Slashdot Mirror
FireWire Goes Long Distance, Experimentally
P-Rod writes: "PC World.com News has an article detailing how Japanese researchers have created a low-cost way to send information through FireWire cables 100 meters at 400 Mbps. The current form of the Apple-created high-speed peripheral interface (known as the IEEE 1394 industry standard and dubbed i.Link by Sony) is limited to distances of 4.5 meters at that speed, its present top speed, unless a repeater device is used. This could bring new options to computer networking, especially considering FireWire's superb ease of use over Ethernet. "
Whats the advantage, besides speed, of using Firewire over Ethernet?
Last night I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas I'll never know.
But in the really real world, I have tried Fireware in my iMac DV... it is a very cool technology... I would LOVE to see a long distance version... perhaps a whole in house Firewire network... sweet. -Affegott 2 hundred and foty dollars, worth of puddin. awwww yeahh
The current form of the Apple-created high-speed peripheral interface (known as the IEEE 1394 industry standard and dubbed i.Link by Sony) is limited to distances of 4.5 meters at that speed, its present top speed, unless a repeater device is used. Oh fucking wonderful. Would some Japanese researchers care to tell me what I'm meant to do with the container-load of repeaters I just bought? I was gonna raise $6bn to cover the entire United states with a network of repeaters, placed in a grid of 4.5 meter squares. (Hey, they funded Iridium).
-- the most controversial site on the Web
Does anyone know of a good site for info on maximum lengths of SCSI, ethernet, Fibre Channel? I am personally interested in the effective length of TOSlink. I want to use one of my 'puters as a input on Living Room stereo using optical fibre. I don't want to go through all the trouble of setting up an Xterm and cabling if the fibre won't extend all the way to the other room.
Sorry if this is a little (or a lot) off topic. Moderate this as you wish.
_damnit_
_damnit_
It's my job to freeze you. -- Logan's Run
How is firewire any easier to use than Ethernet? You plug the wire into the computer, and it works, doesn't it? Since most (all?) Macs have ethernet built in, and most PCs dont' have Firewire, it doesn't seem like it is that much difference. I assume that you have to enter your TCP/IP settings either way (or use DHCP).
How different is USB and Firewire in design from SCSI? On the face of it, they sound like very similar technologies, except that USB is built-in with less hassle. But I haven't checked it out in any detail, as is usually the case with me and most hardware I don't own (either one, as it happens).
;)
Also, I was wondering about those USB keyboards: do I really need to be typing that fast? Do you think Word can keep up, or would the paperclip get dizzy?
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
I found the news of wireless firewire a lot more interesting.
:)
FW is really nice technology if everything falls in line - several meters at 200Mbps wireless, 400Mbps in long range cables and 800Mbps in "short" cabling. Cool..
sulka
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid, it is true that most stupid people are conservative."
Hmm.. Long distance, high bandwidth.. Sounds like fiberchannel, hopefully they'll be able to do it cheaper then fiberchannel runs right now...
Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
Ok, time for the big questions which generate a lot of +3 Informative replyes in the thread.
...) fit togheter or there are some liiitle protocol incompatibilities/extensions between them ?
What firewire sollutions exists for x86 PC's and are there Linux, *BSD, BeOS drivers for them ?
How much more they cost comparing to Ethernet and USB ?
Can you home-build cables for them you have to buy the wires too ?
Does ALL of the devices (FireWire, IEEE 1394 "compatible", iLink, FooWire
1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
I don't really see how this would be any better for home networking than Ethernet. Your still going to have to setup the interface somehow, right? If your want to use a cablemodem to connect to the Internet your still going to have to use ethernet somewhere (well for the time being since AFAIK all cablemodems use an ethernet connection). I think that fast (and later gigabit) ethernet will satisfy the needs of home networks (and most corporate ones) for the foreseeable future.
;-> ) Well you get the idea it'd be cool, though I imagine the MPAA and the RIAA might want to start sueing people or charging royalties for these devices since they are of course opposed to any nifty technologies that make both general consumers and us geeks go "hey cool" ;->
The big potentional I see for firewire is networking regular consumer electronics with computers. Having sort of plug'n'play networking for things like your TV, VCR, DVD player, stereo etc... so that you could control them from your PC and move data between them easily, then that would be cool. Like caputing your home movies and vaction pictures onto your house server then being able to pull them off from any TV in the house, or being able to play MP3's from any stereo in the house all off of a central server, or taping Quake matches to your VCR (or hell just setting it for spectators to watch them live
Just my rambeling late night thoughts on what I'd like to be able to do with this kinda technology.
"Listen: We are here on Earth to fart around. Don't let anybody tell you any different!" - Kurt Vonnegut
Since the original article was sketchy of details, here's a link to the Japanese group that actually did it.
I know jack about cabling and plastics, but it says that they're using poly-methyl methacrylate wideband plastic optical fiber that's either Graded-Index (100m) or Multi-Layer (50m).
This also piqued my interest: "Perfluorinated POF has been successfully used in trials of 10 Gbps transmission. However, this POF is considered appropriate for office applications because it is only one-fifth the thickness of poly-methyl methacrylate POF. Expectations in the industry have grown for the potential of the easier-to-use poly-methyl methacrylate POF for digital home networks."
Could some engineering type explain all of this?
There is a group developing IEEE1394 compliance for Linux.
Their (old) website is located at http://eclipt.uni-klu.ac.at/ieee1394/, with their new website at linux1394.sourceforge.net
Hope this helps.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Dunno about SCSI. Fibre I believe has up to a kilometer or two maximum distance, surely more than you'll need.
As far as ethernet, depends what kind. 10/100baseT goes about 87m, 10base2 goes up to a bit less than 200 meters, and 10base5 goes up to a bit less than 500 meters. Of course, I've never seen a working 10base5 installation, just remnants of cable left over from olden days gone by.
Dunno nothin' about TOSlink though. If it's fibre, it should be able to go quite a ways, I'd imagine.
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
It's an IEEE standard. So's ethernet, come to think of it...
As far as relevance goes, it's techie=stuff, and could impact people who use fireware (mac users, linux-ppc users, etc.). Plus it has to do with networking, and proposes to be a replacement for ethernet. Gee, I work with ethernet all day, it's my job...
This is WAY more relevant to slashdot than something like, say, the movie review earlier today or some of the other things that have been posted.
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
Can't Bluetooth do all the without wires?
_______________
Wow, 400mbps shared between 6 000 000 000 internet users.. that makes 2 400 000 000 000 mbps EACH.
/'s like I usually do.
I hope I didn't get my *'s mixed up with my
I understand a littany of off-topic posts, but WHAT ?
Suitability of anything over anything else requires a context.
"Staples found to be better than paper clips" - sure, maybe for holding paper together, but not for ejecting Mac floppies.
Firewire is nice for peripherals, but why must people compare it to ethernet? It's made to connect several devices *locally* in a high-speed fashion.
You're all mumbling crap about 63 devices blah blah blah and wondering about addressing schemes.
Is there a limitation that people don't know about regarding Ethernet MAC addresses?
Then, you talk about collisions.
Huh? Properly Vlanned and subnetted switched networks should be in place to deal with collisions.
Fibre Channel? First, it's 100 MBps, not 100mbps. Second, outside of external arrays on expensive-as-shit multiprocessor servers, when do you see it? You don't.
How many of the people complaining about SCSI actually know if it's the bus which is holding them up? Fine... it's nicer to run fiber from one rack to another than to get those damned SCSI cables routed around.
I think that most of the commenters are people who just get hard-ons when you mention fiber.
Firewire, Fast Ethernet, Ethernet, SCSI, Fibre Channel, USB, USB-II... when does it stop? How many devices shall we end up with that can't talk to one another? How many upgrades shall we have simply because we need new interfaces on them?
You know what we need? A cheaper solution. Why should SCSI cables cost so damned much? The adapters to plug your Fast SCSI-II drive into your U2W cable?
Keyword for success and unification is commodity . Which of the abovementioned standards is commodity? Ethernet/Fast Ethernet. RJ45 connectors? Cat5? Commodity.
Yeah, you're right though. Let's make it so there's no way in hell you can get what you need to get the new system on the network at 10 minutes after 8 in the evening. </rant>
-NevDull
400 Mbit/s Firewire as an ethernet replacement, well maybe, but then what about Gigabit ethernet (1000 Mbit/s) as a SCSI/Firewire alternative?
Is that plausible?
I've seen a lot of comments about how FireWire is supposed to replace SCSI or Ethernet or USB. FireWire was meant to replace SCSI, it's not a network like Ethernet. However, it has a couple of advantages over SCSI. True Plug and Play. On a Power Macintosh one can insert a harddisk into the FireWire chain and it'll show up on the desktop, vice versa works as well. Scalability. The original spec is 400 Mbps, the 1394b spec is 800 Mbps and more is on the way. Also, a slower device using 400 Mbps on a 800 Mbps chain will NOT slow the whole bus down, as is the case with USB and SCSI. Easy. FireWire is appearing in all digital camcorders now and will be appearing in a lot more devices. Imagine your DVD player digitally connected up to your amp and a digital TV. These days, one can buy a 1299 dollar iMac with a 799 dollar camcorder and make movies out of the box that are far better than anything out there 4 years ago at any pricelevel below 20,000 dollars. Intel is pushing USB like crazy, but remember that USB needs a host. That's why Intel likes USB so much (and dislikes FireWire) since the PC (with Intel Pentium processor of course) will always be the center of things with USB. With FireWire devices can control each other without the need of a single host controlling devices. Not good for Intel, good for the consumer. Ethernet has it's place in the world, just like USB (slow hub based bus for keyboards and mice). FireWire will find it's own sweetspot. The reason PC users haven't seen it a lot is that Intel is not playing nice here, refusing to implement 1394 in their chipsets. Citing a lack of market for it. I guess Apple needs to create that market for them, just like they did with USB.
Hasn't the IEEE standard been dropped? I thought
that's just --Apple-- now. And haven't some ppl been taunting USB2.0 over Firewire for video stuff? (since that's really an open standard and so forth...)
--exa--
400 Mbps / 6,000,000,000 internet users. Sounds like the UUNET backbone :)
kwsNI
If your card is using a long wave laser (1300 nm)you can reach distances of 10 km without a repeater. This does not mean that the average optical FC card (850 nm) can do this, but versions many vendors cards with long wave lasers do exhist. You can also get 30 m using copper HSSDC, which is a bit cheaper.
Who needs disk anyway. Just buy more RAM. :)
Use SCI (IEEE standard 1596-1992) - SCSI/TCP/IP over SCI. That'll do nicely thank you.
Deleted
No hub is needed, making the network much easier to set up and more dynamic.
Self-configuring/bus mastering
High and guarrantied bandwidth for devices that are likely to take advantage of it (DV)
Interfaces directly with consumer peripherals (with FireWire ports).
Peripherals are equal 'citizens' to CPUs rather subservient to them
I think this last point in particular is a key point about FireWire in general that people often miss: devices can talk to each other over FireWire without the presence of a computer, which is why it is so attractive to manufacturers of consumer electronics who can use it for their own purposes and not simply to hook the device to a computer.
Using longwave tranceivers (1300 nm) FibreChannel can use cable lengths of up to 10 km with 1 Gbps data rate, and you'll start seeing 2 Gbps products real soon. These are't experimental products either, you can buy them now. FibreChannel can aslo use fabric switches to make networks considerable larger than anyone in their right mind would want to make.
The price can be a bit of a problem for a lot of applications right now, but if you need the bandwidth, expandability, and cable lengths, FibreChannel can provide them.
This may offer a great boon to firewire,
but there have been primarily short sighted comments so far.
Forget firewire for a second. What this article is realy saying is that this researcher has come up with a 400mbps over 100M link that was cheap!
The technology that he used was described as cheap, and that means that it could be applied to other areas. If it was cheap enough to be come commodity like cat 5, a new breed of 400mbps networking standard could develop.
Considering it's 4 times faster than 100mbps, and 40 times faster than the 10mbps that most of us are still running on, that new signalling/cabling standard may indeed have somewhere to go.
More Caffeine. NOW
OK, I'm not going to give a full technical description here, but:
;-)
... you'll just have to type slower :-)
USB, PS/2, Serial Port, ADB (Apple Desktop Bus) are designed for low speed peripherals such as keyboards, modems or printers. USB does or will rule the roost here.
SCSI, IDE, Firewire are designed for higher speed devices such as hard disks. IDE is very limited (only really any good for internal hard disks), SCSI is (or was) superior to IDE in that it can support up to 7 periperals, longer cables and devices other than hard disks, but has cable termination and multiple version issues. Firewire is being touted as a replacement to SCSI, and will eventually be faster, but SCSI is still the choice for high perfomance if you can put up with its limitations.
Ethernet is designed for connecting computers (and printers) to each other in networks.
There is some overlap - in particular, Intel are pushing USB 2 as something to use instead of firewire. However, USB 2 is still vaporware, will be slower than Firewire, and has a lot of penalties stemming from its design as a relatively low speed protocol. USB 1 is also used for low speed storage like Zip disks.
So the comparison between USB and SCSI doesn't make an awful lot of sense - they are really designed for different things (unless you are talking about something like a Zip disk, in whch case SCSI will be higher performance if available).
Oh, and every computer I have ever bought has had SCSI built in and hasn't been any hassle, so what is buit in depends on what you buy
As for your keyboard, I doubt that Word can keep up with a USB keyboard
I can't really see why anyone would want to run Firewire over distances of 100 meters. It certainly wouldn't be for saving money over Ethernet. I was at Best Buy yesterday to pick up a Cat 5 patch cable, and I saw a 6' Firewire cable for $75!
Friends don't let friends use multiple inheritance.
Ethernet can be just as easy to use as Firewire or any plug and play system. DHCP rocks for allocating IP's if you want to avoid setup hassles. DHCP can easily be set up to hand out an IP address to a specific hardware ethernet address. Firewire was not meant to replace ethernet as a networking system, its meant to be a perhiprial connection system (and a kick ass one at that). Any networking system still has to identify each system uniquely. I don't think many people are going to be connecting they're company webserver to the net via firewire anytime soon.
Firewire is only preferred by 19% of Slashdot readers.
Statistics in the recent poll "My favorite paripheral connector" state that 19% of Slashdot geeks prefer firewire, while 35% use garden hose.
I wonder if there are any recent tests on garden hose to see how its signal performs over long distance.
-ShelbyCobra
Living life in the right side of the s-plane
I don't get why this would be useful. As far as i can tell firewire has only be implemented for connecting peripherals to cpu's. Are you suggesting doing system to system networking with this technology? Interesting but then it just ends up being ethernet all over again all the same problems withOUT 20 years of making it work.
I have had similar conversation about fiber channel. I have noticed a number of people not directly involved with networking think the problem is the current technologies. Well your correct, but the answer could not possibly be to replace them with something brand new. Most all new datalink technologies like fiber channel and firewire offer similar capabilities as Ethernet/fast e/gig e. But mostly lack deployed standards and all the features need to deploy to thousands of nodes.
- Dustin -
That firewire runs power over its "firewire" cable while ilink does not. Firewire is like USB in this way, in that low power devices can get power from the host and not need to be plugged into an outlet.
I think other than that the 2 are interchangable (I saw a 3rd party firewire card with the firewire and iLink logo..)
http://www.firewireworld.com for more info
Ah, didn't know about the segmenting details there. I just knew it was under 200m. I've never had to deal with more than 10 or so nodes on a segment, or more than about 15m with thin ethernet (all this was home lan cabling). All my professional experience has been with 10/100baseT.
Of course, in the case of the user here, he's only wantin' to hook stuff up to his stereo, so the number or nodes shouldn't be a problem.
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
I don't know what else you are looking for, but in general, glass has better transmission qualities than plastic. That is, at the wavelengths that diodes currently run best(IR and red) the signal can travel through more glass before being lost to diffusion and noise.
The main disadvantages for glass are cost and flexibility. To some unknowing home user who is used to coiling cables around his finger, leaving loops in cable runs that are converted to kinks when someone pulls on them, yanking speaker wire around the sharp corners of furniture and so forth, glass would be bad. Even really thin and surprisingly flexible glass will break when you bend it too sharply. Plastic doesn't have this problem. There is still signal loss around curves, but that happens to both glass and plastic when the curves start getting sharp.
If you are wondering about Graded Index or Multi-Layer, then we are talking about the Index of Refraction of the plastic or glass medium. Graded Index has a continuous variation in IoR from the center to the edge. The idea being that if the light starts to stray from the center of the fiber(as occurs when the fiber is bent), it will be bent(refracted) back toward the center. The Multi-Layer form does the same thing but with sharp, discrete boundaries between the layers with differing IoR. This causes a reflection rather than a gradual refraction. Typically the layers are set up to reduce the loss because with each reflection some of the light is not reflected. If you've ever heard of "multi-coated" optics on binoculars or telescopes, then we are toalking about the same thing. The idea is to minimize the loss due to reflection that happens whenever the light meets a boundary between media with different IoR. The Multi-Layer is trying to emulate the gradient. The difference as far as the light is concerned(whether a given setup appears to be a gradient or sharp boundary) depends on the wavelength, the delta of the IoR, the delta rate of the the IoR between multiple layers, and thickness of each layer. IOW, as you make more layers and the layers get thinner and the IoR delta between each gets smaller, multi-layer -> gradient. The gradient is ideal, but as usual harder(AKA more expensive) to build and build well. A typical gradient fiber will start out as a multi-layer that then gets "treated" with heat or whatever to cause the layers to melt or diffuse into each other. IF all goes well, the discrete layers turn into a smooth gradient. This kind of process works for both glass and plastic although much less effort is spent on making "good" plastic since generally "poor" glass beats it over distance anyway. For short length multi mode fiber, plastic can and does compete. For long hops, single mode glass is the only way to go.
Now that fiber is making its way into the more hostile and cost sensitive environment of untrained home users with generally short hops, plastic's toughness and low cost will probably win over glass.
Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
- W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO
FireWireWorld.com has a nice analysis of the PC World article here.
Home FireWire/1394 Networking Takes Giant Leap Forward
Friday, March 31st, 2000 [3:00 PM]
PC World is reporting on a research project in Japan that has successfully transmitted 1394 data across 100 meters at 400 Mbps, the current limit to FireWire/1394 transmission speeds. This is significantly faster than was considered possible at those distances, and, more importantly, could lead to home networking. According to PC World:
A Japanese government research project headed by the Electronic Industries Association of Japan has succeeded in sending IEEE 1394 signals--an emerging standard for digital home networks--over a long distance at high speed.
The breakthrough confirms the system's suitability for use as a network around the home and opens up new possibilities for its use beyond the home, the EIAJ says in a statement.
IEEE 1394 interfaces are increasingly being built into home electronics equipment like video cameras, televisions, and PCs, sometimes under the FireWire or iLink [sic] brand names. But most incorporate electrical interfaces that can send the 400-megabits-per-second IEEE 1394 data stream over 4.5 meters through metallic cables only. While this is adequate for connecting a series of devices located close to one another, it is not sufficient for running a network around a typical house.
The Japanese trials, which were headed by Keio University's Yasuhiro Koike, succeeded in sending data at 400 mbps, which is fast enough for digital video, over a distance of 100 meters.
You can find more information in the PC World article, which we recommend.
The FireWireWorld Analysis: This is fantastic news. Home wiring is an important part of the future of FireWire/1394. Home entertainment as well as centralized control of appliances could easily adopt the FireWire/394 standard. This would have huge implications for all areas of FireWire/1394 use as economies of scale would brings more advances more quickly, across the board.
This is one of the most significant developments in FireWire/1394 so far this year.
Maybe Linus wants to use the iLink(1394) port on his Vaio Picturebook?
--
--
blinko - "the nail that sticks up gets hammered down"
Or is the H key an example of western imperialism that you're rebelling against?
1) Firewire was designed to replace SCSI - true
2) SCSI isn't plug & play - somewhat false.
SCSI for the most part doesn't 'hot swap' as nicely as Firewire, and SCSI for the most part doesn't have auto device IDs unless you consider SCAM - SCSI Configured AutoMatically - something I've seen even in ISA SCSI adaptors. So Firewire isn't that much of a quantum leam in those aspects, but hopefully the cables will be cheaper, they are more convenient.
Unfortunately, the only 'Firewire' drive devices I've seen are those that use IDE drives internally rather than offing that aspect of its circuitry.
On any Windows 9X / NT system with a SCSI adaptor installed, installing a new hard drive / zip / CDROM, it will automatically show up. With Macs, when you plug in a Zip, supposedly you do need to add the extension, which is goofy in my opinion.
3) The next home video interconnect standard is called HAVi - Home Audio Video interconnect (or interlink or something like that), which uses the IEEE1394 standard, the same connection that your digital camcorder uses. Pioneer has demonstrated some nice looking prototypes, as shown in either Home Theater magazine or maybe Popular Science, I forget.
If Intel's going to have it's chips in anything that will connect to a Digital TV (like the proposed X-box?), they are best off supporting IEE1394, but I suppose they'll just drag their feet until the X-box happens, but given its release time table, they would probably be significantly behind times as even the PS2 supposedly has IEEE1394 support _already_.
I wonder if Apple will start demanding that people pay by there meter for thier Fire Wire Tax
Next, Firewire is a bus protocol, Ethernet is a network protocol. Ethernet vs. Firewire is like saying Ferrari vs. Mac Truck. Even Firewire vs. USB is a rather silly, although I'm sure Intel sees it as a contest.
The next thing I have a problem with is this urge to turn all interconnect busses into a home networking solution. 150 foot USB! 10 meter wireless IDE! Yippee!
Then again, with Firewire, it does actually make sense. It would be so cool to have a house wired for Firewire. Then, I would need only one sat receiver or cable box downstairs in the den and simply hook up my bedroom (or outdoor or basement or kitchen) TV to the Firewire connection and we'd be in business. With the right accessories, you could control channels through Firewire too.
Obviously, if two people wanted to watch different things at the same time, there'd be a problem. But the solution now is to rent another cable or sat box (big bucks), or carry the damn thing to the bedroom and hook it up there.
Think also what it could do for home surveilliance. Put your little vidcams everywhere and hook them up to Firewire. Use the monitor to switch to different views. Heck, maybe even tell the cameras to deliver lots of little low-res views so the bandwidth doesn't saturate.
And since Firewire is designed for this, it would be far superior to Ethernet even if there were a 400 Mbps version. Firewire delivers the Quality of Service needed. There might even be a market for Ethernet to Firewire bridges, so you could use the Firewire cable to network the house for computers, or to hook Firewire up to your old cable modem.
It could be the beginning of a new (excuse me) paradigm. As a bus gets better at working long distances, maybe it will supplant the LAN in some settings. And Firewire is great because you don't need a computer in the middle of it. Making Firewire work over these long enough distances is the only thing that makes sense. Then someday there will be wireless...
Imagine having your house firewired. You buy that new DVD player, and plug it into your living room TV.
Two weeks later you want to watch a movie, in your bedroom.
Instead of unplugging your DVD, you just tell it to put the picture upstairs. Your TV's infrared receiver now receives signals like your DVD player was in the room.
This type of scenario is why firewire home networks would be a great addition to a home (once all devices have a firewire port on them.)
I thought that Apple designed and patented the *connectors* that are used in the Firewire specification, but only *participated* in the working group consisting of a number of companies (Sony, Phillips, Yamaha, etc) that actually invented the Firewire spec.
...
In other words, its incorrect to say that Apple invented Firewire... but they did invent the *connectors*.
Could someone with a better working knowledge of how the IEEE-1394 spec was presented clear this up? Or, point me in the direction of details about where this technology actually came from
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
"History of the IEEE 1394 Standard
The 1394 digital link standard was conceived in 1986 by technologists at Apple Computer, who chose the trademark 'FireWire', in reference to its speeds of operation. The first specification for this link was completed in 1987. It was adopted in 1995 as the IEEE 1394 standard. "
So much for your thoughts. BTW. The 4-wire connector was designed by Sony as an alternative to the 6-wire one.
I think long distance FireWire would be cool but I'm bothered by the people wanting to use it to watch television or DVDs. Want to know a simple way to watch TV from the DVD downstairs? Run a coax from the DVD to your TV. Get a radio remote to control it. Sheesh. I think this would be great for device networking in data centers. You could get SCSI speeds over really long distances, need more speed? Just add more FW ports. I really think that FW has the potential to replace IEEE 802.x in many environments, especially as the protocol stands now. It would be much simpler to treat any networked device as a remote device on the network. The autonegotiation would go over really well for the non-networking engineers setting up a LAN in their house. Besides the auto-setup all the routing and such is done in the hardware so the software and CPU are totally free to do other things, this is a good thing when executing a large/complex remote file.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
How can anything be 'easier to use' then ethernet? Of all the computer technologies I've ever used Ethernet has probably been the easiest to use. Basicaly just plug your computer in and go. I suppose it requires some planning on huge networks, but I don't see how firewire would be better there, especial since they are only now getting to be 100 meters, whereas ethernet has been that long for aeges.
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
I doubt you could power a whole computer over firewire, so the power aspect dosn't really help you out in networking...
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
Some manufacturer demo'd links over 60 to 100 km's of singlemode fibre. I was to busy playing with the funny gadgets they passed around to us for attending the presentation that i don't remember what kind of bandwidth they were talking about (hey, i don't have clients with offices that big). Pretty sure it was 10Mb or over. They already had it working along some oil-pipeline with a few repeaters along the way.
Message on our company Intranet:
"You have a sticker in your private area"
beauty is only a light switch away
First of all, everything should be moved over to optical. AFAIK it's far faster than anything and can go the distance, so why argue over 100bT and ieee 1394. Sure, it's expensive, so are firewire devices. But here's the deal - the big networking businesses should just drop ethernet and firewire and everything else and concentrate on optical. High demand and mass production will bring Optical prices down around those of ethernet.
b00ya, fastest networking available at an affordable price.
-kidlinux.
keep in mind that firewire is a new technology compared to Enet and that if firewire reaches the speeds that Ive been told (well over a GBit) then there is your advantage right there.
- If I had to choose between the two, Id choose the one with the puffy little shoes.
Guess I was too lazy when I posted that earlier today... so thanks for doing my web browsing for me.
And I guess I'll also just go get my question ("Is the 4-wire adapter compatible with the 6-wire one, and are there convertors so I can use the i.link port on my Sony laptop?") answered when I have some free time to read the IEEE1394 trade association web site...
:)
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
Can you give us a reason for your detestation of your 'forbidden letter'. Was it involved in some traumatic incident earlier in life? Or is it part of some wider belief system?
Do you work alone, or are you part of a broader movement?
Also, are any more letters 'forbidden'? It would be really useful if you could give a complete list, so we can try to avoid any more infringements.
TomV