Firewire definitely faster than USB 2.0

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by gopher, Dec 5, 2002.

  1. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
  2. macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #2
    I thought everyone knew this anyway!! :p

    USB 2.0, makes your mouse go like the clappers!! heh heh!! :D
     
  3. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    #3
    Everyone except those who claim the iPod is too expensive.
     
  4. macrumors 68000

    pgwalsh

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, Colorado
    #4
    Re: Firewire definitely faster than USB 2.0

    Good article. What that article doesn't take into account is the home networking aspect of FireWire. If A/V receivers, TV's, Stereo's and other equipment start using FireWire the effect will reverse over time - IMO. Maybe when FireWire 2 comes out they'll take notice.
     
  5. macrumors 65816

    Nipsy

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2002
    #5
    Re: Re: Firewire definitely faster than USB 2.0

    However, it make more sense for these sorts of devices to communicate via ethernet.

    New homes are bing wired for ethernet like the homes in the 20s were wired for telephones.

    If I have an ethernet jack in every room, I can do something good (stream MP3 to the living room stereo, etc.), but running firewire in this way means you have a contractor retro fit it or deal with ugly surface cables, etc.

    Add the cost Firewire cable over cat 5e or cat 6, and the distance limitations, and it is not a practical home networking solution.
     
  6. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    #6
    Maybe Firewire 2 will be a beefed up gigabit ethernet?

    Added drivers to allow target disk mode over ethernet? Maybe that's why Apple has released developer driver tools for IP over Firewire. Makes me wonder! Cut down the number of ports you need on a Mac, and you have room for Bluetooth or USB 2 without enlarging the case as much on a Powerbook or iBook.

    Call it an educated guess :cool:
     
  7. macrumors demi-god

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #7
    Re: Re: Re: Firewire definitely faster than USB 2.0

    I could see Firewire catching on before ethernet just because FW is already setting itself up to be the replacement for analog i/o's. FW and DV are establishing themselves in the pro/semi-pro market, and more and more equipment is being built w/FW. And when FW 2 comes out the added bandwidth will be able to handle everything but the most hi-end A/V bandwidth. Pro's want an all digital environment and it's only a matter of time before this tech filters down to consumers. Image having a TV w/FW. No more super cable clutter, everything is connected w/Firewire.


    Lethal
     
  8. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Jose
    #8
    ok

    I think this is just a repeat of what is in the Firewire 2 thread, if ya wanna see my opinion please read my posts

    (just because it was on the screensavers don't make it right, leo and patrick are constantly wrong. Maybe not on this topic but in general)

    PowerMac G4 1ghz
     
  9. Gus
    macrumors 65816

    Gus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Location:
    Minnesota
  10. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Jose
    #10
    Ok

    Thanks, but i am serious when i saw that my opinions on this subject can be found in that thread.

    sorry this post is so off topic, i am hoping to avoid the famous short newbie posts er yeah.

    PowerBook G4 1ghz
     
  11. macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #11
    Re: Re: Re: Re: Firewire definitely faster than USB 2.0

    How can Firewire catch on when Ethernet has already caught on. It is a past tense statement that a lot of new homes are being wired with ethernet already in them. I know this for a fact and have been in a few of them in the last couple years.

    Also talking about high end audio. Integra has released there new networking ready receiver the DTR-8.3. It uses ethernet.

    Check it out in this photo it's in the middle slightly to the right of center.
     

    Attached Files:

  12. Moderator emeritus

    Rower_CPU

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #12
    Re: ok

    Why don't you post them here? Or at least provide a link?

    What do you find incorrect/suspect about the test method they used to determine that Firewire is faster than USB 2.0?

    Just because you say so, doesn't make the Screensavers wrong. ;) Provide some backup for your statements, please.
     
  13. macrumors 603

    shadowfax

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #13
    Re: Firewire definitely faster than USB 2.0

    Wow, i had no idea they were already running that. do they actually have like drivers for that and stuff--like, so you can shut the thing off from your computer or adjust the volume? i thought that was funny when lethalwolfe mentioned he thought FW would "catch on" first. i just went to best buy to look for FW cable and it is PRICY. wow. Cat5 is faster (can you run GB eth over cat5? i dunno, but even at 100baseTX it has more bandwidth than, or at least as much as 800Mbps). couple that with, as has been mentioned, cat5 is ubiquitous in almost all new "higher end" houses. why would anyone ever even think of networking with any instance of firewire? it's like networking your house with SCSI or Serial IDE. what's the point? the only really big difference i see between FW and ethernet is that it allows bus-powering and is not at all established as an appliance networking solution. and while bus ppowering is nothing shrort of sweet for camcorders and ipods, i don't see how this would help you with your TV or your stereo... or your refrigerator for that matter, LOL. Rendezvous, i believe, is focused on networking. like, over the ethernet networking. i think it is a pretty good guess ethernet is where we are going there. i mean,. wow. switching from gigabit ethernet to "gigabit FW2," assuming such a thing comes out... that would be like buying a Ford Mustang when you already have a camaro of the same year. and when everyone is doing this, it's not like you can get rid of your mustang. that's not even remotely practical.

    wow, i'm on a tangent. but i haven't posted for like a week, so you have to put up with me. sorry.
     
  14. macrumors 65816

    whocares

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Location:
    :noitаɔo˩
    #14
    Re: Re: Firewire definitely faster than USB 2.0

    How's that? It thaught 100base TX was 100Mbps? (thus 8x slower than FW2..)
     
  15. Moderator emeritus

    Rower_CPU

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #15
    Gigabit uses Cat6 or fiber optic cable, as far as I know...

    So Cat5 is not faster than current Firewire or Firewire2.
     
  16. macrumors 65816

    benixau

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #16
    Cat 5e supports GB ethernet. I know, my house is networked with the stuff and i have two new pmacs and they talk at giga speeds.
     
  17. macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #17
    Re: Re: Firewire definitely faster than USB 2.0

    I haven't really researched it yet. I think it just lets you stream music to it. Though they do have ports as on my DTR-7.2 that let you connect any room remote receivers and the receiver has A-Bus which allows it to function as a mulitroom stereo in as many as 5 rooms I think all while controlling screen motors lights etc..
     
  18. macrumors 603

    shadowfax

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #18
    Re: Re: Re: Firewire definitely faster than USB 2.0

    oh, hell, it's 100Mbps, i thought it was MBps. that would explain gigabit eth, lol. wasn't putting 2 and 2 together i guess. either way, GB ethernet and even the 8x slower 100baseTX still seem better home appliance networking solutions, seeing how they are already home networking solutions. sorry for the misinformation.
     
  19. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Jose
    #19
    ok

    Hey Rower_CPU, I didn't back up my claims because i had no real proof of it's accuracy j/k, sorry bout that i was a bit lazy and wanted to express my thoughts w/ out having to do the typing again. The main problem I had w/ the test form SS was that they were using a very slow Peecee 1.1 ghz o something like that. This makes it very hard to determine the correct answer to the question of which is faster. I think that when you have a lower clocked CPU it dosen't perform as well a it could if it didn't require a large portion of the processor attention. er i hope the terminology i used was correct what as i have said er posted 2 other times previous to this if ya wanna see my opinions w/ fact's go to the Fourm page. and yes i am not posting a link there you might have to do some clicking ;(


    POwerBook G4 1ghz
     

Share This Page