Re: USB2 faster than Firewire
jor@soda.csua.berkeley.edu (Jason O'Rourke) writes:
> Bruce Murphy <pack-news@rattus.net> wrote:
> >> 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.
> >
> >For 'the job' read 'mouse and suchlike'. Now let's talk about being
> >able to move disks around easily etc.
>
> Bruce, you're parroting the same bullshit over and over.
>
> USB2 based drives are just as portable as firewire ones. And both
> interfaces are fast enough for available hard drives.
In theory, perhaps. But having heard exactly the same statement made
about USB 1.1, I think I'll not leap onto this particular bandwagon
either.
USB is, and will always be, a poorly implemented, poorly designed,
cheap and nasty technology. Thank you again, Intel. I'm made
particularly happy by the USB 2 standard not requiring compatibility
with 1.1 devices[1], and with the number fo semiconductors manufacturers
who baulked at producing controller chipsets for it.
B>
[1] last time I checked it was a Jolly Good Thing, but optional.
Fnews-brouse 1.9(20180406) -- by Mizuno, MWE <mwe@ccsf.jp>
GnuPG Key ID = ECC8A735
GnuPG Key fingerprint = 9BE6 B9E9 55A5 A499 CD51 946E 9BDC 7870 ECC8 A735