I'm thinking the same way!
With all this HD stuff and all, it's time for a big leap. Optical technology can do that. (and it's probably more energy efficient)
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
First 3rd Party Mac USB 3.0 Interface Benchmarked
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm thinking the same way!
With all this HD stuff and all, it's time for a big leap. Optical technology can do that. (and it's probably more energy efficient)
Compare using what? Is newer FW even shipping? Somebody dropped the ball. Actually making it to market counts for something too.
USB 3 is very new, but there's more out there than that. Newegg shows 67 USB 3 enclosures under something like 25 different brands. They have maybe 5 brands of USB controllers too, a few brands have more than one controller available.
mdriftmeyer said:
If Apple had put in expresscard slots in all macs then you could simply buy a card when you needed the interface. Apple wants you to buy a new machine when it thinks it's time for you to change and the new machine may not have that legacy interface you need, btw.
there is still one major problem with USB
* USB networks use a tiered-star topology, while FireWire networks use a tree topology.
* USB 1.0, 1.1 and 2.0 use a "speak-when-spoken-to" protocol;
peripherals cannot communicate with the host unless the host specifically requests communication. A FireWire device can communicate with any other node at any time, subject to network conditions.
* A USB network relies on a single host at the top of the tree to control the network. In a FireWire network, any capable node can control the network.
that's why in real world tests, you get half the speed with USB 2.0 in application like Final Cut Pro ... even thou it's faster on paper (480Mbps) over FW400
* USB networks use a tiered-star topology, while FireWire networks use a tree topology.
* USB 1.0, 1.1 and 2.0 use a "speak-when-spoken-to" protocol;
peripherals cannot communicate with the host unless the host specifically requests communication. A FireWire device can communicate with any other node at any time, subject to network conditions.
* A USB network relies on a single host at the top of the tree to control the network. In a FireWire network, any capable node can control the network.
that's why in real world tests, you get half the speed with USB 2.0 in application like Final Cut Pro ... even thou it's faster on paper (480Mbps) over FW400
Does anyone know what USB 3.0 chipsets the drivers support? I have a motherboard with the NEC D720200F1 USB 3.0 chipset and it would be great if I could use USB 3.0 on the Mac side.
Well, I hope Apple gets their crap together soon because I'm not upgrading my Macs until the new machines have USB 3.
Actually you are right...I meant not to include the word "very"...but yes, a high percentage of desktops/laptops include USB 3.0.
Considering there are crappy machines selling for as little as $399 I certainly wouldn't include those...nor netbooks. But many $600+ desktops and $900+ laptops include USB 3.0.
I agree USB 3.0 is not mainstream yet...but the drives are already piling up...I am hoping digital cameras become USB 3.0 compliant soon.
Yes, Intel seems to be dragging their feet in support as they are looking at other options. Too bad Intel controls so much progress. USB 3.0 is long overdue.
-Eric
While I would love for FW3200 or LightPeak to take over I am sick of USB 2.0 and FW800 drives are always more expensive to buy. I just want something faster without much additional cost as USB2 is slow as hell now a days.
Ok. And?
USB easily dominates (and has since when?...1997?) over FW for consumers. If folks are gonna use FCP or other memory and I/O intensive apps, it's going to be on local SATA or similarly fast drives...not USB 2.0...and I doubt even FW.Do you have evidence that FW3200 will ever see the light of day? There are so few FW800 vendors right now that it's obvious to me that the FW market is functionally on its last legs. Most PCs don't even have FW ports.
That's predictable given Apple has decided to not ship FW1600 or FW3200 in favor of waiting another 1-3 years for Lightpeak (by which time USB 3.0 will 100% ingrained). Plus it has backwards compatibility going for it whereas some genius managed to think that changing the interface plug design (more in the shape than the connection, really) for FW800 compared to FW400 was a great idea. It's non-incentives like that which helped kill Firewire for the masses. Having to use adapters to plug something in sucks.
Apple doesn't care what people want. Get used to it. They do what Steve wants. Period.
The good news here, however is that my September era 2008 MBP can easily be upgraded to full USB 3.0 with this Caldigit Express Card ( http://www.caldigit.com/avdrive/Card_laptop.html ) whereas all of you that have newer "SD" slot MBP models are just plain SOL. How great is that stupid SD reader now???
But then I also have a true matte screen, replaceable battery, two FW ports and other "Pro" features that the newer "Consumer Pro" models totally lack because they're not actually "Pro" AT ALL.
Yeah, like I want to pay up the wazoo for some tiny SSD drive when I can get a 500GB 7200 RPM drive for $40. I'm getting 110MB/sec sustained transfers for my $40 too and it's dead quiet. People who think they "need" SSD probably think they "need" an 8-core Mac Pro with 22GB of ram just to do Ping on iTunes. Meanwhile, my Hitachi is working great with Logic Pro here.
Yeah, like I want to pay up the wazoo for some tiny SSD drive when I can get a 500GB 7200 RPM drive for $40. I'm getting 110MB/sec sustained transfers for my $40 too and it's dead quiet. People who think they "need" SSD probably think they "need" an 8-core Mac Pro with 22GB of ram just to do Ping on iTunes. Meanwhile, my Hitachi is working great with Logic Pro here.
1)Not sure where you are getting $40 7200RPM drives...laptop drives? Not at $40. Desktop drives? Not at $40. $60 and up for anything decent but please don't state these things are all over the world for so cheap.
2)Yes, SATA drives are pretty much just fine for most consumers
3)What's really hindering personal computer performance (and has been for over a decade) is hard drive I/O. Period. CPUs are far faster than even enthusiasts can push. RAM is (and has been for 15+ years) dirt cheap...and RAM plateaus very quickly as a source to improve "speed". SSDs are night and day performance improvements. Sure, a 128GB is $200 these days (for a 2.5" drive)...and a 64GB is $100....but plop one in as your main drive and watch your OS and daily apps fly. Grab a 2nd drive and use it for high end apps/tools like Photoshop, movie authoring, rendering, etc. and you'll wish you bought one months earlier.
Not everyone needs the latest and greatest...but hard drive I/O is really the final bottleneck to break.
What did Apple do to cripple the express card slot?
I use the last 15" that had an express card slot and I bought this refurbished just for that specific reason. I figure eventually I'll have to suck it up and get a 17" if I want my express card slot.
Yawn...
That's a tired old argument, Firewire has plenty of legs left (mainly in audio and video though), just not in the consumer markets it seems.
As for FW800 never reaching the same level that FW400 gained, I honestly think that's because apple did their old trick of using it to differentiate between their "consumer" and "Pro" models for years, much like they did with GigaBit ethernet, and currently with dedicated GPUs. If they'd included FW800 on all models after it was released it would have seen a heavier uptake (and if they'd have eased on their licensing shenanigans).
On a side note I'd like to see how heavily USB3 uses the CPU, as it's commonly known that FW has always been easier on clock cycles in comparison to USB.
Link or it didn't happen
But seriously, even a pair of the cheapest SSDs would cost £120 in the UK, and an AMD hexacore is about £150, so I'd be impressed if you could verify this.
Although it could just be our VAT
Firewire 3200 might theoretically be slower than usb 3.0, but in actuality, it might be faster than usb 3.0. The theoretical speeds are always exaggerated.
Its intels fault that they didn't want to push out any of their chipsets supporting usb 3.0. Apple doesn't really like to use Nvidia or other 3rd party chipsets. We'll have to wait until 2012 i guess, but until then we'll get lightpeak?
You can blame intel I guess, but you could also argue that apple are just being lazy cheapskates, after all the recent Gigabyte socket 1366 Mobos run on the intel chipsets, and they've added USB3, and SATA3 controllers to the motherboards themselves, so it wouldn't be too much to ask for apple to consider doing the same.