USB2 in powermacs... some ppl have it working!

[Latino]

Hi all

I just found this:

http://www.macnn.com/news/19183

Reading the user feedback at the bottom, it seems like some people have it working.

Sorry if this has been posted elsewhere. I couldn't see it doing a search for USB2

So, any of you with a powermac DP 1.2Ghz or 1.43Ghz care to give it a go?

Latino

[iJon]

what i dont understand though is how they test the drivers. if they tested a printer or something wouldnt the manufacturor have to make a usb 2.0 driver to go with the printer. or are they testing it some other way.

iJon

[Freg3000]

I'd try it. Not that I have any USB 2 devices. Or a new MDD Powermac. Or any avaiable USB ports.

Ok i wouldn't try it. :rolleyes:

Have there been any horror stories from this yet?

[NavyIntel007]

Is that same chip on the powerbook?

[Sun Baked]

So I don't have to answer this too many times, I'll answer the generic questions.

Which Mac actually has the new PCI to USB2 bridge?

The only mac is the Revision B MDD PowerMac, the one with FW800.

At least that's what the tech documents say, but there are some that are not updated yet.

[blueflame]

so does the 17 in powebook have it? it has fw800
A

[Sun Baked]

Originally posted by blueflame
so does the 17 in powebook have it? it has fw800
A The only mac is the Revision B MDD PowerMac, the one with FW800.

At least that's what the tech documents say, but there are some that are not updated yet.

---

The where and why is in the other USB 2 threads.

EDIT: Adding the following...

This is the Revision B MDD PowerMac (jan 03), it has some motherboard changes that were included with the addition of FW800 -- ie a PCI USB controller chip.

http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G4/PowerMacG4/art/jos01.gif

This differs from the Revision A MDD PowerMac (sept 02), which has NO USB 2 chip.

http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G4/PowerMacG4Sept02/art/moj01.gif

According to the document found here (http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/hardware/hardware2.html) -- it's probably the only machine with this chip.

---

Note: If you have the Revision B PowerMac with FW800 & Airport Extreme capability, you may have a USB2 controller chip -- if you have any other machine besides the new iPod (most likely not).

[BaghdadBob]

Other than being able to use USB 2.0 devices, why would you do this if you have firewire? Apple's official quote is "And it's way faster than USB 2.0."

:eek:Are they lying?!?!?!?

If not, what would one need it for, I'm curious. I thought there weren't alot of USB 2.0 devices out there anyway

(<--- is more ignorant on this subject than even other subjects)

[iJon]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Other than being able to use USB 2.0 devices, why would you do this if you have firewire? Apple's official quote is "And it's way faster than USB 2.0."

:eek:Are they lying?!?!?!?

If not, what would one need it for, I'm curious. I thought there weren't alot of USB 2.0 devices out there anyway

(<--- is more ignorant on this subject than even other subjects)
apple is being stupid on this one, most people dont even know apple invented firewire, nobody cares. its not like pcs and macs or anthing. usb 2.0 is soon becoming what usb is. a standard for many cameras, printers, scanners and things like that. usb 2.0 is faster than usb, who cares about firewire. firewire still serves its purpose, the same as fw800 will. there are just certain things apple needs to put on their computers, like svideo on the powermacs.

iJon

[TyleRomeo]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Other than being able to use USB 2.0 devices, why would you do this if you have firewire? Apple's official quote is "And it's way faster than USB 2.0."

:eek:Are they lying?!?!?!?

If not, what would one need it for, I'm curious. I thought there weren't alot of USB 2.0 devices out there anyway

(<--- is more ignorant on this subject than even other subjects)

there are actually a number of growing USB 2 devices that take advantage of USB 2's speed but not quite firewires, such as a new batch of digital cameras, printers, scanners, media readers ect... the point is that is availble and I wouldnt mind to have USB 2 ports, i have the old 1.25 MDD, so how do i go about activating the USB 2 drives?

Tyler

[iJon]

Originally posted by TyleRomeo
there are actually a number of growing USB 2 devices that take advantage of USB 2's speed but not quite firewires, such as a new batch of digital cameras, printers, scanners, media readers ect... the point is that is availble and I wouldnt mind to have USB 2 ports, i have the old 1.25 MDD, so how do i go about activating the USB 2 drives?

Tyler
you will need a pci card since your powermac doesnt have usb 2.0

iJon

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by iJon
apple is being stupid on this one, most people dont even know apple invented firewire, nobody cares. its not like pcs and macs or anthing. usb 2.0 is soon becoming what usb is. a standard for many cameras, printers, scanners and things like that. usb 2.0 is faster than usb, who cares about firewire. firewire still serves its purpose, the same as fw800 will. there are just certain things apple needs to put on their computers, like svideo on the powermacs.

iJon

Well I know Apple invented firewire. They also seem to be leading the edge on wireless networking. Before I had heard of AirPort, I hadn't even heard of wireless (wasn't plugged in for a while to that point...was stuck with a quadra..........) and now they have AirPort Extreme.

The question is, why isn't FW a more popular standard? Does it not have the hot-plugging capabilities that USB does? Is it just another case of Apple failing to market some of their more practical and outstanding technologies? ("I am a software developer, and iPhoto is great! What is FireWire, prabhu?")

Someone fill me in if you have patience. I could read up on it, but I love you guys so much, I would hate to miss the opportunity to pick your brains :) :) :)

And WHY is Apple letting INTEL beat them to the punch for actually ADVERTISING wireless networking??? WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY!!!

Gack. I'm gonna cough up a hariball...

[MrMacMan]

Intresting, I've seen this posted, but if it works, very nice.

[Sherman]

Here is the thing. Those chips are CAPABLE of doing USB 2.0, but only the 1.1 part of the chipset is activated. Apple ordered them on the cheap. You cannot get them to use USB 2.0 just by installing some drivers. That's on the same line of though that you could make the older AO4 Pioneer SuperDrives go faster with that driver update.

Once those things have been made to only use 1.1, they won't use 2.0. Apple will have to order them 2.0 style before it will work. As of now, they'll just fsck your system.

Sorry to disspoint :(

[maxterpiece]

why have USB ports when you can have backwards compatible USB2 ports... there are no plusses, just minuses to having USB instead of USB2. So HA! Recoup that!

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Sherman
As of now, they'll just fsck your system.

Sorry to disspoint :(

Just so you know fsck is not a swear word. It's the UNIX command for (File System Check). You should get to know the command if you use OSX. In case you don't know about it or how to use it just let me know and I will explain in detail.

Oh, and I too have heard of completely locked up systems from people trying random USB2 drivers.

[iJed]

Originally posted by Sherman
Here is the thing. Those chips are CAPABLE of doing USB 2.0, but only the 1.1 part of the chipset is activated. Apple ordered them on the cheap. You cannot get them to use USB 2.0 just by installing some drivers. That's on the same line of though that you could make the older AO4 Pioneer SuperDrives go faster with that driver update.

Once those things have been made to only use 1.1, they won't use 2.0. Apple will have to order them 2.0 style before it will work. As of now, they'll just fsck your system.

Sorry to disspoint :(

According to MacNN it appears that people have got this working: "According to a Korean site Create Mac, it appears that the drivers for the USB 2.0 chipset in the MDD 1.25 and 1.42 Ghz are updated and confirmed that they do work."

[pianojoe]

Originally posted by MacBandit
Just so you know fsck is not a swear word. It's the UNIX command for (File System Check).

But it *could* have been a very elaborated joke.

[BaghdadBob]

OK, someone in a previous thread was pointing out the difference between megabytes and megabits (at least the abbreviations). Correct me if I'm wrong, but a bit is 1/8 of a byte, as a byte is 8 bits, right? So if you have a transfer speed of 800 megaBITS per second, then that equates to about 100 megaBYTES per second?

Someone on MacNN said something about now having 480MB/s...which is megabytes per second, which would be faster than 800 megabits per second...and yet FW is supposed to be "way" (--Apple) faster then USB 2.0.

Am I confused about the whole bits vs. bytes thing, or is that person confused about the speed of USB 2.0 (getting their bits and bytes mixed up).

Sorry, but I suck with network ****, I can't even get my Jaguar system hooked up to my fiancee's XP system, and they're hooked up through a hub for DSL. I have to email her photos and graphics (LAME).

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
OK, someone in a previous thread was pointing out the difference between megabytes and megabits (at least the abbreviations). Correct me if I'm wrong, but a bit is 1/8 of a byte, as a byte is 8 bits, right? So if you have a transfer speed of 800 megaBITS per second, then that equates to about 100 megaBYTES per second?

Someone on MacNN said something about now having 480MB/s...which is megabytes per second, which would be faster than 800 megabits per second...and yet FW is supposed to be "way" (--Apple) faster then USB 2.0.

Am I confused about the whole bits vs. bytes thing, or is that person confused about the speed of USB 2.0 (getting their bits and bytes mixed up).

Sorry, but I suck with network ****, I can't even get my Jaguar system hooked up to my fiancee's XP system, and they're hooked up through a hub for DSL. I have to email her photos and graphics (LAME).

You've got it just fine. It's just that most people when they write out abbreviations have no clue that capitalization makes such a difference. Examples MHz - Mhz, MB - Mb, KB -Kb. As you can see it goes on and on. Big B means Bytes little b means bits.

USB2 is rated at 480Mb/s and Firewire is 400Mb/s, Firewire 2 is 800Mb/s. You can see the speed comparisons there. The problem is USB2 has a quite a bit of working overhead so the actual throughput is much much less then the theoretical maximum and in real world tests USB2 quite often shows lower throughput then even the original Firewire at 400Mb/s.

[BaghdadBob]

Oh, good. Man, how many times has someone else's confusion made me second-guess myself? It's hard always being right :p

My girl is sick of my showing her all the neat things my computer can do that hers doesn't. She once told my icily "Are you just going to keep telling me how great Macs are or are you going to buy me one?"

She would switch, too. The only advantage she's ever seen between PCs and Macs is that the PCs at Jostens printed about ten times faster. Forget the fact that the administrators had turned off background printing on all the Macs and the PCs had about 10% print failure rate (to film, anyway). But I digress.

Apple does need to start including USB 2.0, there's no reason not to, barring a significant price increase. Maybe Panther will turn this on for the equipped Macs? That would be funny at the expo: "And with Panther, USB 2.0 magically works on select G4s!"

[BaghdadBob]

OK, I'll bite: what's the diff between MHz and Mhz? I know both my phone and G3 are in MHz...

[mangoman]

For what it's worth, I stuck an Orange PCI USB2/Firewire card in my 933 tower. Installed Orange's drivers. Everything works fine, but (and everybody's got a big but) ... Deep sleep doesn't work. Asked Orange about it and they confirmed that it's a problem, blamed Apple.

The usual suspects.

:D

[heal]

Hi all

No-one seems to have mentioned a few things in the usb 2 vs firewire debate. But just for the record

- Firewire is WAY faster than USB2, dont get bogged down in the numbers - notice how video professionals havent embraced USB2?. Here they say

- Despite USB 2.0's 80 Kbps speed advantage over FireWire, our testing showed that the additional overhead of USB 2.0 made it slower than FireWire. For high-bandwidth devices such as external hard drives, the difference was as high as 70 percent.?

and that is comparing firewire 400!

- I think USB 2 support is fine but not particularly useful unless it is a usb2 device only - the only problem is some manufacturers will only add a usb2 plug to their camera (etc) and forgo FW which is faster - a worrying trend

- Firewire started as an Apple only product whch others had to pay for. USB2 was launched as a competitor so that intel didnt have to pay the royalty. USB2 is a ?stretch? of USB?1?. I doubt that there will be a USB?3? as there aint much juice left in the think (correct me if im wrong) However, Firewire 800 is only a step with firewire 1600 next in line - now, 200 megabytes per second Will blow your hair back.

- As far as I am aware, USB2 is only as fast as the slowest device plugged into it. Plug a usb?1? device such as a mouse inot the chain and the performance plumments to 12Mb ( 1 and a bit MBytes/s)

have fun



m

[Sol]

Originally posted by heal
- As far as I am aware, USB2 is only as fast as the slowest device plugged into it. Plug a usb?1? device such as a mouse inot the chain and the performance plumments to 12Mb ( 1 and a bit MBytes/s)

Good point. I think this feature of USB 2.0 is the most likely reason why Apple does not support it. Since USB 2.0 ports look exactly the same as USB 1.1 it is highly likely that most people would connect their external hard-drives, cameras, etc into the same bus as something like the mouse and keyboard which are USB 1.1 devices. This would slow down all devices to 12 Mbs and create nothing but confusion. On the other hand, having all the fast devices plugged into FireWire and all the slow devices into USB 1.1 keeps things simple and efficient.

[jayscheuerle]

My limited understanding is that USB uses your computer's processor to processinformation, while Firewire has its own built-in chipset.

That's why Firewire's more expensive and why in situations where a steady stream is necessary (video work) it is the preferred choice... - j

[JtheLemur]

Just so you know fsck is not a swear word. It's the UNIX command for (File System Check). You should get to know the command if you use OSX. In case you don't know about it or how to use it just let me know and I will explain in detail.


Oh man, thanks for KILLING that.

Just so YOU know, "fsck" has been used as a replacement for "*****" for a good long fscking time. (for obvious reasons =)

[bennetsaysargh]

unless you have a digital camera with a really large anount of high sized files, usb2 will not matter. some people barely know where to plug in things to the computer, let alone care how fast thier usb is. it won't make a difference like fw800 will, but fw800 will take a little while longer to catch on.

[The Grimace]

As I understand it, the slowdown when a USB 1.x device is plugged into a USB 2 hub has long since been resolved. In other words, a USB 2 device will work at full transfer rate even if a USB 1.1 device is also plugged in.

However, USB does require an external proc. to work (i.e. camera -> computer -> t.v.) whereas a FireWire device requires none (i.e. camera -> t.v.).

(tig)

[bennetsaysargh]

most people in the pc world don't know about fw because it isn't put into all of the machines. they aren't exposed to it, so when they hear, they think it's not as good because they don't have it. just putting that in there because that's what one of my friends thought.

[sickracer2015]

has anyone actually tried to download the file
http://www.createmac.com/upload_image/download_file/OrangeUSBInstaller_v3_1.img

disk copy doesnt even mount it.. their file is corrupt.. i think that says enough about the reliablity.

[AidenShaw]

Originally posted by The Grimace
As I understand it, the slowdown when a USB 1.x device is plugged into a USB 2 hub has long since been resolved. In other words, a USB 2 device will work at full transfer rate even if a USB 1.1 device is also plugged in.

Correct, USB 2.0 and USB 1.1 devices can be mixed on a hub, and the 1.1 devices do not slow the 2.0 devices.

I don't think that it's been "resolved" as much as early misinformation is being corrected. A number of early reports (some still popping up on the web) said that USB 2.0 was a 3-speed protocol, and that it stepped down for 1.1 devices. (USB 1.1 is 2-speed, 12 and 1.5Mbps).

In fact, USB 2.0 is 480Mbps only, the data from a 1.1 device is buffered and sent upstream in packets at 480Mbps by the USB 2.0 hub.

[Windowlicker]

why are people so much after usb2? sure it's fast and everything, but after you'd have one, would you actually have much devices to connect to it? why wouldn't we rather use fw800 devices?!

sure it would add some compatibilty, but would we really benefit that much?

[firestarter]

Originally posted by bennetsaysargh
most people in the pc world don't know about fw because it isn't put into all of the machines. they aren't exposed to it, so when they hear, they think it's not as good because they don't have it. just putting that in there because that's what one of my friends thought.

Most people in the PC world don't care which is better.

USB was good enough for small slow peripherals, and USB2 is good enough for faster peripherals - disks, printers, scanners, digital cameras.

It's not as good as Firewire, granted, but it's included for free on all PC boards, in all new PC laptops, and in most new peripherals. 'Cheap' and 'good enough' are concepts that have driven the PC market to its current success.

Sure, Firewire is great where you need it - high speed disks, digital video, but due to its cost it WILL NEVER acheive the market penetration that USB2 will. Apple may think that they're fighting Firewire's corner by not including USB2 in macs - in reality this is just a disservice to Mac owners who will be left running the next generation of peripherals at only USB1.1 speeds.

[ktlx]

Originally posted by Windowlicker
why are people so much after usb2? sure it's fast and everything, but after you'd have one, would you actually have much devices to connect to it? why wouldn't we rather use fw800 devices?!

sure it would add some compatibilty, but would we really benefit that much?

A lot depends upon what devices you are interested in.

Nearly all of the new memory card readers, digital cameras and scanners are shipping with USB 2.0. I have heard that even color printers are starting to ship with the interface.

I do a lot of digital photography and no video work at all. For me, Firewire is pointless but USB 2.0 is a God-send. Transferring files from high speed CF cards to my computer over USB 2.0 is considerably faster than USB 1.1 and considerably cheaper than Firewire. Firewire 800 makes absolutely no sense for me.

I would expect that for someone who does video almost exclusively, the view would be just the opposite. USB 2.0 seems to have almost no penetration in that market and Firewire 800 would be great for external RAID arrays. I would rather use Ultra320 SCSI, but Firewire 800 seems to be cheaper.

[jacg]

Once you're used to Firewire, USB can seem slow. I want to be able to use a USB2 consumer digicam (most are going that way) and USB2 'pendrives' (new, very affordable models support USB2) at the increased speeds.

I know these wont transfer data as fast as similar Firewire-equiped devices, but on the other hand, they do exist. (AFAIK there are no FW consumer digicams and few FW 'pendrives')

If sticking with USB1 IS costcutting by Apple, it is short-sighted. If it is NOT costcutting, then someone needs a reality check.

[GPTurismo]

I think apple jumped the gun. and I personally feel Macs need USB2 and FW800. It's like how they jumpd the gun with DVD-R and many more PCs are going DVD+R :|

[ktlx]

Originally posted by bennetsaysargh
unless you have a digital camera with a really large anount of high sized files, usb2 will not matter. some people barely know where to plug in things to the computer, let alone care how fast thier usb is. it won't make a difference like fw800 will, but fw800 will take a little while longer to catch on.

That's kind of a strange argument. Unless you have an external RAID array, Firewire 800 won't make a difference over Firewire. Only the very fastest IDE drives can reach Firewire speeds and then only under special circumstances. It seems like the same argument used to poo-poo USB 2.0 can easily be used to poo-poo Firewire 800.

Since USB 2.0 is basically free to the non-Mac community, it has considerably more return to the user than Firewire 800 does. It may only speed up the file transfer from CF cards or from a scanner by two or three times but it is virtually free. A USB 2.0 card reader is the same price as a USB 1.1 and USB 2.0 has been coming on new PCs for quite a while. Changing the interface on cameras and scanners to USB 2.0 from USB 1.1 did not seem to increase their price either.

In my mind that is where Apple screwed its customers. It has recently introduced new versions of its complete product line except for the iBook. Adding USB 2.0 to these would have been virtually free because of the chipset compatibility. Instead Apple chose to treat its customers like second-class citizens and choose not to embrace an industry standard. Apple ignoring USB 2.0 does nothing except hurt its own customers. It will not slow adoption in the least.

[bennetsaysargh]

although i have no use for it, usb2 should be put in macs now that fw 800 has been implemented.

[ldjessee]

Hello,

Just wanted to make some things clear about some research that Apple started in the late 80's to come up with an improved data transfer standard (over SCSI).

The reason it is called Firewire is because the connectors were observed to have 'thermal noise' during use.

Apple offered up Firewire to the IEEE standards body. They accepted it in 1995, giving it standard # 1394. That is why it is sometimes referred to as IEEE-1394 or as 1394-1995. This standard was capable of 100 Mbits/sec through put.

IEEE-1394a was an improvement to the standard and pushed the max datarate upto 400 Mbits/sec. IEEE-1394b (which was offered in 2001 and approved by 2002) raised not only the data rate, but offered some new cabling options.

1394b is backward compatible on original cabling (which makes it easy for hubs and adapters to go from the new cabling to the old with nothing other than a physical connector change). On new cabling, it allows for up to 800 Mbits/sec. On fibre cabling (ie, optical) it will go upto a maximum throughput of 3200Mbits/sec.

Due to these different cabling formats, and the speed, some networking magazines did speculative articles on how you could use 1394b (optical) as a backbone for a network.

This all went away when several companies showed 10gigabit ethernet products.

I prefer Firewire/1394 for anything that is moving any amount of data.

As the megapixels increase in camera's, going to firewire makes alot more sense.

Now, I have a wacked out opinion. Intel (and some others) pushed the idea of USB. It would be great for alot of low speed devices (keyboards, mice, etc). Intel had a VERY diffucult time pushing this. Most manufacturers were happy with PS2 (not the game consol).

Then, Apple included USB in all of their new macs. Alot of companies that made hardware for the Macs started making products. Some of these companies also made products for PCs, and so they started releasing PC versions. Do you think that it really upset the team at Intel that had worked so hard trying to get companies to accept this standard, got nothing be resistance, then along comes Apple, and witin 6 months, you have a wide range of USB devices?

There was originally talk of including 1394 into the Intel chipsets...never seemed to happen.

But, the biggest backing for 1394 is not computers, though that has helped with its success, but it was the camcorder industry picking 1394 as its way of transfering digital video around that really gave 1394 its biggest initial boost.

Add DV's wild success (even TV stations and movie producers are using them) to the need to have this, and it only made sense to make external harddrives, then CD/DVD burners, etc.

Hitachi if claimed it was going to include 1394 on all of its HD TV sets (I do not know if this ever came to pass). 1394 was even selected as the interconnect standard by the automotive industry.

It is a very robust standard, that didnt oversell itself on its capabilities. It said it could do 100 Mbits/sec, and it did very close (as they had already taken into account some of the overhead).

Anyway, that is my very long winded approach of trying to clear up what Firewire/1394 is.

[ldjessee]

Hello,

Why typing my long post, several others were made.

I view some of the arguements of 1394 vs USB2 the same way I see Ford vs Chevy (or any two car companies) arguement. Someone will like one, someone will like the other.

I agree that Apple should start including USB2 on the Macs, but I am not sure what the advantage would be.

Most USB2 devices I have seen are external harddrives, CD/DVD burners, and 1 scanner (which for the harddrives and CD/DVD burners, most are both 1394 and USB2. or they are offered in a 1394 version, which is already built into the current models). The rest say USB2 compatible, which means they are USB1.1 that does not block or hamper USB2 signal.

It is my opinion also that in the next year, Apple will be including USB2.

[rog]

Why do I want USB 2? Because already many peripherals make use of it. When I was looking for scanners, there were many that use USB 2, but only 1.1 if used on a Mac. So there is a massive penalty speedwise. Yes, I could get a firewire scanner, but they cost more and the selection is limited. Yes, I could have bought a PCI card, but then OSX seems to have lots of issues with various PCI cards, I'd have to keep the drivers updated over time, and worry about lost stability. So give me USB 2. Jeez, it's not like by Apple not making it available it's slowing down the dominance of USB2. With 3% market share it makes no difference at all in the marketplace, and just makes apple seem irellevant. So a PC users with USB2 devices contemplates swtiching, sees that they can't use any of their USB2 peripherals, and they say forget it. It's just bad business sense and Apple needs to get with the program!

[jayscheuerle]

Just get a card at CompUSA for $5.

here. (http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code=50204323&pfp=BROWSE)

Interesting specs...

For MAC Users
Mac G3 required
OS 8.6 to 9.2 (USB 1.1 support only)
OS X 10.3 or greater (USB 2.0 support)
Available PCI slot

[redAPPLE]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob


Sorry, but I suck with network ****, I can't even get my Jaguar system hooked up to my fiancee's XP system, and they're hooked up through a hub for DSL. I have to email her photos and graphics (LAME).

as far as i know, you would need a router to connect.

[chabig]

OK, I'll bite: what's the diff between MHz and Mhz?

There is no real difference, except that MHz is correct and Mhz is not. The proper abbreviation for Hertz is Hz, so a million of them would be M (mega) + Hz = MHz.

Chris

[ldjessee]

Hello,

Just for those who want Artistic accessories for their Mac:

www.all4dvd.com

Each drive will come with unique, original artwork.

Models include a protable, a desktop harddrive (in Firewire800), and a DVD burner.

I am not trying to advertise for them, just thought some here might be interested.

[Topsnack]

usb2 will become ubiquitous because it is being pushed on pc's by intel. and all of intel's technology is superior to everything else, as we all know. its just the cheaper solution not the best one a common problem with pc's.

[rickvanr]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
Just get a card at CompUSA for $5.

here. (http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code=50204323&pfp=BROWSE)

Interesting specs...

For MAC Users
Mac G3 required
OS 8.6 to 9.2 (USB 1.1 support only)
OS X 10.3 or greater (USB 2.0 support)
Available PCI slot


its says "x.0.3" not x.3.... but then at the bottom it says 10.3... odd... wonder which one is the typo

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by redAPPLE
as far as i know, you would need a router to connect.

Sorry, it is a router. Now you know I suck!

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by heal

- As far as I am aware, USB2 is only as fast as the slowest device plugged into it. Plug a usb?1? device such as a mouse inot the chain and the performance plumments to 12Mb ( 1 and a bit MBytes/s)


This is incorrect.

[Edit: Here's documentation that this is untrue ... note that the 2.0-only and 1.1/2.0 mix drive-read speeds are virtually identical, and that both are dramatically faster than USB 1.1-connected speeds

http://www.macopinion.com/columns/macskeptic/02/02/08/
]


While it is (of course) true that if you plug a 1.1 device into a 2.0 port it will only transmit as fast as USB 1.1, USB 2.0 hubs (which are required for plugging multiple devices into a single bus) can and should (according to the spec and to informal testing) allow 1.1-based devices and 2.0-based devices to be plugged in and operating simultaneously, without the 2.0 device being "slowed down" to 1.1 levels. In reality the 2.0 device will slow down slightly, but that is because some of its bandwidth is being used up by the 1.1 peripheral, and it will still operate much faster than USB 1.1 (39x faster instead of 40x faster).

The "problem" here is that devices that allow "chaining" (like the Mac keyboards and monitor) are really, at the system level, USB hubs. And, of course, all of them to date on the Mac side are USB 1.1 hubs. So, if you plug a USB 2.0 device into the "keyboard-mounted USB port" and the keyboard into the USB 2.0 port you've added to your Mac (either via this risky device driver fix or via a legit add-in PCI or PCMCIA card), your USB 2.0 device will be operating at 1.1 levels. Not because there is a USB 1.1 (more likely 1.0 ... USB 1.1 is really overkill for a keyboard) device on the "chain" (the keyboard), but because between your peripheral and the host controller there sits a USB 1.1 hub (inside the keyboard).

Of course, were Apple to ship USB 2.0-equipped Macs I'd strongly suspect that along with them they'd ship USB 2.0-hubbed keyboards and monitors to avoid the confusion, but you'd doubtless hear from people who plugged in their old keyboards/monitors and are shocked to see that their USB isn't any facter than before!

USB 2.0 has a lot of faults for some applications (mostly centered around its high CPU overhead and latency issues), but the degradation to USB 1.1 is actually quite well implemented.

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
My limited understanding is that USB uses your computer's processor to processinformation, while Firewire has its own built-in chipset.

That's why Firewire's more expensive and why in situations where a steady stream is necessary (video work) it is the preferred choice... - j

This is true. USB requires more CPU-level processing of data, and is thus less reliable for high-bandwidth "streaming" operations. Of course, USB has its own "built-in chipset" too, but the USB architecture requires an OS driver to interpret USB signals as they come in, while the FireWire chipset handles basic IO all by itself.

This is, BTW, why you see a bit more push towards USB 2.0 on the marketplace:

1) It "looks" faster than FireWire (480Mbps vs 400Mbps), and in reality is "close enough" most of the time.

2) The device-side chips are cheaper because more processing is done on the host (computer) side. Saving $0.10 per device might not seem like a lot (heck, i for one would gladly pay a buck or two more for a Firewire port instead of USB 2.0!), but it adds up over millions of units ...

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
Just get a card at CompUSA for $5.

here. (http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code=50204323&pfp=BROWSE)

Interesting specs...

For MAC Users
Mac G3 required
OS 8.6 to 9.2 (USB 1.1 support only)
OS X 10.3 or greater (USB 2.0 support)
Available PCI slot

Note that "x.0.3" is in the manufacturer-supplied blurb area, and "10.3" is in the CompUSA-supplied summary area. The manufacturer-supplied blurb is always more reliable, as the summary is based off the blurb and nothing else.

OS X has had USB 2.0 support for quite some time. Add-in PCI cards like those linked to above have been available practically since USB 2.0 debuted. Thus, OS-level support of USB 2 is hardly nes at all. The only news would be OS-level support of USB 2.0 on the motherboard, and/or USB 2.0 support on the motherboard (the latter is what we have here).

[MacArtist]

First off, to the poster who says he is a photographer and says that he has no use for FireWire:
All of the professional digital cameras are using FireWire(IEEE-1394) not USB 2. check out the Canon EOS 1-D, 1-Ds, and the Nikon D1x and D1h. Their other pro level camers, the Canon 10D and Nikon D100 are using USB 1.1.
As for printers and scanners, Epson's top of the line consumer level printers and scanners are using FireWire with a couple of the mid-range using USB 2.
While some of the mid range digital cameras are starting to use USB 2, most people will not ever see a benefit over USB 1.1 because they are the ones touting USB 2 as cheaper and thus will also buy the the slower, less expensive flash memory, thus defeating the point of having USB 2 in their camera.

It would be great if Apple were to equip Macs with USB 2 because it would ease some of the transitions of switchers who are pro USB 2 and wouldn't hurt FireWire in any way.

As many have pointed out, FireWire is a faster IO protocol than USB 2 in real world tests, and thus will always be used for very large sustained transfer needs. And this isn't just limited to hard drives, optical drives and video cameras, but also includes pro digital still cameras, large format printers and scanners.

And to the person who mentioned that Apple jumped the gun with DVD-R while so many PCs are using DVD+R:
The DVD-R format was designed by Pioneer and approved by the DVD Forum, the same group that sets the standard for commersial DVD-video. DVD+R was designed by several PC manufacturers who wanted to jump on the DVD burning bandwagon but wanted to make money on the venture as opposed to having to pay the royalties to use DVD-R.

[ktlx]

Originally posted by MacArtist
First off, to the poster who says he is a photographer and says that he has no use for FireWire:
All of the professional digital cameras are using FireWire(IEEE-1394) not USB 2. check out the Canon EOS 1-D, 1-Ds, and the Nikon D1x and D1h. Their other pro level camers, the Canon 10D and Nikon D100 are using USB 1.1.

I am the person you reference and I have a Canon EOS-1D. I do not use the camera's Firewire interface because it is faster to pull the CF card out of the camera and use my USB 2.0 card reader. I cannot tell you why this is true, but I am not the only one to observe this. Apparently it is even true for the Nikon cameras because the person who recommended this owns a Nikon D1x.

I have seen several other people recommend doing this at www.dpreview.com but I don't know which cameras they have.

So for me (and at leave several other people I have seen), a Firewire interface is of no use. When I come home and transfer over a 100 images to my computer, my USB 2.0 CF card reader does the job considerably faster than my camera's Firewire interface. Why that is true is probably a question for a Canon engineer.

[mangoman]

Originally posted by bennetsaysargh
unless you have a digital camera with a really large anount of high sized files, usb2 will not matter.

...exactly why I bought the Orange board and USB2 media reader.

[ktlx]

Originally posted by MacArtist
As many have pointed out, FireWire is a faster IO protocol than USB 2 in real world tests, and thus will always be used for very large sustained transfer needs. And this isn't just limited to hard drives, optical drives and video cameras, but also includes pro digital still cameras, large format printers and scanners.

That is not true for optical drives and mini-DV video cameras. There is plenty of bandwidth headroom with both USB 2.0 and Firewire.

This is only true for cameras that do not need to write everything to flash and can operate in tethered mode. Otherwise, even the fastest CF cards still have speeds low enough that both USB 2.0 and Firewire provide way more than enough bandwidth.

Digital backs for medium format cameras will probably stick with Firewire because they have huge files and can operate in tethered mode. They would benefit from a Firewire interface and at $10K a piece (or more), you are not worried about the computer interface cost. :D

[Bear]

Originally posted by mangoman
...exactly why I bought the Orange board and USB2 media reader.
I bough a firewire reader, why bother having to add extra hardware? And it works with my Powerbook as well.

Also, for people who don't have Powermacs, the firewire reader is the best choice.

[Bear]

Originally posted by ktlx
I am the person you reference and I have a Canon EOS-1D. I do not use the camera's Firewire interface because it is faster to pull the CF card out of the camera and use my USB 2.0 card reader. I cannot tell you why this is true, but I am not the only one to observe this. Apparently it is even true for the Nikon cameras because the person who recommended this owns a Nikon D1x.
...
Why is using a USB 2.0 or Firwire card reader faster? The answer is actually rather simple. some (all?) of the cameras slow down the transfer rate due to what the camera can handle for the transfer rate.

As noted previously (and elsewhere) I use a firewire based card reader which works on all firewire equipped Macs, as opposed to a USB 2 reader which only works on Powermacs where you can install a USB 2 card.

[chickengrease16]

regarding the comment about why apple doesn't go ahead and announce usb 2.0...

i'm a slashdotter, like many of you are, and i saw in one of the comments that a pretty good reason might be that they have a whole bunch of usb 1.1 stuff in stock (motherboards, or maybe whole systems), and want to completely get rid of that before they announce that their powermacs have usb 2.0... sounds like a reasonable explanation to me...

but about the firewire 800... i'm waiting to get a 15" powerbook until they update the 15-inchers to include firewire 800 and airport extreme, as well as the DDR memory and ATA100 hd interface. the 12" is too small, and the 17" is too pricey... i've fallen in love with the 15" but it doesnt have those new features like the others do! do any of you know when they will add firewire 800 and that other stuff to the 15"?

[meateater]

i figured since i had the newest biggest badboy tower id be ok!!!! NOT!!!!!!after downloading the usb2 driver i went to restart and all i got was the grey screen and apple with a black block in the center!!!! it would not do anything past that point!!!! luckily right at startup the keyboard would let me eject the disc tray and i was able to put in the restore disk. i had to reload my software and put the old inside a folder. when i have time ill probably burn all my stuff and do a clean install on the hard drive. DUMB, DUMB AND DUMBER!!!!!!

[tazo]

lol :rolleyes: dude the guy said only the 1.25 would work like 10 times:D

[meateater]

this is the insert for the article ( it appears that the drivers for the USB 2.0 chipset in the MDD 1.25 and 1.42 Ghz are updated and confirmed that they do work. ) isnt the mother board in both computers the same????

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by meateater
this is the insert for the article ( it appears that the drivers for the USB 2.0 chipset in the MDD 1.25 and 1.42 Ghz are updated and confirmed that they do work. ) isnt the mother board in both computers the same????

Yes it's the same but from the results I have seen it doesn't matter. What I mean by that is it appears that with seemingly identical machines one will work with the drivers and the othere will not. It doesn't matter 1.25 or 1.42 it just seems to be quirks differing from computer to computer.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by meateater
i figured since i had the newest biggest badboy tower id be ok!!!! NOT!!!!!!after downloading the usb2 driver i went to restart and all i got was the grey screen and apple with a black block in the center!!!! it would not do anything past that point!!!! luckily right at startup the keyboard would let me eject the disc tray and i was able to put in the restore disk. i had to reload my software and put the old inside a folder. when i have time ill probably burn all my stuff and do a clean install on the hard drive. DUMB, DUMB AND DUMBER!!!!!!

The archive and install does install a completely clean system from what I know. I would not worry about reformating the drive though backing up is never a bad idea. Unless you have a hard drive corruption problem there is rarely a need to reformat in OSX.

[meateater]

my os still works fine but the previous system folder takes up about 1 gig of hard drive space.i still have 104gigs available so i probably wont reformat. the usb2 driver seems to be completely disabled. by the way, nice icon macbandit :D

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by meateater
my os still works fine but the previous system folder takes up about 1 gig of hard drive space.i still have 104gigs available so i probably wont reformat. the usb2 driver seems to be completely disabled. by the way, nice icon macbandit :D

You can delete your previous system now. Oh and thanks about the tar.

[jacg]

Well I've scoured the web thoroughly and I can't find a Firewire SD memory card reader. There are many USB2 options for much faster transfers, but like owners of all non-USB2 macs, I won't be able to benefit from them.

Any chance of a FW-to-USB2 cable?

[firestarter]

Originally posted by jacg
Well I've scoured the web thoroughly and I can't find a Firewire SD memory card reader. There are many USB2 options for much faster transfers, but like owners of all non-USB2 macs, I won't be able to benefit from them.

Any chance of a FW-to-USB2 cable?

I have an SD to CompactFlash adapter... The SD card actually slots into the side of a CF card, and you can then use it wherever you would use a compactflash.

Not sure how fast it is - but it seems OK. I don't recognise the brand - bought it in Hiroshima for about $30 US

[jacg]

Thanks for the tip firestarter.

[bennetsaysargh]

there are rumors regarding the iPod and a possible usb2 to fw cable. i cant remember from where though.

[iJon]

Originally posted by bennetsaysargh
there are rumors regarding the iPod and a possible usb2 to fw cable. i cant remember from where though.
i would bet it would the other way around. it would be firewire to usb2.

iJon

[bennetsaysargh]

that's what i meant. thanks for correcting me =D

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by jacg
Well I've scoured the web thoroughly and I can't find a Firewire SD memory card reader. There are many USB2 options for much faster transfers, but like owners of all non-USB2 macs, I won't be able to benefit from them.

Any chance of a FW-to-USB2 cable?

Are these what you were looking for.

http://www.addonics.com/products/flash_memory_reader/firewire_mini_digidrive.asp


http://www.amtron.com/reader/external.htm

[gopher]

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

Nuf said.

[BaghdadBob]

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

Nuf said.

It makes me so proud! Our own little FireWire makes it's big television debut! And on Paul Allen's network even! :)

Anyone notice that this particular link is in the "Supergeek" subdirectory of the ScreenSavers dir.?

[bennetsaysargh]

i think we're classified as supergeeks because we are the only ones who care :-P

[jacg]

Originally posted by MacBandit
Are these what you were looking for.

http://www.addonics.com/products/flash_memory_reader/firewire_mini_digidrive.asp


http://www.amtron.com/reader/external.htm

Thanks MacBandit. Now to see if I can get these in the UK.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by jacg
Thanks MacBandit. Now to see if I can get these in the UK.

Damn if I had known I would have given you some UK addresses there happened to be some when I was searching but I don't know where they are without redoing the search. Just do a google search for Firewire Media Reader or Firewire Flash Reader.

[aasmund]

Originally posted by Sol
Good point. I think this feature of USB 2.0 is the most likely reason why Apple does not support it. Since USB 2.0 ports look exactly the same as USB 1.1 it is highly likely that most people would connect their external hard-drives, cameras, etc into the same bus as something like the mouse and keyboard which are USB 1.1 devices. This would slow down all devices to 12 Mbs and create nothing but confusion. On the other hand, having all the fast devices plugged into FireWire and all the slow devices into USB 1.1 keeps things simple and efficient.

This is only true for hubs. And newer hubs will probably not have the problem. if yuou connect a hard drive and a mouse (which actually runs at 1.5 mbps) directly to your coputer they will all run at their maximum speed.