"David Eppstein" <eppstein@ics.uci.edu> wrote in message news:eppstein-D4151D.13161520062003@news.service.uci.edu...
> In article <m28yrwy3ni.fsf@fuscipes.rattus.net>,
>  Bruce Murphy <pack-news@rattus.net> wrote:
>
> > USB is, and will always be, a poorly implemented, poorly designed,
> > cheap and nasty technology.
>
> You left out poorly marketed.  In case you weren't already confused
> enough about USB 1.1 vs USB 2, now the USB people are redefining the
> specs so that both can be called USB 2 -- see
> <http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/18/2025210>.  One of the two
> USB 2's is full speed, the other is high speed.  I'll leave you to
> guess which one you have to ask for if you want firewire-like speed, or
> what fraction of consumers will guess wrong and be left with the
> impression that USB 2 is still slow.

I don't think either of the two are fast enough for hard disk i/o !

For me something like Fibre Channel (HotSwap) with  >20gig/sec
capasity, is the the minimun "portable storage" interface spec.
I want my 50MB/sec (_sustained_ throughput) guaranteed!

I personally would never consider hooking up an HD to a firewire
or USB2 unless it was a laptop or something.    Kid-stuff.

                                                            ( :-D




> -- 
> David Eppstein                      http://www.ics.uci.edu/~eppstein/
> Univ. of California, Irvine, School of Information & Computer Science

Hey, My old school!  Awesome!  Frisbee-Golf anyone?    O :-)