USB 3

[Mystic]

For quite a while I have heard rumors of USB 3 coming out. Well, apparently it will be out pretty soon and the rumors are that USB 3 will be some 10 times faster than USB 2. If this is true than perhaps firewire, ethernet, and eSata will all become unnecessary on computers. The USB 3 is also supposed to be backware compatible with USB 1.1 and USB 2. So equipment using USB 1.1 and USB 2 can still be used.

On some of its new computers Apple is using only USB and not firewire and some think this is because of the upcoming USB 3.

Computers probably could be reduced in price if the USB 3 will make unnecessary other equipment such as firewire and ethernet and external hard drives using USB 3 would be incredibly fast.

 

[JHZR2]

I have to wonder about ethernet. That style of connection, and the wiring itself is ubiquitous. For everything else, I agree.

 

[OVERKILL]

Won't obsolete Ethernet. Ethernet will go 300ft. USB will not.

 

[PandaBear]

Right about ethernet. You can't route USB as easily as ethernet and the protocols are very universal. Most likely in the future we will see USB, DVI, audio out, and ethernet on the machine only.

Firewire (1394) fails because Apple was trying to charge $1 a port and everyone intentionally try to kill it because of the Apple's control.

USB is much cheaper and there is no one in the industry trying to force a royalty on the others. In about 5-10 years, firewire will die like zip drive and floppy.

 

[Mystic]

PandaBear I agree with you on what you have said. Firewire was more expensive, rightly or wrongly, and it was just natural for people to go to USB once USB had speeds roughly comparable to firewire. And with USB 3 apparently the speeds for USB will be much higher than firewire. The only two reasons for continuing to use firewire as far as I can see is perhaps firewire is superior for video transfer (what do you think OVERKILL?) and for compatibility with older devices that require firewire. Firewire was also nice I need to add for connecting two Apple computers.

I can remember when Apple seemed to be slow putting USB 2 on its computers (they kept using USB 1.1 for a while). Apparently they wanted everybody to use firewire. If they had made firewire more competitive with USB maybe firewire would have won.

But some of Apple's newest computers do not have firewire. My guess is they are looking at a USB future.

USB could replace ethernet to some extent with some modem/routers and there are some stories floating around that DVI is in trouble.

I am looking forware to the day when solid state hard drives are as cheap as the current mechanical hard drives because those solid state hard drives will probably be much more reliable. And I am looking forware to USB 3. You can already buy solid state hard drives but the drives need to come down in cost. I am also looking forward to Blu-Ray being commonplace and cheap. And maybe some technology like laser light being used to speed up communication in computers.

 

[OVERKILL]

USB and Firewire (IEEE1394) are both serial interfaces, just like SATA. Firewire holds no real benefits over USB 2.0, and USB 3.0 will likely make it extinct.

 

[Mystic]

Thanks for the answer OVERKILL. I was just wondering if there might be a future for firewire if firewire was superior for transmitting video. Someone once told me that firewire was superior in that area. I really liked firewire and there once was a time when it was much faster than the USB at the time. I can still remember hooking up two Apple computers using firewire.

As long as there is no superiority of firewire in transmitting video then firewire will probably be gone sometime after USB 3 has become available. Imagine how fast scanners and printers will be!

But firewire will still be superior in one area-the name! Who was the person who came up with the name 'firewire?'

 

[OVERKILL]

Somebody at Apple I believe.

Firewire's superiority in video transfer stems from the fact that many camcorders shipped with both IEEE1394 on them, as well as USB....1.1.

So Firewire was SUBSTANTIALLY faster, as well as being better supported in terms of software support (Adobe Premier and the like) because of it's use on Apple computers; which are commonly used for video editing.

As time has rolled on, this has changed.

 

[Cutehumor]

With windows 7 and USB 3 coming out. it maybe time for me to unload some pcs

 

[Mystic]

So there is no difference in how USB and firewire transmit data? I have heard that USB transmits in the form of packets of data and firewire has a smooth transfer.

According to various testing USB 2 (which is supposed to be faster than the orginial firewire now called Firewire 400) was not actually faster than firewire. But then Apple came out with Firewire 800 and was rumored to be developed Firewire 1200.

But USB 3, if actually 10 times faster than USB 2, will blow everything else out of the water in transfer speeds. Even the not released Firewire 1200 (supposed to be 3 times fatser than Firewire 400) would be slow in comparison. Of course, USB 3 may be more expensive than previous USB.

 

[Mystic]

Before you sell your computers Cutehumor remember that you can just upgrade to Windows 7 and that USB 3 will be backward compatible with USB 1.1 and USB 3. And perhaps it would be possible to add a USB 3 card to a computer.

You will still be able to use your USB equipment. And USB 3 has not be released yet, but I think it is now very close.

 

[OVERKILL]

USB 1.0 (1996) was 12Mbit/second in "full speed" mode; 1.5Mbit defined as "Low speed".

USB 1.1 (1998) Offered more compatibility. Same speed capabilities as 1.0.

USB 2.0 (2000) (called High-speed USB) is 480Mbit/second (60MB/sec) and is of course, as noted, backward compatible with non high-speed devices.

USB 3.0 (called Super-speed USB) is slated to be 4.8Gbit/second (600MB/sec) and will be backward compatible as well.

Maximum obtained transfer speed with USB 2.0 has been 53MB/sec; 2/3rds of the maximum rated speed. That's not bad at all.


Firewire (IEEE1394) was designed as a flexible replacement for SCSI. It's main advantage over USB is the fact that it can allow communication between devices without use of the CPU.

Firewire has been available in the following speeds:

Firewire 400 (1995) 400Mbit/second has a MAXIMUM transfer rate of 49MB/sec. It has various transfer modes, such as 100Mbit, 200Mbit or 400Mbit half-duplex.

Firewire 800 (2002) (defined under IEEE1394b) 800Mbit/second has a MAXIMUM transfer rate of 84MB/sec FULL-duplex.

Follow up REVISIONS (already defined under IEEE1394b) that are/were slated to be released this year are Firewire 1600 and Firewire 3200; 1600Mbit and 3200Mbit/sec respectively. Falling short (substantially) of USB 3.0's offering.....



The BIG thing is that Sony, who makes a LOT of video equipment, is one of the founding companies for IEEE1394, so their implementation of Firewire (they call it iLINK) has always been "better" on their Camcorders than their USB support.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
The BIG thing is that Sony, who makes a LOT of video equipment, is one of the founding companies for IEEE1394, so their implementation of Firewire (they call it iLINK) has always been "better" on their Camcorders than their USB support.


I think both USB and Firewire will continue to exist for many years to come until the market decide to use one over the other.

Ethernet cannot be replaced by USB. Maybe some router or USB modem in the future will be USB based, but the mass amount of equipments and infrastructures (in work place, carriers, schools, etc) guarantee that the cables and sockets will stay and only the equipments and PC will change.

There are already 10GB/S on Ethernet in mid-high end market for non-consumer application. As soon as they make them cheaper (lower cost chips), they will be everywhere and be faster than USB again.

 

[Cutehumor]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
Before you sell your computers Cutehumor remember that you can just upgrade to Windows 7 and that USB 3 will be backward compatible with USB 1.1 and USB 3. And perhaps it would be possible to add a USB 3 card to a computer.

You will still be able to use your USB equipment. And USB 3 has not be released yet, but I think it is now very close.


Mystic,

I was thinking if Windows 7 minimum requirements may be high? I don't know what they are. The ram I have is 2 GB. I remember Vista needs at least 2 GB to run efficiently. I'm still on XP. I just figured windows 7 would be more than 2 GB ram. But that is a good point about getting a USB 3.0 card. Sounds like there are alot of developments in the computer world.

 

[Mystic]

Yes, Cutehumor I just don't want to see you replace your computers unnecessarily. I like how it is possible to just upgrade a Windows computer with various upgrades such as more Ram, a faster processor, Blu-Ray, a more powerful power supply, a faster better video card, etc. Some of these same upgrades are possible with Apple computers but I doubt you could upgrade the processor or get Blu-Ray right now at a reasonable price at least for an Apple computer.

The story I have heard is that Windows 7 (or whatever they finally call it) will be more efficient than Vista and use less system resources, so maybe less Ram will be needed to run it.

Hard to say right now if you could have an older computer run USB 3 with just a USB 3 card or not. Perhaps the motherboard and everything else would have to be replaced. But if you had no USB 3 equipment you could run your older computers indefinitely.

Most Windows computers I know of can be upgraded to 4 GB of Ram. That is the only upgrade that some people need.

There will come a time however when present day computers will have to be replaced. A lot of new technology is coming (or already here and just too expensive now) like new OSs, USB 3, and solid state hard drives. Ultimately everything will have to change including motherboards.

 

[simple_gifts]

Quote:

Windows 7 (or whatever they finally call it) will be more efficient than Vista and use less system resources


Holding my breath..... not. I'm curious as to what will be in W7 that will make it worth buying, especially in the midst of an economic slowdown. Problem is.. XP is too good, or good enough for what everyone wants to do; that seems to be the sentiment with most of the posts in this section.

MS spent years adding code to make Vista, now apparently they are taking it out (or actually making it work); They should just stop, tell the programmers to stop, and backfit the new features into XP and start selling subscriptions to XP security and feature updates; they will get their money, spare corporations the pain of moving to a new OS (huge task) and spare the embarrassment of another dud on arrival.

Peruse this totally biased article...

http://blogs.computerworld.com/the_big_windows_7_lie