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!newsfeed.frii.net!newsfeed.frii.net!140.99.99.194.MISMATCH!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!news-west.rr.com!cyclone.nyroc.rr.com!cyclone-out.nyroc.rr.com!twister.nyroc.rr.com.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: "Charles V. Stancampiano" Newsgroups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras,fj.comp.dev.digital-camera,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm References: <4p4Ha.85950$hd6.2138@fed1read05> <150620032330475587%barry@netbox.com> <3eedb176$0$87200$45beb828@newscene.com> Subject: Re: USB2 faster than Firewire Lines: 26 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 22:24:38 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.66.102.27 X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com X-Trace: twister.nyroc.rr.com 1056407078 66.66.102.27 (Mon, 23 Jun 2003 18:24:38 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 18:24:38 EDT Organization: Road Runner Xref: ccsf.homeunix.org fj.comp.dev.digital-camera:313 USB chip set is considerably cheaper than support chips for FireWire AFAIK. Charlie "Mark Leuck" wrote in message news:CEcIa.985014$OV.1092233@rwcrnsc54... > > "Howard McCollister" wrote in message > news:3eedb176$0$87200$45beb828@newscene.com... > > Theoretical numbers notwithstanding, USB 2.0 is actually quite a bit > slower > > than Firewire 400. Look at http://tinyurl.com/ef28 for some testing on > that. > > > > Firewire 800 is now standard on Macs (at least some of them) and Firewire > > 800 PCI host controllers are available for PC and Macs for $89 or less. > > > > HMc > > I should think Firewire would be standard on Macs since they developed it, > the biggest problem tho is Apple is charging a higher royalty for Firewire > than Intel charges for USB which is why these days you see more USB. > >