Poll: Is USB2 an important feature for you?

[MacRumors]

Vote: Poll: Is USB2 an important feature for you? (http://www.macpolls.com/?poll_id=126&ref=forums.macrumors.com)

[yzedf]

cuz steve says so

[springscansing]

I think apple should have it in there already, just for the marketing perspective. People are still going to make firewire 800 drives, since many people know firewire 800 is better than usb2 anyway.

[Hemingray]

It's just one more thing that would make the Mac more appealing. Why not? It can't be that much more expensive to implement... can it?

I think after FW800 becomes more widely accepted and is put into Macs across the line, we'll finally see USB2. At least I hope so. It seems like the logical thing to do.

[DreaminDirector]

Why? What is the point of USB2? I know of nothing that would use USB2. Maybe because Mr. Jobs has put the blinders on my eyes and all I can see is how much firewire blows everything else out of the water. Period. And guess what! There's firewire 800 now. USB2? No way.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by DreaminDirector
Why? What is the point of USB2? I know of nothing that would use USB2. Maybe because Mr. Jobs has put the blinders on my eyes and all I can see is how much firewire blows everything else out of the water. Period. And guess what! There's firewire 800 now. USB2? No way.

For some devices like Digital camers USB2 is not even twice as fast as USB1.

I really don't see a reason for them to have USB2 at all. Even when USB2 get's it's maximum bandwidth and is implemented properly it still underperfoms Firewire400.

[dricci]

Yeah, I see no real use for USB2 either, Firewire blows it all out of the water (and even more so with 800). However, since PC manufactuerers are starting to utilize it more and more, you'll see a lot of potential switchers who are coming over and might be a bit disapointed that their "high speed" USB2 devices are slow(er) on USB 1.1.

I think we'll see USB 2 once Firewire 800 is shipping on all machines (maybe with the 970 intro later this year?).

[Bear]

Unfortunatly USB2 may become a necessary evil. Inexpensive flatbed scanners are USB2 capable. And putting these scanners on USB2 makes acquiring the scanned image noticably faster.

I am going to go with a USB2/Firewire combo card for my PowerMac. This will give me a USB2 port for the scanner and will make sure I have enough USB ports that I won't need a USB hub for expansion.

The reason for the combo card is that I would definitly need a firewwire hub otherwise. And I might stil need one in the not so distant future. I have 2 already that don't have a 2nd firewire port for chaining devices together.

[KLFloyd]

Originally posted by DreaminDirector
Why? What is the point of USB2? I know of nothing that would use USB2. Maybe because Mr. Jobs has put the blinders on my eyes and all I can see is how much firewire blows everything else out of the water. Period. And guess what! There's firewire 800 now. USB2? No way.

Forgive me, but this is an issue I feel very strongly about...

Have you not looked around a electronics store lately? USB 2 is popping up everywhere in Scanners, Printers, Cameras, Hard Drives, and more.

Remember USB didn't come out all that long ago, and now it's getting difficult to find devices with serial and SCSI ports. In time this will become the case with USB 2.0. The PC market has already adopted it, since PC users make up the bulk of the computer users the hardware companies are going to switch to using USB 2.0 ONLY for their products. Why not? After all USB 2.0 is backwards compatible so anyone who has an old device lying around will still be able to use it.

Then we Mac users are going to be stuck in a more difficult situation than we're already in. We won't be able to run down to the corner and grab a new scanner, we'll have to special order everything. Don't you remember it that was before when we had such limited selections in Mac products to choose from and even then had to do most of our purchases special order? I don't want to go back to those days again. Not being able to drive across town and pick up a Mac is bad enough.

Bottom line, there is absolutely no down side to Apple adopting USB 2.0 in their future product releases, none. So lets do it now before we're forced to do it later and we're really in a tight. Although I hope I'm wrong, I really don't think that FW800 is going to catch on for quite some time look at the very few PC's that are currently shipping with FW installed at all?

And those of you who are just saying, "no because it's not important to Steve." you all need to do your research and be informed of the issues before you blindly follow someone. Learn to "Think Different."

[beez7777]

i dont think it's a bad idea for apple to start putting it in their computers, as it does have some uses, as well as what dricci said about new switchers. do i have any use for it? no.

[bennetsaysargh]

i have no need for it, but like the other people have mentioned, the usb2 will play an important part in the switchers.

[FelixDerKater]

Yes, Apple should add USB 2 support. There are hundreds of peripherals based on the standard sitting on store shelves. We are getting back to the days where you have to buy proprietary standards-based peripherals like it was back in the day when you had to pay a premium for peripherals based on ADB, Serial, and SCSI.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Bear
Unfortunatly USB2 may become a necessary evil. Inexpensive flatbed scanners are USB2 capable. And putting these scanners on USB2 makes acquiring the scanned image noticably faster.

The magazine tests in MacWorld and MacAddict that I have read with USB and USB2 scanners have shown no difference in the aquire rate between the two.

[zach]

I dont see why anyone needs usb 2. Firewire 400 is about as fast and is common, and firewire 800 blows usb 2 out of the water. Besides, the firewire connector looks so much cooler.....

[dprlynch]

Originally posted by KLFloyd


Forgive me, but this is an issue I feel very strongly about...
...
Then we Mac users are going to be stuck in a more difficult situation than we're already in. We won't be able to run down to the corner and grab a new scanner, we'll have to special order everything.
...
Bottom line, there is absolutely no down side to Apple adopting USB 2.0 in their future product releases, none. So lets do it now before we're forced to do it later and we're really in a tight. Although I hope I'm wrong, I really don't think that FW800 is going to catch on for quite some time look at the very few PC's that are currently shipping with FW installed at all?
...
And those of you who are just saying, "no because it's not important to Steve." you all need to do your research and be informed of the issues before you blindly follow someone. Learn to "Think Different."

First off, USB2 devices WILL work on a USB1 port, just at USB1 speeds. So you'd still be able to use those devices.

Second, I agree with you that there isn't really a downside, depending on the cost of USB2. At the least it could be put into the PowerBook/PowerMac lines.

Third, you'd be good to follow your own advice and research things as well, since you made the mistake about the USB1/2 compatibility issue.

Personally, I don't care about USB2. The only real devices that are going to use it are scanners and a couple other devices. Cameras will probably continue to use FireWire since it would cost $$ to switch over with no appreciable (if any) benefit for USB2. More than likely those devices would upgrade to FW800 than USB2.

[pimentoLoaf]

Backward-compatibility is key, here, not the plethora of NEW NEW NEW Firewire 800 devices.

Why replace a peripheral that ain't broke yet?

[avus]

Mac Treasure Tracing Club (Japanese Mac site) reported on Feb. 13 that they "confirmed" the new PowerMac G4 (FW800) is equipped with the NEC's USB 2.0 Controller PD720101 (!) on the motherboard but it is limited to work only on 1.1. They wondered if the USB 2.0 drivers from Orange Micro, Sonnet Tech, or MacAlly would "enable" the USB 2.0 functionality as their products have the same NEC controller, but they also suspect that it is limited to the USB 1.1 standard by the firmware. So, they asked any PM G4 (FW800) owners who experimented with the USB 2.0 drivers (under their own responsibility, MTTC added) to report to them. No one has replied yet.

If the hardware is already there, Apple should support it as well.

http://www.tcp-net.ad.jp/danbo/

[scem0]

yes, i have a PC and many USB2 devices.

[onemoof]

Apple doesn't want to adopt USB2 because:

a). Apple earns a royalty when you buy a Firewire device. They want to be sure there's a good market for Firewire so they make lots of money. Only putting Firewire on the computers encourages stores to actually stock Firewire devices while if they had USB2.0 the stores might drop Firewire altogether which hurts everyone.

b). USB2 is bad for things like CD burners because it doesn't provide a sustained data transfer rate. USB2.0 isn't capable of anything near 480 MBps while Firewire 1 can actually achieve close to 400 MBps. That 480 MBps is the bursting speed, while for Firewire it's the sustained speed.

[BeigeUser]

Apple will probably adopt USB2 for the same reason that they adopted USB1: They want to have access to the vast amount of USB2 devices available out there.

All new PC's will have USB2 onboard but not all will have firewire. Third party companies are more likely to support USB2 rather than firewire. Only certain equipment that can take advantage of firewire's superior capabilities will actually choose the firewire connection.

For those who say that USB1 is sufficient for currently available devices, I can name at least 1 printer (Japan model Epson PM-970C), several scanners and many hard drives that require USB2 or firewire to run at its full speed. USB1 is too slow for todays equipment and it will be much less sufficient for tomorrows technology.

If Apple doesn't use USB2, Apple will have to convince all PC makers to have firewire as standard equipment so that there will much more firewire devices available. Otherwise only niche firewire devices will be available to Apple users. If I was a Windows user with a lot of USB2 devices, that will be another reason for me NOT to switch. Imagine: Switch to Mac, all your USB2 devices will run much slower.

[DavidCL23]

it shouldn't be a question, even $300 pc's have usb 2.0 nowadays

[nslyax]

Is it important to me? no Will it happen? yes

Apple will put USB 2.0 in macs soon, as soon as firewire 800 is equiped on all models. Apple will probably replace the usb ports on all macs with 2.0 ports by year end.

In my opinion, based on what Apple has done in the past, they might even drop usb all together on lower models, especially the ibook, and just go with firewire 800 (and eventually 1200 or 1600) and bluetooth, once it has fully matured.

Almost any device that is available with USB 2.0 is either also available in firewire or has only a small improvement over usb 1.1. I see no need for 2.0, but to apeal to switchers, and whiners (sorry, its the truth), it will come.

[mjb]

Originally posted by DavidCL23
it shouldn't be a question, even $300 pc's have usb 2.0 nowadays

Amen.

I don't want to be told what I need. I can figure out what I need on my own. I'll select my tools as appropriate for the job...not as they are dictated to me.

Apple was able (and rightly so) to milk the 1394 licensing before USB2 was out.

But now that USB2 is available, it escapes me why it hasn't been introduced to the platform.

I'm lead developer for my company, and a lifelong x86 (mostly Windows/DOS) user. I had a severe dislike (I'm being gentle) for all things Mac-related. But several months ago, I got an iBook to evaluate OS X and the new platform, since I was impressed by its heritage. And...I like it. A lot.

But if the "Lexus" of computing can't keep up with current standards, I have a difficult time making an argument to port our hardware to use Apple. Especially since our hardware is USB2. No way am I going to get a Powermac and then have to spend even more $$$ to buy a USB2 PCI card. It's not the money that stops me, it's what it says about Apple...

[Bear]

Originally posted by nslyax
...

Almost any device that is available with USB 2.0 is either also available in firewire or has only a small improvement over usb 1.1. I see no need for 2.0, but to apeal to switchers, and whiners (sorry, its the truth), it will come.
Show me Firewire based flatbed scanners that are $99. Actually since it would save me the $$ from buying a USB2 pci card, show me flatbed tell me who makes firewire based flatbed scanners for under $150 (US).

[KLFloyd]

Originally posted by dprlynch


First off, USB2 devices WILL work on a USB1 port, just at USB1 speeds. So you'd still be able to use those devices.

Second, I agree with you that there isn't really a downside, depending on the cost of USB2. At the least it could be put into the PowerBook/PowerMac lines.

Third, you'd be good to follow your own advice and research things as well, since you made the mistake about the USB1/2 compatibility issue.

My information came from cNet that USB 2 devices will not work on USB 1. Can you site your source please? I hope you're right.

[Bear]

Originally posted by KLFloyd


My information came from cNet that USB 2 devices will not work on USB 1. Can you site your source please? I hope you're right.
I've seen some USB2 deviceds say that they are USB1.1 compatible.

Maybe this is on a device by device basis?

For example I know that Canon scanners are USB2/1.1 capable.

[dprlynch]

Originally posted by KLFloyd


My information came from cNet that USB 2 devices will not work on USB 1. Can you site your source please? I hope you're right.

My source is http://www.everythingusb.com/usb2/faq.htm
Go 2/3 down the page where it says "What happen if a USB 2.0 device is plugged into a USB 1.1 system?". The answer is The entire bus under the USB 1.1 root hub will slow to 12Mbps.

So yes, USB2 devices WILL work on USB1 ports and vice versa. You just see slower speeds if it's not a USB2 device in a USB2 port. Hence the term UNIVERSAL serial bus.

Plus, the people who develop USB didn't want to force consumers to switch everything over again. That was the idea for the full compatibility.

[timbloom]

It isnt "will you use it right now" I know I will probably own my computer for 2-4 years and constantly rely on it. <br>My b&w g3 ruled, it had USB & FireWire at a time when nothing used them. But then stuff started coming out that really made it worth my money, that machine was probably my most worthwile purchase I have ever made from Apple. Why? because it lasted a long time. I didn't notice I had firewire till about 9 months after I bought the machine and I found a firewire drive I really needed, I looked at the back of my machine and to my suprise I found I could use it.<br> I do not want to buy a product that contains older technology when EVERYTHING ELSE is using it. Apple is known for it's innovation and keeping ahead of the times. Why stay behind if you just "don't like" a standard. I am sad to say, I walk into a computer store that isnt exclusively mac, almost all external cdrw's and hard drives are usb 2 now. I know firewire is faster respective to their competitor, but tell me one hard drive that can fill firewire 400. No reason to hold back if the technology is allready out there, your just showing your customers what you really think of their inteligence. It's insulting, if I buy a $3000 computer, the last thing I want to do is buy even a cheap card to enable a common standard, it's rediculous. I love firewire, but c'mon! I want the best of both, I don't buy a mac to be held back.

[yzedf]

Originally posted by nslyax
Is it important to me? no Will it happen? yes

Apple will put USB 2.0 in macs soon, as soon as firewire 800 is equiped on all models. Apple will probably replace the usb ports on all macs with 2.0 ports by year end.

In my opinion, based on what Apple has done in the past, they might even drop usb all together on lower models, especially the ibook, and just go with firewire 800 (and eventually 1200 or 1600) and bluetooth, once it has fully matured.

Almost any device that is available with USB 2.0 is either also available in firewire or has only a small improvement over usb 1.1. I see no need for 2.0, but to apeal to switchers, and whiners (sorry, its the truth), it will come.

ok.

so apple drops usb altogether on the low end stuff.

show me a firewire keyboard or mouse i could plug use.

you, are a frickin' idiot.

[nslyax]

Originally posted by yzedf


show me a firewire keyboard or mouse i could plug use.



Hence the BLUETOOTH that I mentioned.

Originally posted by bear


Show me Firewire based flatbed scanners that are $99. Actually since it would save me the $$ from buying a USB2 pci card, show me flatbed tell me who makes firewire based flatbed scanners for under $150 (US).



And in this case I dont think that a USB 1.1 v. 2.0 scanner would bring that much benifit, especially in the sub $99 price range. Heck, most usb 1.1 scanners are over $100 if you want a decent one, and if your really serious about it, youll get a firewire scanner regardless.

I admit my statements arent perfect, but I did menion it was an OPINION and it is speculation of the future.

[usersince86]

Originally posted by yzedf


ok.

so apple drops usb altogether on the low end stuff.

show me a firewire keyboard or mouse i could plug use.

you, are a frickin' idiot.

Good point. USB and FW have 2 different sets of peripherals. USB2 is being marketed as everything USB and FW are combined, even though it's not. But USB is very important, and USB2 is very do-able. If FW400/800 are better (which they are), why the hesitation to add USB2?

On a side note, I really don't think your attitude makes you look any smarter. Suggestions:
1. Figure out why you have such a bad self-worth, and think that ridiculing others makes you feel better.
2. Buy a dictionary and enhance your vocabulary.

Just my 2 cents. Not meant to ridicule you either. I just don't see the point of attacking others...

(ok, I'm getting down from my soap-box now)

[MacBandit]

Okay everyone is pointing to scanners as having USB2 and how it is such a boon for them.

Please someone point me to a test of a scanner with USB2 that actually shows a significantly faster scan speed the USB1. I have seen no such test. In fact in some tests there are scanners out there that have higher scan speeds with similar settings and similar results with USB1 over USB2.

The point is that USB2 implementation is extremely scetchy device to device. I was really excited about it until I saw that small devices such as Digital Cameras show little to no speed increase in data tranfer. It just appears to me that there isn't standard that everyone is meeting. A lot of the devices are doing it half assed and I can't blame Apple from avoiding it at this momment.

[Boyd]

Here's my thoughts on several USB 2.0 subjects from this thread:

Apple is apparently including a USB 2.0 host controller in some current models. Apple didn't choose a USB 2.0 host controller for no reason. It is more expensive. So if they put it in the hardware already they must have a reasonably firm plan to enable it. It only needs a software update. How long before that happens? Or could they back away from that plan? Perhaps. Should we expect it as part of an OS update some time this year? I think so.

Reports tell us that the latest PowerMac now includes the NEC USB 2.0 host controller. Incidentally, Intl's USB 2.0 host controller seems to be based on NEC's design. Has anyone looked inside the new Powerbook to see what host controller is used?

I wish I knew which models already include the USB 2.0 host. I wouldn't be surprised if iMac and iBook retain Firewire400 and USB 1.1 for some time with PowerMac and PowerBook offering Firewire800 and USB 2.0. That split seems like a natural feature differentiation between the model lines.

USB 2.0 devices may work on USB 1.1 systems, but only if the developer decided to make that device operate on both. On the other hand, all USB 1.1 devices should work under USB 2.0 host system.

Devices that are natively USB 2.0 may not necessarily be 40 times the speed of a similar device on USB 1.1, even thought he bus is 40 times as fast. Very often other connections inside the device aren't up to delivering 480Mbs performance.

For example: if a USB 1.1 digital camera reads images out of memory at 50Mbs per second, then USB at 12Mbs per second is the limiting factor. You will get your pictures at some speed less than 12Mbs. A similar camera designed to run on USB 2.0 is not going to transfer the pictures faster than the 50Mbs second memory read/transfer speed. You can't expect that USB 2.0 automatically means a device will operate at 40 times the speed.

The earliest USB 2.0 devices tend to be upgraded designs based on USB 1.1 generation products. So many may not show the significant speed increases that are possible. In time we will see more USB 2.0 devices that better show off the true nature of USB 2.0 at high speed.

USB 2.0 and Firewire are different. Each has its strengths. Some devices work better with Firewire. Some are more naturally suited to USB. I want to be able to pick and choose from all products in the market so please give me both.

If you think USB 1.1 is useful but aren't convinced that USB 2.0 is so necessary, then think of it this way. Having a USB 2.0 host controller allows you to connect lots and lots of USB 1.1 devices without worrying about running out of the 12Mbs bus. Each device can basically have it's own 12Mbs connection.

One limitation to consider: Running each USB 1.1 device on it's own 12Mbs connection requires a TT ("Transaction Translator") for each device. Some USB 2.0 hubs have only one TT so all USB 1.1 devices connected on that hub share a single 12Mbs connection. Some hubs have a separate TT for each port so each device gets it's own dedicated 12Mbs connection. Unfortunately, most USB 2.0 hubs don't tell you anything about that on the packaging. I hope that will change soon. Look for packaging that mentions multi-TT or something like that.

Thanks for considering some thoughts from an experienced USB developer (mostly Windoxs products ;) )