Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Guess the time.... 
Author Message
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
tombolt wrote:
Doesn't FireWire have a dedicated chip and USB shares the CPU? Thought I read that somewhere as to the reason for the performance difference.


The difference as fas as I know is that data on Firewire goes from device to device. On USB it goes from device to hub and to device, which affects the speed at which data arrives at its destination.

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Wed Jun 01, 2011 5:04 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:25 pm
Posts: 10691
Location: Bramsche
Reply with quote
jonbwfc wrote:
There are of course many issues which define the speed you get data off a drive, of which the notional or indeed actual speed of the interface is only one...

Jon

Yes, but when the drive could reach around 40MB/s on a 4 year old Wintel machine and around 12MB/s on a brand new iMac (2006 24" at the time), there was something seriously wrong with the iMac's USB configuration.

Tombolt wrote:
Doesn't FireWire have a dedicated chip and USB shares the CPU? Thought I read that somewhere as to the reason for the performance difference.

This is partly true. But doesn't explaion why a 2002/2003 single core Athlon processor could run rings around an iMac with a faster Core2Due processor... Either Windows and Linux (the AMD was dual booting) were a lot less processor intensive than OS X, or Apple had deliberately slowed USB down.

Given that most reviews (from non-Mac magazines and websites) all marked the USB performance of these high priced machines as less than the cheapest Wintel box on the market, Apple either deliberately crippled USB on the first Intel motherboards or they b*lloxed up the design. Given Apple's usual attention to detail, and their licensing deals on Firewire, it makes more sense that they didn't suddenly want a Mac with a USB port which could achieve 70-80% the performance of a Firewire port.

_________________
"Do you know what this is? Hmm? No, I can see you do not. You have that vacant look in your eyes, which says hold my head to your ear, you will hear the sea!" - Londo Molari

Executive Producer No Agenda Show 246


Thu Jun 02, 2011 7:09 am
Profile ICQ
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
big_D wrote:
Apple either deliberately crippled USB on the first Intel motherboards or they b*lloxed up the design. Given Apple's usual attention to detail, and their licensing deals on Firewire, it makes more sense that they didn't suddenly want a Mac with a USB port which could achieve 70-80% the performance of a Firewire port.

Apple never bollox up designs, do they? Hanlon's razor still applies.

Jon


Thu Jun 02, 2011 10:22 am
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:56 pm
Posts: 12030
Reply with quote
I'd still rather FW than USB. The networkability of FW has been really useful in the past.

_________________
www.alexsmall.co.uk

Charlie Brooker wrote:
Windows works for me. But I'd never recommend it to anybody else, ever.


Thu Jun 02, 2011 10:42 am
Profile
Moderator

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:13 pm
Posts: 7262
Location: Here, but not all there.
Reply with quote
ProfessorF wrote:
I'd still rather FW than USB. The networkability of FW has been really useful in the past.


And daisychaining. Currently got three FW drives in a chain. I can't do that with USB...

_________________
My Flickr | Snaptophobic Bloggage
Heather Kay: modelling details that matter.
"Let my windows be open to receive new ideas but let me also be strong enough not to be blown away by them." - Mahatma Gandhi.


Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:12 am
Profile
Official forum cat lady
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:04 am
Posts: 11039
Location: London
Reply with quote
I'm a FW fan too

_________________
Still the official cheeky one ;)

jonbwfc wrote:
Caz is correct though


Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:59 am
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
HeatherKay wrote:
ProfessorF wrote:
I'd still rather FW than USB. The networkability of FW has been really useful in the past.


And daisychaining. Currently got three FW drives in a chain. I can't do that with USB...

I had seven drives at one point daisy chained but It was hard work sorting what files were where. :oops:

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:41 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
HeatherKay wrote:
ProfessorF wrote:
I'd still rather FW than USB. The networkability of FW has been really useful in the past.


And daisychaining. Currently got three FW drives in a chain. I can't do that with USB...


I have two daisy chained in a FW800 circuit. Rather nice as I don’t have to find a hub or an FW800 PCI card.

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:03 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.