Subject: Re: IEEE1394 (firewire) vs USB2
To: Kevin Sullivan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Chuck Yerkes <email@example.com>
Date: 08/02/2002 17:52:25
Quoting Kevin Sullivan (firstname.lastname@example.org):
> I'm looking to buy some external disks for my server at home. 3 years ago
Why external vs. internal?
> I would have gone with SCSI, but nowadays SCSI is very expensive and I
> really don't need the performance for my home system. So I'm comparing
> firewire and USB2.
SCSI performs better. It costs more.
> My new i386 machine (which will be the primary user of the disks) will have
> USB2 on the motherboard. But my G4 Imac has firewire (and cannot be
> upgraded to USB2),
No USB2 PCCards will work? (yet?)
> and I already have some firewire cables for my
> playstation2. USB2 drives would work in my USB1 laptop and other machines
> without additional hardware, albeit very slowly.
> The deciding factor may be NetBSD support, so: using 1.6 (i386 mostly),
> which is better supported, umass via USB2 or firewire? Is this likely to
> change soon? Also, does one or the other bus have serious design flaws
> which will cripple it?
Neither works with 1.6 that I know of. Let me also toss the
cup of gasoline that is Firewire2.
Firewire is very common in the video/film world. Getting
firewire on any machine should be pretty easy. Getting the
free (as in "like a bird") OS's support on it will always lag
the for-profit ventures.
USB2 drives should work with USB1. That's a plus. Firewire
is only 40MB/sec (slow SCSI). USB2 is theoretically a little
faster. Does having a USB1 device kick that down to "slow
Me? I'm poking around for a 3.5" firewire enclosure, but most
of them running the Oxford Chipset use IDE drives. So I can
stick a regular IDE disk into them - 3.5" or 2.5" depending on
Perhaps you just want to get a large IDE drive and stick it
inside your i386 box. 80 GB is around $110 on sale. Put in
in some enclosure later.