Path: ccsf.homeunix.org!ccsf.homeunix.org!news1.wakwak.com!nf1.xephion.ne.jp!onion.ish.org!onodera-news!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!news.stupi.se!news.stupi.se!rip!c03.atl99!news.webusenet.com!wesley.videotron.net!weber.videotron.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3EF3803E.40204@videotron.ca> From: Alan Browne User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030208 Netscape/7.02 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras,fj.comp.dev.digital-camera,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm Subject: Re: USB2 faster than Firewire References: <190620032345078375%barry@netbox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 21 Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 17:44:30 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.203.255.193 X-Complaints-To: abuse@videotron.ca X-Trace: weber.videotron.net 1056145469 24.203.255.193 (Fri, 20 Jun 2003 17:44:29 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 17:44:29 EDT Xref: ccsf.homeunix.org fj.comp.dev.digital-camera:274 You guys figure this still needs to be x-posted to rec.photo? Jason O'Rourke wrote: > Bill Tuthill wrote: > >>Who collects the 25c royalty? I thought Firewire had become a standard, >>IEEE 1394, which appears to be available on Linux (www.linux1394.org) >>for free or perhaps with copyleft, I dunno. >> >>Why can't the PC vendors reimplement it as did the Linux community? > > > Because there is no need. USB2 does the job and supports usb1 devices > as well. Firewire will be used for video purposes as needed, may be > challenged by DVI. Both will be niche markets on the desktop. >