Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Firewire 2 Next?

Re: Re: how do we think these devices will be used

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
Click to expand...

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

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.
 
well

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
 
Re: how do we think these devices will be used

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?
Click to expand...
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.
 
"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.
 
FireWire2 and XRaid

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?
 
Re: FireWire2 and XRaid

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?
Click to expand...

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
 
Re: FireWire2 and XRaid

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?
Click to expand...

No - because XRaid uses FibreChannel for fast connectivity

(common misconception)

arn
 
bits v bytes

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.
 
The Simple Things

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
 
Re: well

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
Click to expand...

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.
 
Re: Re: well

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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
 
Re: well

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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Re: Re: well

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.
 
USB, USB2, FireWire, GigaWire

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.
 
arg

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
 
Re: arg

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
Click to expand...

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.
 
ok

"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
 
Re: ok

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
Click to expand...

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)
 
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
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back