Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 17th Nov 2008 19:18 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 337479
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by Macrat
by poundsmack on Mon 17th Nov 2008 22:40
in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Macrat"
RE[3]: Comment by Macrat
by Delgarde on Tue 18th Nov 2008 00:54
in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Macrat"
Not when USB isn't a real bus and wastes CPU, is horrendously inefficient and can't do half of what FireWire can. USB will always be second fiddle, quality wise, when we have FireWire and eSATA.
And yet there are many, many, more storage devices using USB than Firewire and eSATA combined. It might not be ideal (I use an eSATA external disk myself), but it's cheap, and it works well enough for most people.
RE[3]: Comment by Macrat
by StaubSaugerNZ on Tue 18th Nov 2008 19:37
in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Macrat"
Not when USB isn't a real bus and wastes CPU, is horrendously inefficient and can't do half of what FireWire can. USB will always be second fiddle, quality wise, when we have FireWire and eSATA.
True. USB consumes noticeably more CPU and requires a host computer (FireWire can communicate without a host). FireWire also has modes that USB does not. This makes FireWire more suited for real-time applications.
Note also that FireWire is an IEEE standard (IEEE1394, with various sub-versions). It is also a US military standard which has led FireWire to be used on the F-22 and F-35 fighters. IIRC, NASA also uses FireWire in equipment on the Space Shuttle. USB is an 'industry standard' maintained by a consortium of interests, which is why there are some dodgy implementations out there (and why it was possible for some USB 1.1 devices to be labelled "USB2" when they were not).
USB is far better than the mess of connectors that came before but technically it is not as good as FireWire, so don't believe the marketing bullsh!t. It was principally designed to be a "poor man's FireWire" mostly so that Intel and Microsoft wouldn't have to pay royalties to Apple for all the devices they envisaged.




Member since:
2005-11-10
Not when USB isn't a real bus and wastes CPU, is horrendously inefficient and can't do half of what FireWire can. USB will always be second fiddle, quality wise, when we have FireWire and eSATA.