[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
RE: [OT] USB2 on Laptops?
- To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [OT] USB2 on Laptops?
- From: "Phil Harris" <phillip.harris1@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 18:26:09 -0000
- Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> USB 2.0 is actually quite expensive to implement. The chipset
> is roughly 3 times the cost of a standard USB 1.x one.
> So surely the same will be true of USB 2.0? Why do you expect
> the adoption of USB 2.0 to be quicker that that of Firewire?
No! USB 2.0 is *TRANSPARENT* to implement because as far as the user is
concerned it's just a USB port which is standard fayre on all modern PCs
whereas firewire still has limited market penetration.
> No, I didn't say that at all. USB 2.0 is almost exactly the
> same as Firewire.
In the same way that IDE is similar to SCSI perhaps? After all they do a
similar job...
> It is reinventing wheel when Firewire does almost the same
> job. The example you gave of SCSI and IDE is an interesting
> one as both standards do the same job very, very difrently.
> USB 2.0 and Firewire are so close as to be pointless.
Look ... I'm going to do the decent thing and make this the last posting
on this because basically we're not getting anywhere and just pissing
people off. You've appologised for insulting me which I accept but
you're not willing to participate in a *DISCUSSION* on the coexistence
of multiple competing standard interfaces.
> We could always fart in each other's faces ... that's a
> favourite of mine.
I'm sure it is...
Phil
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|