|
|
#1 |
|
Rear Admiral Upper Half
![]() ![]() ![]() |
I love firewire
its amazing how fast you can transfer files across firewire. I just transfered 400 megs orth of data from my harddrive to an external firewire drive, and it was done in secods. plus there was no strain on my system at all!!!
__________________
http://ribitch.com/ipod.html |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Lieutenant Commander
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 905
|
Agreed. Firewire sure beats the heck out of USB 2.0.
__________________
YVAN EHT NIOJ |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Lieutenant
![]() ![]() Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 339
|
yeah but USb isn't really made for HDs...it's for KB/Mouse/gamepad
__________________
WindowsXp Pro Albatron PX845PEV Pro @ 158Mhz FSB Intel P4 2.26 @ 2.68Ghz w/Stock Intel HSF Enermax 431Watt PSU ATI Radeon 9700Pro @ 345/337(674DDR) 512MB Corsair XMS3200 DDR @ 421Mhz 40GB IBM Deskstar 60GXP 7200RPM ATA/100 60GB Maxtor 7200RPM ATA/100 Pioneer 16x DVD-Rom Teac W540E CDRW (40x/12x/48x) Hercules Game Theater XP 6.1 soundcard |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Rear Admiral Upper Half
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
usb 1.1 was made for lower transfer rates, usb 2.0 is actually faster than firewre 1.0 firewire 2.0 (1394b) is supposed to be released in the near future and is by far faster than firewire 1.0 and usb 2.0 i have seen allot of people saying usb 2.0 is the future, but firewire has already proven itself (since 1999 with apple i believe) and will only expand. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Lieutenant
![]() ![]() Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 339
|
what Dv cam do you know that uses USB?! heh and how many thousands or millions of Dv cams are sold worldwide?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Rear Admiral Upper Half
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
currently none, primaily dv cams are mostly used on macs to edit video, and macs do not have usb 2.0 without an aftermarket card. Plus USB 2.0 devices are failry new USB 2.0 has been prmarily used for portable harddrives as well as cd-rw and dvd-rw drives. If a pc was an acceeptable choice for nonlinear editting, than maybe more cameras would ship with usb 2.0 instead of firewire, since most pc's are still not shipping with built on firewire |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Lieutenant Commander
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 905
|
USB 2.0 is theoretically faster than firewire, but in practice it is not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Rear Admiral Lower Half
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Lieutenant Junior Grade
![]() Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 131
|
USB is the biggest rip off ever. Not only is it slow, the devices rarely work as advertised. Although they are getting better, they still don't compare to 1394 in ease of use or throughput
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Lieutenant Commander
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 523
|
FireWire is awesome, but if you want tranfer files Computer to computer NOTHING beats GigaBIT. Whoo I backed 18 Gigs from a laptop to my machine in a matter of minutes. I'd Love to see a firewire network cable. They have USB but that wouldn't compare to FireWire.
I've transfered files from a Friends Digital Cam to my computer via the firewire and it was very quick, almost seemed seemless. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Administrator
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Isn't firewire 2.0b eventually going to support fiber optics? From there it's going to be reaching ludicrous speed.
![]() http://192.41.19.35/space/chicken.wav |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Captain
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: May 2000
Location: L.A..... Costa Mesa... Whatever, Man!
Posts: 1,824
|
Quote:
Ha! Dave. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
Lieutenant Commander
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 905
|
Quote:
Gigabit and firewire are equally fast in that sort of situation because the notebook's hard drive speed would limit the transfer rate. Any firewire cable is a network cable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
the admiral formerly known as overclocked
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Outside the mainstream
Posts: 5,922
|
Speaking of firewire....
http://www.firenas.com/home/ Firewire Network Attached Storage. Way too fking cool. -OC
__________________
But what is adulthood except a delayed end-run around our parents' better judgment? -- Peter Egan *cough* |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Rear Admiral Upper Half
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
taken from http://www.1394ta.org/Press/2001Press/may/5.21.a.htm 3.2 Gigabits!!!! take that gigabit ethernet!!!What good is a technology that is heavily dependeant on the cpu when it comes to large amounts of data transfer? You want minimal CPU interruptions, which is what firewire is designed to do. The only real system slow down you will have is from your harddrive access and RAM. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Chief of Naval Operations
![]() ![]() Join Date: May 2000
Location: LEVITTOWN< PA> USA
Posts: 13,621
|
So, if my Pentium II 450, which will not support burning rates greater then 10X were to utilize FireWire, then I could burn at 40X?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
Rear Admiral Lower Half
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 | |
|
Rear Admiral Upper Half
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
what speed is your burner. My work computer has a 12x burner in a P2 333. It does 12 without any problems |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Chief of Naval Operations
![]() ![]() Join Date: May 2000
Location: LEVITTOWN< PA> USA
Posts: 13,621
|
I have an IOMEGA Zip 12X burner which will not burn at that speed. I have never really tried a 10X burner. I assumed from the information on a Pacific Digital 32X box that 10X is the fastest I can burn.
I usually burn at 8X with no problem on my HP 9100. |
|
|
|