX (OSiX)]

Good to see the nonsence come to a stop :¬)

USB2 was never designed to beat or even match FireWire, it was designed to be a "super" USB which could be used for higher speed devices. Intel used a less costly chip which would send in bust rates up to 480 to compensate for the drops in speed. And as we all know Intel like big numbers. So let's leave it at that and get back to planning for replacing our LANs with FireWireIP systems :-D