|[Home] [Credit Search] [Category Browser] [Staff Roll Call]||The LINUX.COM Article Archive|
|Originally Published: Saturday, 23 October 1999||Author: Stephen Morrow|
|Published to: enhance_articles_hardware/Hardware News||Page: 1/1 - [Printable]|
Author of 'USB 2.0 or FireWire: The Facts' Responds
After recieving many emails about the USB 2.0 vs. FireWire article, the author would like to respond and clear up a few points.
|Page 1 of 1|
In response to the comments posted about my article I would like to post this:
1. Apple FireWire does operate at 400 megabits per second - 40 was a typo. As you noticed, I referred to the Apple FAQ (which stated that it was 400) in case there was any confusion.
2. I have been informed that some PC's have adopted the FireWire port, but the number is few, and many PC manufactuers are very against the adoption of the FireWire port for several reasons of thier own. I did not say that it would not be on the PC; I merely expressed my opinion that more than likely it will not.
3. Although there are Video Devices that have adopted FireWire as a standard, many others plan to adopt USB 2.0. FireWire has not been officially adopted by the video community.
4. I have been informed that FireWire is going to be pushed to faster speeds. When I contacted Apple on this matter, I was told that Apple does not know if they will push FireWire faster. I imagine that they will, and I would also think that USB would do the same.
5. I have also heard some people say that Firewire and USB 2.0 are not competing. Although they are not competing directly, the companies that develop products for them are making decisions to base thier products on one or the other (generally not both). From that stems competition for the interface. The company I work for is a major hardware distributor, and we are currently in the process of making this same decision. Whether Apple or USB want competition is beside the point: there will be competition.
6. I also am not "trying to put the two in competition". I simply suggest that Linux focus on developing for USB 2.0 for two reasons: first, due to the fact that currently it is faster, and second, that there is already a wealth of USB 1.1 periphals that we have not developed into Linux.
Thank you for all your comments, and I appreciate hearing them. They will be answered as quickly as we possibly can. If I have offended anybody with my opinions I am truly sorry, but I don't care about Apple, or Intel, only about Linux. Whatever I post is always, in my opinion, in Linux's best interest. Thank you for your concern.
|Page 1 of 1|