Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

FireWire For Windows XP, But No USB 2.0

Posted by timothy on Wed Apr 11, 2001 09:10 AM
from the duck-duck-duck-goooooose dept.
Lizard_King writes: "In this ZDNet story, Microsoft has announced that they will support Apple's Firewire technology in Windows XP and not USB 2.0. Looks like USB 2.0 hardware manufacturers will have to supply their own drivers for the initial release of XP." I sure hope this isn't a death knell for USB 2.0, but the argument that there just aren't that many USB devices seems valid, if circular. (And Firewire is good stuff.)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2 | 3
  • Apple's Firewire? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:18AM
  • Re:Out to get us/Linux Support by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:33AM
  • RTFP: Read the fscking post (Before moderation) by Yarn (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:55AM
  • Goodbye, PC Hello .NET by Jeremiah Cornelius (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @01:10PM
  • "There just aren't many USB devices"? by Wakko Warner (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:32AM
  • Solaris doesn't support Firewire. by Wakko Warner (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:30AM
  • So what? by The Man (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:46AM
  • Apple bigger than Intel??? by Wyatt Earp (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:47AM
  • by Wyatt Earp (1029) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:38AM (#299111) Homepage
    There are Epson scanners and printers that have Firewire, as well as some Canons and Agfas...but the Firewire for Printers and Scanners are only on the high end machines.

    Now I like USB for keyboards and mice and PDAs, but bo does it suck compared to Firewire for things like CD burners.

    USB 2.0 just seemed like a half-assed attempt to overthrow Firewire using Intel's might.
  • Re:Standards finally by pod (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:44AM
  • Re:Not phrased quite right by pod (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @08:24AM
  • Re:FireWire/USB support in Linux by Phil-14 (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:04AM
  • Re:Not many USB devices? by Ryano (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:23AM
  • God I love Microsoft by sheldon (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:09AM
  • Re:Blinking icon: clever idea by sheldon (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @12:22PM
  • WHAT!? by sheldon (Score:2) Thursday April 12 2001, @10:10AM
  • Re:Is MS against USB now that Linux has it? by planet_hoth (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:17AM
  • Not a bad thing by warmcat (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:21AM
  • Re:Couple of quick points by omidk (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:11AM
  • Would you stop blaming drivers already? by RelliK (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:38AM
  • Misleading/false bit in the article by MushMouth (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @08:36AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is unavoidable by MushMouth (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:34AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is unavoidable by MushMouth (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:27AM
  • Re:More Slagging USB 2.0 by MushMouth (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:30AM
  • Re:don't you have to pay apple for by MushMouth (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:37AM
  • Is MS against USB now that Linux has it? by monsted (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:12AM
  • Re:Out to get us/Linux Support by Switchback (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:05AM
  • Are there any USB 2 devices? by hatless (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:54AM
  • IEEE1394 is being supported for obvious reasons. by t (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @03:29PM
  • Re:Only Reason by Dino (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:44AM
  • Reason MS supports IEEE-1394: available now by RayChuang (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:24AM
  • Re:Choices by wik (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:32AM
  • Re:Only Reason by IntlHarvester (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:29AM
  • Re:Only Reason by IntlHarvester (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:27AM
  • Re:Firewire, USB, and Microsoft by IntlHarvester (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:51AM
  • Re:Only Reason by IntlHarvester (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:04AM
  • Re:Not many USB devices? by elmegil (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:19AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is unavoidable by decaym (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:01AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is unavoidable by decaym (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:18AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is unavoidable by decaym (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:38AM
  • USB 2.0 is unavoidable by decaym (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:12AM
  • Dammit by Pope Slackman (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:11AM
  • Re:Darwin by Pope Slackman (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:53AM
  • Blinking icon: clever idea by Weasel Boy (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:16AM
  • Cheap shot, and not quite true by Weasel Boy (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @08:47PM
  • Re:Cheap shot, and not quite true by Weasel Boy (Score:1) Saturday April 14 2001, @10:22PM
  • Re:Not many USB devices? by Jethro73 (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:35AM
  • by Jethro73 (14686) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:23AM (#299150)
    Now I *know* they are out to get us. It is a conspiracy to make you buy new hardware. The *day* after I bought my first USB keyboard, this story comes out... Consider:

    - AT to ATX (Legit upgrade, no consipracy there)
    - Socket to Slot back to Socket (definitely a conspiracy)
    - USB to Firewire (then back to USB after 2.0)

    Grrr...

    Must upgrade... Must upgrade...

    Maybe I am just insane...

    Also, on a related note, did anyone else notice the GREAT USB support of Linux? RH setup detects my Microsoft optical mouse during setup, and Windows ME doesn't... Now *that* is weird...

    Jethro
  • Not true. by webslacker (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:49AM
  • More Slagging USB 2.0 by cygnus (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:52AM
  • monopoly by jilles (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:09AM
  • by znu (31198) <znu@acedsl.com> on Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:44AM (#299154)
    Actually, iMacs all have Firewire now too. And other Apple machines have been shipping with Firewire on board for years, as have some PCs from Sony and Compaq. There's quite a bit of Firewire stuff out there already, and absolutely no USB 2.0 stuff.

    Original USB has it's place; a Firewire keyboard or mouse is clearly absurd. But you've got to understand USB 2.0. It's an inferior standard cooked up by Intel because Firewire's peer-to-peer design makes Intel nervous; it means you'll be able to hook lots of 'smart' devices together without a computer. Intel clearly doesn't like that idea.

    Because USB 2.0 isn't peer-to-peer, it's next to useless in the consumer electronics industry. That means that even if computers start showing up with USB 2.0, they'll still need Firewire to talk to all your other devices. And because USB 2.0 chipsets will never be made in anywhere near the same volume as Firewire chipsets (which will eventually be in every camcorder, TV, DVD player, stereo, etc.), it will probably cost more.

    --
  • Don't worry, Intel will make the drivers by BigPappa (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:14AM
  • Oops that's USB 1.1 by Valdrax (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:39AM
  • Re:Firewire, USB, and Microsoft by Valdrax (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:59AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is just an Intel scam anyway by Valdrax (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:01AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is just an Intel scam anyway by Valdrax (Score:1) Thursday April 12 2001, @07:26AM
  • Re:Firewire, USB, and Microsoft by Valdrax (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:30AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is just an Intel scam anyway by Valdrax (Score:2) Thursday April 12 2001, @04:35AM
  • by Valdrax (32670) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:18AM (#299162)
    Actually, I hope it is the death knell. The original USB standard was not intended to be extended like this. It was meant for simple, low bandwidth devices, and the protocol specs show it. While USB 2.0 defeats some of the problems, such as evenly slicing your bandwidth among devices no matter what they need, it's still a processor arbitrated bus. It's just an attempt by Intel for further system dependency on the processor at the expense of performance. It helps their bottom line to make us more dependent on their hardware at our own expense.

    Plus, the FUD marketing plan that they used just when Firewire started to get some public interest turned me off instantly. "Oh, no, don't use Firewire! We'll have this standard up and running in a few years, and then Firewire will be dead because ours is slightly faster than their current standard. Never mind that speed bump Firewire has planned. Listen to our vaporware instead!"

    Firewire is elegant. It doesn't suffer from the star topology bottlenecks of USB 2.0. It's not processor arbitrated and does not require and active computer to be useful. It supports isochronous transfers. It makes a good networking protocol. It is in every way superior, and Intel and, apparently, Microsoft both know it. I hope that this is the knife in USB 2.0 that kills it. Bring on the Firewire devices, I say.
  • by Valdrax (32670) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:36AM (#299163)
    The annoying thing though is that, although firewire might be better, most motherboards don't have them on-board. So USB 2.0 would be nice for those of us (ahem, all of us) that have USB ports on our computers.

    While the connectors are the same, the circuitry needed to recognize USB 2.0 isn't there. Surely, you don't expect to plug an UltraATA/100 drive into an EIDE controller and expect to get full UltraATA/100 speeds out of it? This isn't just a matter of updating software. The hardware controller device has to recognize the protocol, which it won't magically do. Since the purpose of these controllers is to be cheap, don't expect them to be firmware-upgradeable either.
  • by Valdrax (32670) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:20AM (#299164)
    Actually, in the class sense of the word, it is a troll. However, no one really uses troll to mean a good intellectual post meant to trick people into a flamewar. Nowdays, it just means some 14 year old posting a bunch of profanity laced racist slurs or an inane, worn-out joke over and over again, like the old grits routine and the recent revival of the Beowulf cluster nonsense.

    I guess no one remembers to good old days, when newsgroup discussions were filled with people from academia, who actually put some thought into baiting people. Race baiting and name calling is easy. Making people honestly believe you think something really stupid or irritating is a lot harder. No one remembers when a troll was a thing of art instead of the infantile behavior it is today.

    I mourn for the loss of the intellectual troll. They were the court jesters of the Internet. Nowdays, trolls are just a bunch of immature vandals who go about urinating all over message boards because they have no respect for the sense of community that the long-time members of that site once enjoyed.

    In a way, I feel like a herald for the aliens in Independence Day. You move into a new community on the Internet, and you find a rich variety of well-meaning individuals who are interested in little more than discussing their ideas. In this small preserve of civility, you can feel free to express yourself. Then, the ravagers come and destroy the community you once loved. They don't read old discussions for topics well hashed-out. They don't obey the rules of behavior. In fact, they spurn them openly. You then have no choice but to move on, saddened by the loss of another haven on the Internet. You find a new place to enjoy, and then the cycle repeats.

    I guess I've rambled long enough. It just makes me nostalgic to see a post like this. To see what intellectual provocation looks like once again. I doubt I'll see it again on Slashdot in a long time.
  • by Valdrax (32670) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:23AM (#299165)
    This has nothing to do with USB 1.0. It's still being supported as the hot-pluggable low-bandwidth device interface it was intended to be.

    This is about USB 2.0, the hacked extended version that support devices at 480 Mb/s. It was intended to be a Firewire killer, but doesn't have the same technical merits. Intel started crowing about coming up with it soon about the time Firewire started to get some momentum going. It effectively killed the momentum for Firewire for awhile. I say let USB 2.0 die. It's an inferior protocol that's intended to further slave your computer to the processor instead of farm that functionality out.

    USB 1.0 isn't going anywhere. It's still good for what it was intended for.
  • by Valdrax (32670) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:06AM (#299166)
    No kidding. It's an obvious troll, in the classic sense of a post designed to fool people into a flamewar. It's actually one of the few beautiful, well thought out trolls I've seen on Slashdot. Most people don't even bother to think something out as far as this. It's all goatse.cx this and Beowulf cluster that, with a mix of profanity, racism, and obscene ascii art thrown in.

    It's good to see the rare intellectual troll every now and then. This post should've only have been marked Funny (+1) or Troll (-1), with maybe a couple of Overrated/Underrated moderation thrown in.

    Oh no. Oh, Lord, no. I'm posting about moderation, something I consider the cardinal sin of offtopic kvetching. Oh, well. I'm still counting down from the Day of the Karma Cap.
  • Moderators on crack? by maddboyy (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:58AM
  • Re: Firewire for Linux by chill (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:19AM
  • Re:Not many USB devices? by chill (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:34AM
  • Re:Couple of quick points by kettch (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:15AM
  • Re:Couple of quick points by kettch (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:05AM
  • Re:Is MS against USB now that Linux has it? by Juln (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @11:36AM
  • Re:Playstation 2 (preparations for xbox?) by cxreg (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:07AM
  • by Big Jojo (50231) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:49AM (#299174)

    Lack of WinXP support is exactly what Microsoft promised last year ... see the May (?) WinHEC slides on the topic, where they described their ship criteria. Basically, no OS support till host controllers and devices have been available for a while, and drivers are proven. This isn't news.

    It's only this month that USB 2.0 host controllers have begun to be available from vendors, as PCI addin cards. (Belkin, Orange.) I've yet to see USB 2.0 devices of any kind be advertised for walk-in cash purchases. Wait till the summer before you expect to see these devices ... like IDE-speed disk access. (480 Mbit/sec ~= 60 MByte/sec, in the same range as ATA/66.)

    Firewire advocacy aside, USB 2.0 clearly has a future. It's faster, and when you buy a system with USB 2.0 support built in, it'll have the same connector you know about. Devices are forward and backward compatible. And finally having conformance testing is a good thing, too.

    And let's not forget the next generation of PCMCIA devices, "CardBay" ... the first generation was ISA-on-a-Stick, then came PCI-on-a-Stick, next time it's USB 2.0 going out those familiar connectors. Cheaper than PCI/Cardbus support. See http://www.pcmcia.org/cardbay.htm [pcmcia.org]

  • Re:Couple of quick points by alexjohns (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:45AM
  • Re:Couple of quick points by alexjohns (Score:1) Thursday April 12 2001, @08:24AM
  • A little information..... by Wariac (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @08:26AM
  • Re:Only Reason by bnenning (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:22AM
  • Re:Apple's Firewire? by questionlp (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:10AM
  • Re:Remember CPRM? by questionlp (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:12AM
  • Re:Are there any USB 2 devices? by questionlp (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:15AM
  • Re:Choices by mghiggins (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:39AM
  • monopoly by kajoob (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:55AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is just an Intel scam anyway by yellowstone (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:43AM
  • Re:The annoying thing by fnj (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:23AM
  • Re:Not many USB devices? by fnj (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:26AM
  • Re:Couple of quick points by Datafage (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:09AM
  • Re:Couple of quick points by Datafage (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:10AM
  • Re:Out to get us/Linux Support by Steveftoth (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @03:36PM
  • Re:Non-voting Shares my arse by Wordman (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:14AM
  • Re:RTFP: Read the fscking post (Before moderation) by -homb- (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:07AM
  • by webword (82711) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:29AM (#299192) Homepage
    USB 2.0 versus FireWire [macworld.com] (MacCentral Online) -- Solid article. Check it out.

    Face-off between USB and FireWire Flash Card readers [barefeats.com] -- "Translation: Do NOT expect the gap between FireWire and USB readers to close when USB 2.0 readers start shipping. Do expect FireWire to be updated soon to achieve 800Mbit/sec... possibly 1600Mbit/sec, Moral: Use FireWire any time the device can handle the speed." (Somewhat useful.)

    Will USB or FireWire connect with consumers [cnet.com] (CNET) -- "In the end, FireWire may take the lead for storage devices, scanners, video cameras and consumer electronic devices, while USB continues to dominate mice, keyboards and other peripherals." (Comments: Some fluff, but useful.)

    USB 2.0 versus 1394 [semtech.com] (Japanese) -- I don't read Japanese, but this is an article comparing USB 2.0 and 1394 . . .

    Tom's Hardware Comparison [google.com] (via Google) -- "In the FireWire versus USB debate, currently it is no contest. USB is cheap and well suited for inexpensive devices like keyboards and mice, while IEEE1394 is far, far faster, more user friendly and a bit more robust, but is also a little more expensive to implement."

    SCSI versus IDE, FireWire, USB, etc. [macbuyersguide.com] (Mac Buyer's Guide) -- "Indeed, Apple specifically recommends against FireWire drives, for use with its high-end video editor, Final Cut Pro." (Comments: Other interesting stuff is in this article. Check it out.)

  • Re:Moderators on crack? by fprintf (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:07AM
  • Re:Is MS against USB now that Linux has it? by Speare (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:43AM
  • by Speare (84249) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:35AM (#299195) Homepage

    I use Win2K daily and have very solid uptimes. I think it's pretty solid, and I would expect XP to be another step in the right direction as far as stability goes. (Other aspects of XP trouble me, such as the kiosk-oriented gui and the copy control features.)

    It's fairly well known that the biggest issue for Win9x/WinNT/Win2K's stability is crappy third-party device drivers. The fault lies in the OS architecture, to be sure, but the reality is that device drivers can crash your Windows since they run in a less restrictive processing environment.

    Microsoft tests their own drivers a lot more than they can exercise ATI's drivers, so guess what happens when you install an ATI video card that's not on the HCL? Boom.

    Do you think this'll be any better when someone installs some generic $25 USB2 hub? How about new devices that have been in development for a while, assuming USB2 support for XP would save them, who are now reading resumes for some code jockey to learn how to make a USB2 driver for their first assignment?

    Even if Microsoft wants to snub Intel for whatever bedfellow business reason, it's in their best interest to make sure consumer-level cheapo devices can't rip down the platform. Boom.

  • Choices by graniteMonkey (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:16AM
  • when to switch by graniteMonkey (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:40AM
  • Re:when to switch by graniteMonkey (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @08:29AM
  • Re:Choices by graniteMonkey (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:35AM
  • Re:Choices by graniteMonkey (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:46AM
  • Re:Only Reason by BrentN (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:38AM
  • Re:Choices by jacobcaz (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:24AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is just an Intel scam anyway by redvision4 (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @08:48PM
  • Re:Choices by harlows_monkeys (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:03AM
  • Re:USB 1.0 going away? by Rand Race (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:16AM
  • Re:USB 1.0 going away? by Rand Race (Score:1) Friday April 13 2001, @11:21AM
  • Parallel? by DeeezNutz (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @08:00AM
  • I wonder by mpost4 (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:56PM
  • But not Device Bay by Animats (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @11:22AM
  • Re:monopoly by SuiteSisterMary (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:35AM
  • Re:USB 1.0 going away? by aaashby (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:20PM
  • Re:This is not neccesarily good by Strog (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:27AM
  • Re:Is MS against USB now that Linux has it? by Strog (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:31AM
  • Re:Like who gives a shit by Strog (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:55AM
  • Re:This Is Problematic by Strog (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:02AM
  • Re:The annoying thing by Strog (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:23AM
  • USB 1.0 going away? by kisrael (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:15AM
  • Re:Non-voting Shares my arse by DavidpFitz (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:20AM
  • Driver clash here we come! by iainl (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:14AM
  • Re:This is not neccesarily good by iainl (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:25AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is just an Intel scam anyway by iainl (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:35AM
  • Standards finally by HerrGlock (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:16AM
  • Re:God I hate Microsoft by zorba1 (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:49AM
  • Re:Standards finally by dhobbit (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:18AM
  • Re:Choices by dhobbit (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:24AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is just an Intel scam anyway by dhobbit (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:34AM
  • Re:Not a bad thing by 10.0.0.1 (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:48AM
  • Re:monopoly by dazedNconfuzed (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @08:05AM
  • Re:More Slagging USB 2.0 by dazedNconfuzed (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @08:08AM
  • Not phrased quite right by dazedNconfuzed (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:43AM
  • Re:Is MS against USB now that Linux has it? by Decimal (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @04:06PM
  • Re: Linux Support by Ig0r (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:03AM
  • Look - USB 2.0 & Bluetooth in Windows CE by crafty_barnardo (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:25AM
  • Re:Not a bad thing by fohat (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:48AM
  • Re:God I hate Microsoft by TobyWong (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:15AM
  • Re:Not a bad thing by FortKnox (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:29AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is just an Intel scam anyway by attackiko (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:56AM
  • Re:Only Reason by Eponymous Mallard (Score:1) Thursday April 12 2001, @01:36AM
  • Re:Only Reason by Eponymous Mallard (Score:1) Thursday April 12 2001, @01:43AM
  • Re:Not many USB devices? by sydb (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:29AM
  • Finally... by Amigori (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:44AM
  • Paying Apple back? by Fervent (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:49AM
  • An old business arrangement by daemonenwind (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:12AM
  • This is not neccesarily good by Wordsmith (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:17AM
  • Re:Non-voting Shares my arse by SubtleNuance (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:58AM
  • Non-voting Shares my arse by SubtleNuance (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:24AM
  • Only Reason (Score:4)

    by SubtleNuance (184325) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:20AM (#299247) Journal
    #1 Reason:

    Firewire has Oppressive Copy Control built in.
    USB 2.0 does not

    No further analysis or insight necessary. Welcome to the future friends.

  • This Is Problematic by Caraig (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:36AM
  • Re:This Is Problematic by Caraig (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:33AM
  • so what by shokk (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:10AM
  • Missing the point? by icemind (Score:1) Thursday April 12 2001, @05:23AM
  • by ZanshinWedge (193324) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:26AM (#299252)
    Wait, before you think this is a standard "Linus is the true god, Bill Gates is the anti-christ!" posts, hear me out.

    I like a lot of Microsoft's products. I use Windows 2k as my workstation OS. I like Internet Explorer, I like Office, I like Visual Studio, etc. Hell, I've even paid cold hard cash for some of these products (heh). Increasingly though I look at Microsoft's new products I keep hearing that little voice inside my head saying "uhhh, I hate to point this out but the old version was better". I prefer Office 97 to Office 2000, Windows 98 SE to Windows ME, etc. And Windows / Office XP are looking less and less like products I want to upgrade to. There are tons of things that annoy the crap out of me about Windows 2000 right now (for example, the whole ASPI fiasco) but all these new products from Microsoft look like they will simply increase the number of things that annoy me, and not increase one whit the things that please me.

    Also, I find it interesting that MS spent plenty of time making sure their anti-piracy system will work for Win XP but they didn't have enough extra programmers to integrate USB 2.0 (which has been highly hyped for well over a year now).

  • Great user experience guarantee? by donutz (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:32AM
  • New info : MS hasn't dropped USB 2.0 by Ergo2000 (Score:1) Friday April 13 2001, @07:40AM
  • by Ergo2000 (203269) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:50AM (#299255) Homepage
    • Microsoft is not dropping support for USB 1, so all those USB peripherals will work fantastically.
    • USB 2.0 hasn't even been finalized yet.
    • There is no way Microsoft can put a product (Windows XP) into RC stages supporting hardware that hasn't even been finalized. This simply makes total sense for them to quell the disappointment later when every reviewer is falling over themselves to report the abhorrent lack of USB 2.0 support.
    • For those who say that this doesn't matter to this 31337 Slashdot crowd: Realize that numerous linked to sites from Slashdot have shown that great than 80% of the readers of Slashdot who follow the link are running Win32 OS', most often with IE.
    • You can be sure the MS will add USB 2.0 support later on. I'm sure this will give a little push to Firewire for a while, but once USB 2 has straightened out their ship I have no doubt that it will be supported in the MS OS'
    • Ever notice how "Bluetooth" became the darling of the open source community? Why is that? This is curiousity.
  • Re:Not many USB devices? by kmo (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:19AM
  • Re:Great, more Blue Screens o' Death by KurdtX (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @01:08PM
  • Re:Out to get us/Linux Support by KurdtX (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:43PM
  • Re:Out to get us/Linux Support by KurdtX (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @12:54PM
  • USB 2.0 vs. IEEE-1394... by GunFodder (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @12:01PM
  • Re:Is MS against USB now that Linux has it? by TheDweller (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:19AM
  • M$ will include USB 2.0 at some point... by AlphaOne (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:55AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is just an Intel scam anyway by tswinzig (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @08:32PM
  • May be no big deal by Vassily Overveight (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:22AM
  • Some FireWire drives and Final Cut Pro work just f by snStarter (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:14PM
  • Re:Firewire, USB, and Microsoft by willy_me (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:31AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is unavoidable by willy_me (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:04AM
  • USB2.0 speed misleading by willy_me (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:20AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is unavoidable by willy_me (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:48AM
  • Re:Couple of quick points by vinnythenose (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:56AM
  • Re:Out to get us/Linux Support by MCZapf (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:07AM
  • still hope for intellectual trolling. by gagganator (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:05AM
  • Heresay!!!!! by JohnTheFisherman (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @10:01AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is just an Intel scam anyway by JohnTheFisherman (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:36AM
  • FUD factory mackido by JohnTheFisherman (Score:2) Thursday April 12 2001, @06:10AM
  • the real reason by bertok (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @12:09PM
  • Darwin by clinko (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:12AM
  • Re:Darwin by davechen (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:05AM
  • No USB2? Thats a good thing!!! by DaHat (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:43AM
  • A bit of humor.... by syrupMatt (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:35AM
  • Re:Cheap shot, and not quite true by Johnno74 (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @11:50PM
  • Remember CPRM? by heptagram (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:20AM
  • Re:The annoying thing by FooBarney (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:28AM
  • The annoying thing by Evil Adrian (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:14AM
  • Re:The annoying thing by Evil Adrian (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:27AM
  • Re:Paying Apple back? by Petrophile (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:20AM
  • Re:USB 2.0 is unavoidable by Petrophile (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @11:10AM
  • by Consultant Jon (265243) on Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:25AM (#299288)
    I'll grant you, it's usb and not Firewire, but all technologies can't be lucky enough to have been invented by Apple.

    If it had been Apple's, then you know it would've done better. Sure, Intel has a vested interest in promoting USB, and sure, Intel is a pretty big company. But as big as Apple? Not by a long shot.

    You see, company size can't just be measured in terms of assets or market cap. It has to be measured in terms of love and caring. It has to be measured in terms of how many partisan zealots are clamoring to fight for the fatherland, and Apple takes the cake by far. There may be fewer mac users than Wintel users, but they're a whole lot more rabid. When you do something wrong (even if it was right and they just think it was wrong), then they'll let you know. Mac users are like that.

    How does this bode for USB 2.0?

    Well, if they want USB to succeed, then they'll have to bring it in line with Apple's standards, both of technical and cultural means. For one thing, they'll have to make it a lot more expensive. People are sheep and unwilling to invest in a technology that doesn't cost through the nose. (Just look at Microsoft or VA Linux if you want to know what I mean.)

    They'll also want to start vending it in twenty shades of pastel. People are sheep and unwilling to invest in a technology that doesn't put their children's Barbie collections to shame in sugary rainbow gawdiness. It's a fact.

    But most importantly, they will have to emulate Apple's exceptional and successful marketing techniques. Remember when Apple scortched Intel's bunny ads? That was hilarious. Intel will have to come out with a campaign that really demonstrates why you should use USB. They'll have to use a lot of nudity, and more importantly, they'll have to use celebrity nudity. A pinup photo spread of Albert Einstein covering his delicate genitalia with an assortment of grapes (each painted a different color to represent the different available USB colors as discussed above) with the slogan "USB: Yowzers" would go a long way towards bringing USB in line with Apple's projected growth.

    But most importantly of all, USB has to kill all its competition. We can't allow market inefficiencies to set in when multiple redundant technologies are being used across the industry. That's just wasteful. Apple learned this years ago when they killed the more successful Nubus in favor of their own proprietary PCI specification, and they haven't looked back. Unfortunately, the Wintel players haven't yet caught on to Apple's brilliant strategies, so they might be a little slower in turning the tables by killing up ASB. But if our economy is to grow into the next couple decades, we have to trim down our wastrel occupations and allow innovation to flourish.

    Only through these means shall USB reign supreme.
  • Re:USB 2.0 is just an Intel scam anyway by XMyth (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:09AM
  • Re:God I hate Microsoft by jotaeleemeese (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:44AM
  • Duh! by GuyZero (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:23AM
  • Re:Apple bigger than Intel??? by WolfDeusEx (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:47AM
  • USB and falling sales by closet_subversive (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:39AM
  • Re:Worse, because it seems serial ports disappeari by ChuyMatt (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @02:28PM
  • Re:Not a bad thing by Chakat (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:41AM
  • well I guess..... by modman (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:18AM
  • good call, Microsoft by janpod66 (Score:2) Wednesday April 11 2001, @11:41AM
  • Two different tools for two different jobs... by Lethyos (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:12AM
  • Re:Great, more Blue Screens o' Death by unisa_slashbot (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @08:50PM
  • Firewire, USB, and Microsoft by jjshoe (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:20AM
  • So long as... by Guppy06 (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @09:46AM
  • Re:Find me a firewire peripheral... by winterstar (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @07:35AM
  • RTFTA: Read the fscking trollanalysis by slaida1 (Score:1) Thursday April 12 2001, @02:00AM
  • Re:Is MS against USB now that Linux has it? by Jeff Taylor (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:55AM
  • Re:"There just aren't many USB devices"? by Space Coyote (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:19AM
  • Re:Only Reason by Count Fecal (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:47AM
  • Re:Worse, because it seems serial ports disappeari by Tech187 (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:11AM
  • Re:May be no big deal by Tech187 (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:43AM
  • Re:Out to get us/Linux Support by Tech187 (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:45AM
  • Re:Out to get us/Linux Support by Tech187 (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:46AM
  • Re:Do moderators even understand?? by Tech187 (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:49AM
  • Re:Not many USB devices? by jeffehobbs (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:09AM
  • Re:Not many USB devices? by eescabar (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:20AM
  • Re:Duh! by Arethereanyleft (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:54AM
  • Re:FireWire/USB support in Linux by Arethereanyleft (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @05:56AM
  • Can't any of you read? by Arethereanyleft (Score:1) Wednesday April 11 2001, @06:04AM
(1) | 2 | 3