"Michael Frazier" <MLFrazierJr@aol.com> wrote in
news:4p4Ha.85950$hd6.2138@fed1read05: 

> I thought Firewire was much slower than USB 2.0 ???

That's the theory, yes. Reality is something quite different.

> 
> Can a balanced (read non-Macaholic) please enlighten us all on this?

I use PCs with a Canon Powershot G1, and the fastest Compact Flash cards 
I can find. After getting tired of how damnably slow USB 1.1 worked, I 
bought a USB 2.0 faceplate reader and a 1394 external reader.

USB 2.0 was about five times faster than 1.1, which is nice. FW was no 
less than *thirty* (30). Literally a jaw-dropping difference - watching 
the copy status flicker for a few moments and seeing hundreds of files 
appear in the target directory.

I used to copy everything into one directory than thumbnail from there to 
sort the pics. Now I thumbnail from the card - it is just *barely* slower 
than from 7200RPM ATA133 drives.

FW is a more mature standard that actually achieves something near it's 
theoretical limits. USB isn't, and doesn't.

>   "SpaceGirl" <spaceNOgirlSPAM@subhuman.net> wrote in message
>   news:bcijis$jghfj$1@ID-129131.news.dfncis.de... Firewire would be a
>   better option 
> 
>   "Eyron" <odd1@rogers.com> wrote in message
>   news:YP3Ha.116203$3Sm.44701@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
>  > Is there a reason to go to USB2 with todays Compac flash cards?
>  > The fastest cards I think top out at 4mb/s???
>  > Nowhere near the USB2,s nominal rate and about the same rate as 
> USB1.1.
>  >
>  > Whats the point?
>  >
>  > Eyron