USB 2.0 vs FireWire

[JonmaTifa]

I was curious, what did people think about this, since firewire got a head start and is already used in dv cameras, but USB 2.0 is built upon earlier versions of USB, which has been very successful... USB 2.0 is negotiably faster (480mbps) than firewire (400mbps), a USB 2.0 port will use all of your USB 1.0/1.2 stuff, but a USB 2.0 device doesn't work in a USB 1.0/1.2 port :(

normally when there are competing technologies such as this, one will emerge triumphant, while the other is forgotten about... (anyone still use SCSI? :), so which will it be?

[NDD]

while the other is forgotten about... (anyone still use SCSI?
Who isn't ?! :confused:
SCSI's time is not over yet.

As for USB2.0 vs. FireWire ... I guess the cheaper one in production will win, since both interfaces are more or less offering the same.

[smelanson]

I would have to say USB 2.0, backwards compatability helps I just wish USB devices were all self powered my USB only has so much power:rolleyes:

[BipolarBill]

I'm wondering what effect Serial ATA will have on SCSI. I know that Otheos is following it closely. I may start a new thread...

[otheos]

Let's stick to firewire/USB2 issues here, as SATA and SCSI is left for the future.

One thing though, SATA is not going to improve performance. It still is ATA based on IDE with a long awaited cabling restructure. Other than that, no tagged queuing or funny business, so it's not directly competing with SCSI. And on top S-SCSI is in the works too :)

Anyhow, Firewire and USB2 are intrinsically different in one very basic thing. Firewire does not need a PC or computer to work and this is why it's also used in consumer electronics (DV etc).

So the two standards do not "compete" per se, as there are no firewire mice and keyboards. After all the reason USB1.1 succeded was that most USB hardware is very low bandwidth and has very low latency requirements. Firewire being more expensive, was an unecessary overhead for running a mouse/keyboard or that slow zip or 600dpi scanner (most scanners are performance limited due to price consideration, and use slow mechanics that are limiting scanning times and hence data transfer rates).

With CDRW reaching 6MB/s today and external discs very popular, USB2 came to address such uses. And while it offers the marginally higher bandwidth, it also comes with increased latency. This is why Firewire HDs are considered "perfromance" and come with 7200rpm, while USB2 are considered "storage" and typically come with 5400rpm drives. Both firewire and USB2 have a large impact in performance due to the access times increased with the added latency, but firewire keeps ahead in this aspect.

So if it is an external HD you're after make sure it's firewire. Personally I'd go (and have gone) with firewire for all my external storage (DVD-R/RW and CDR/RW) for that matter.

Finally Firewire is less troublesome to implement in both hardware and software as it is not dependent on anything else on a PC, unlike the USB that is strongly connected, needs special drivers and has been the cause of way too many problems for PC users in the past.

So my vote will go to firewire :)

anyone still use SCSI?

You're joking right?