Slashdot Mirror


XP Service Pack 2 Breaks FireWire

Diluted writes "FireWire Depot is reporting about a problem with Service Pack 2 for Windows XP. Apparently not liking the competition from 1394b, Microsoft decided to limit S800 devices to a quarter of their speed capability."

55 comments

  1. Fixed? by bdipert · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I thought this was fixed in a subsequent patch?

  2. Who uses FireWire, anyway? by Nicolae · · Score: 0, Troll

    I've yet to find someone with a use for it.

    1. Re:Who uses FireWire, anyway? by wed128 · · Score: 1

      The only use i see for that much speed on a peripheral bus is for video applications and for high speed backups. for pretty much anything else, it's a lot of wasted bandwidth.

    2. Re:Who uses FireWire, anyway? by Bastian · · Score: 1

      You really start to notice the difference with sustained file transfers, such as large files or backups.

      If you're not one of the poor saps whose laptop has a 4-pin 1394 port, you also really notice not having to carry a power cord and wall wart for your external hard drive everywhere with you.

    3. Re:Who uses FireWire, anyway? by drakaan · · Score: 1
      Right. I mean, who would think of using firewire for video applications. It's not like digital camcorders have firewire ports...

      Seriously, though, digital camcorders make up the bulk of firewire-connected electronic devices. Why hamstring their performance under the auspices of a service pack? I'm sure the fix makes other things speedier while firewire transfers are going on, but at the expense of the transfer itself? Why?

      --
      "Murphy was an optimist" - O'Toole's commentary on Murphy's Law
    4. Re:Who uses FireWire, anyway? by cap'n+gut · · Score: 1

      I use it often to transfer video from my DV camera, and with my external DVD burner. I prefer it to USB 2.0. Also nice to use to link 2 pc's to tranfer files. I thought everyone used it.

    5. Re:Who uses FireWire, anyway? by hawkbug · · Score: 1

      You're kidding right? I use firewire everyday, at work and at home. Work: connect an ipod to, also my external firewire drive which I take between home and work. Home: video editing using my camcorder with firewire output on it. Beats the crap out of analog conversions using a haupauge card or something like that.

    6. Re:Who uses FireWire, anyway? by VoidWraith · · Score: 1

      Why do you prefer it to USB 2.0? I understand if you don't like how USB 2.0 isn't always actually 2.0 but sometimes is set up as 1.1, but a true USB 2.0 interface is faster than firewire. 410 MB/s as opposed to 400 MB/s. Its not a big difference, but while firewire devices and even cabling are so much more expensive, I'll stick with USB.

    7. Re:Who uses FireWire, anyway? by mink · · Score: 1

      1394b (the affected item in this discussion) afaik is 800MB/s

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  3. What the...? by KILNA · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why the hell would Microsoft consider a device connection bus standard to be competition? That statement makes absolutley no sense.

    --
    Error: PANTS NOT FOUND. Press <F1> to continue.
    1. Re:What the...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say Microsoft do sell hardware so maybe there's alternative hardware that uses firewire as a connection... but it's probably just another retarded submittal.

    2. Re:What the...? by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 1

      Call me crazy, but I think it was an attempt at humor.

      Whenever Redmond is found to have broken something, it's usually a competitor's product. And now it is being reported that 1394b is slowed down because of XP SP2. I'm guessing that Slashdot's filters discarded the <sarcasm> tags.

    3. Re:What the...? by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Why the hell would Microsoft consider a device connection bus standard to be competition?"

      I actually had somebody give me shit a couple of weeks ago denying a statement I made about Slashdot sensationalizing MS news stories.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    4. Re:What the...? by KILNA · · Score: 1

      Actually the OP was serious, in another post he equates Apple involvement in Firewire and Intel involvement in USB as reason enough for Microsoft to consider Firewire "competition". Never mind the fact that they address two completely different usage profiles. When's the last time you saw a Firewire PC keyboard, or a consumer DV camera with USB-based video transfer?

      Lets time-shift a bit and look for a theoretical scenario in the past that would be similar to today's situation to see if it makes any sense. Apple only had serial interconnects to printers back in the day... It's like saying a patch to Win 3.1 that breaks serial printing was done because serial is supported by Apple, and parallel is a more common bus for printing on the PC.

      --
      Error: PANTS NOT FOUND. Press <F1> to continue.
    5. Re:What the...? by spectral · · Score: 1

      A bunch of cameras are coming out with USB 2.0 ports, so the lackeys at CompUSA told me. They couldn't SHOW me one, because they're idiots, but they insist that firewire camcorders are dead and USB 2.0 is the new hotness.

    6. Re:What the...? by KILNA · · Score: 1

      I've seen a few combo video/still cameras that do data transfer for the still camera over USB and video over Firewire. That only further proves my point that they're only marginally competing busses without 100% overlap.

      --
      Error: PANTS NOT FOUND. Press <F1> to continue.
  4. At least they have a solution by xTMFWahoo · · Score: 1

    I'm glad to see that they have a fix for the problem listed. I think it's nice that MS acknowledges the problem with a fix. Not sure how degrading the speed is a "fix" or a security feature...

    --
    "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it." Mark Twain.
  5. Huh? by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Apparently not liking the competition from 1394b"

    Since when did Microsoft compete with FireWire? The only real competition to 1394 is USB, and that's an Intel technolog.

    That, and Microsoft has already released a patch.

    1. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Apparently not liking the competition from 1394b"

      Since when did Microsoft compete with FireWire? The only real competition to 1394 is USB, and that's an Intel technolog.


      It's true. Apparently computers compete with electricity too.

  6. well.... by schnits0r · · Score: 1

    to be honoest, if all it broke on my machine was firewire I'd be okay, but it also takes down the internet while it's at it, forcing me to have to restart the dhcp service about every 30 seconds or so for it to actually allow me to get out on the net. Has anyone else had this problem, if so how did oyu solve it? (sorry, I'm a Debian person, not an XP person.)

    1. Re:well.... by El · · Score: 1

      SP2 by default turns on the software firewall... have you tried turning it off?

      --

      "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    2. Re:well.... by schnits0r · · Score: 1

      yes.

  7. Fixed with patch by jfb3 · · Score: 5, Informative
  8. Patch? Fix? by Diluted · · Score: 2, Informative

    Not fixed in a patch or released as a hotfix, but their 'fix' is for the person affected to edit their registry. Your average user is not going to want to edit their registry.

    As far as the competition angle... USB is intel's protocol, firewire is largely driven by apple... that was my point about competition.

    The real issue here is taht Ms's monopoly allows them to crush a protocol if they so desire.

    1. Re:Patch? Fix? by doofusclam · · Score: 1
      As far as the competition angle... USB is intel's protocol, firewire is largely driven by apple... that was my point about competition.

      The real issue here is taht Ms's monopoly allows them to crush a protocol if they so desire.


      Dude, take off that shiny metal headgear. Why would Microsoft exert influence on a standard that doesn't affect their bottom line? You've pulled this out of your ass, ever considered a career in celebrity 'news'???
    2. Re:Patch? Fix? by Diluted · · Score: 1

      *takes off his tinfoil hat*

      Maybe it is conspiratorial of me to make that suggestion but really... why else would they do it? I can't think of any security or stability reasons, unless their handling of S800 devices is so terrible that it can't keep up.

      The only plausible reason in my mind is that Microsoft has some sort of problem with 1394 and because they have the market share to do so, they are able to cripple it into non-usefulness.

    3. Re:Patch? Fix? by mebob · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They may have been driven by those companies, but nobody is really battling for either. Intel happily includes firewire on most of their boards and apple includes USB2 in all their computers now.

      Now thing might change a little with wireless USB, bluetooth, etc,.. but a company is always going to back a technology more when they played a role or invested something into its creation.

      --
      =1000101
    4. Re:Patch? Fix? by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "The real issue here is taht Ms's monopoly allows them to crush a protocol if they so desire."

      Why do I have the feeling that if the little line about MS not liking the competition wasn't in the article, it wouldn't have been posted?

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    5. Re:Patch? Fix? by c0d3h4x0r · · Score: 1

      Maybe it is conspiratorial of me to make that suggestion but really... why else would they do it?

      Yeah, because you know, mistakes never ever happen, and Microsoft never ever ships bugs they didn't mean to put in their software in the first place.

      Stupid jackass.

      --
      Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
  9. Why are you complaining now? by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Service Pack 2 has been out for what, 6 months?

    And you just noticed that Firewire was broken?

    Why are some people just starting to complain NOW, months after SP2 has been released?

    For the record, I haven't had any noticable problems with SP2. It works fine for me.

    Some of our developers had problems, but that's because they weren't smart enough to to deal with the integrated firewall. They were complaining when *spyware* was attempting to establish an outside connection.

    Also for the record, I'm not the windows admin.

    1. Re:Why are you complaining now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are some people just starting to complain NOW, months after SP2 has been released?

      Because Microsoft took away the ability to block the service pack three days ago. Lots of people are now upgrading whether they wanted to or not.

    2. Re:Why are you complaining now? by avalys · · Score: 1

      I assume it's taken a while to notice because not many PCs come with Firewire 800. In fact, until I saw this article, I thought Apple was the only company shipping computers with it.

      Most PCs, if they have Firewire at all, have FW400 (the original).

      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
    3. Re:Why are you complaining now? by Gary+Destruction · · Score: 1

      Many companies won't install new service packs right away. They want time to test them and SP2 can break alot of applications. The delay also allows time for other issues to be resolved before the service pack is installed.

    4. Re:Why are you complaining now? by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 1

      I agree that you shouldn't install new service packs right away, but it has been 6 months, which is enough time to test and prepare for the upgrade.

  10. and this is news? by doofusclam · · Score: 5, Informative
    http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17794

    Win XP SP2 "turns Firewire 800 into Firewire 100"

    Oops a daisy

    By INQUIRER staff: Wednesday 11 August 2004, 09:55
    THE MODERATOR of the RME forum has warned that installing Windows XP SP2 can lead to the bus speed being limited to 100Mbit/s.

    Matthias Carstens posted the message on the RME forum yesterday, but says it's not a problem particular to RME products. He said: "It affects any Firewire 800 device. If you have a FW800 PCI card and an FW 800 hard disk, go see the bits come one by one through the Firewire cable".

    RME, he said, was aware of the problem for some time, but "didn't really imagine that Microsoft would have the guts to try to bury an existing standard. We just downloaded the final public version and it is simply unbelievable".

    He said that some companies are trying to sell Firewire 800 drivers so everything will be hunky-dory. But, he said, these drivers probably won't work correctly with a Fireface 800.

    But phew, there is an answer. He said after the SP2 update, if you install the old SP1 Firewire drivers all will be well. "In our tests this solved all problems and brought back the old performance and compatibility".

    He said RME will release detailed instructions on how to do this today.


    1. Re:and this is news? by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Or you can just edit the registry to remove the restriction. As usual, people are taking some Microsoft tweak and turning it into a grand conspiracy.

    2. Re:and this is news? by advocate_one · · Score: 1
      Or you can just edit the registry to remove the restriction. As usual, people are taking some Microsoft tweak and turning it into a grand conspiracy.

      so why would sp2 even touch that registry entry then???

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    3. Re:and this is news? by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Because everybody who works at Microsoft is a compulsive tweaker.

    4. Re:and this is news? by AhBeeDoi · · Score: 1

      I don't usually wear a tinfoil hat but aren't compulsive tweakers usually looking for improvements in performance?

    5. Re:and this is news? by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Your notion of "improved performance" may not be Microsoft's. These are the guys that invented dynamically resized swap files!

  11. Could someone clarify? Registry hack or patch? by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Could someone clarify?

    I thought the problem with Firewire was resolved with a patch. But the resolution also mentions a Registry hack.

    However, the Download page does not mention any registry hack.

    Is this problem fixed by the patch, or by a registry hack? Either? Both? Neither?

    1. Re:Could someone clarify? Registry hack or patch? by Gary+Destruction · · Score: 2, Informative

      From the Microsoft link for the update: After, you install this update, if you add a host controller for a new 1394 device to your computer, you must add or modify the SidSpeed entry in the Windows registry for the new 1394 host controller. To do this, follow these steps:

    2. Re:Could someone clarify? Registry hack or patch? by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 1

      Apparently I cannot read. My eyes tend to glaze over when reading these patch notices.

      Thank you.

  12. News Flash! by recursiv · · Score: 1

    Microsoft just dealt what many leading experts think will be a fatal blow to the primary competition of Windows XP, 1394b, also known as Firewire. Now that Firewire has been dealt with, Windows XP will have a much better chance of maintaining market share.

    --
    I used to bulls-eye womp-rats in my pants
  13. Already patched, KB Article here. by michael+path · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Patched November 4, 2004.

    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/885222

    1. Re:Already patched, KB Article here. by Lukey+Boy · · Score: 1

      Thanks for linking to the article that's in the posted story, I never would've found that patch otherwise!

  14. Microsoft Windows XP updates are harmful. by dimss · · Score: 1

    WinXP updates break Canon Multipass devices. This happened to my client. Their devices mystically stopped to work one day. After reinstalling WinXP, they resumed their operation for one or two days. Uninstalling "hotfixes" helped!

    Now they have to use SP2. Say goodbye to canon multipass... Canon refuses to fix drivers.

    1. Re:Microsoft Windows XP updates are harmful. by Kalriath · · Score: 2, Informative

      Huh? My Canon Multipass works FINE on Windows XP SP2 with the UPDATED DRIVERS Canon provided!

      http://www.canon.com.au/support/customer/default.a sp?DXI=KnowledgeBase/Customer/KBArticleForm&File=K B01347&productID=mpc190

      Did you really check with Canon whether they were going to fix this?

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    2. Re:Microsoft Windows XP updates are harmful. by dimss · · Score: 1

      Looks like they released new driver in december! I called Canon last time in october or november. Thank you!

  15. device-id's get messed up if you hotplug disks by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

    I found this out the hard way.

    I have 2 FW devices: a canopus media bridge (advc 100 - converts analog video to FW/dv) and a regular old external FW disk (ide bridge inside).

    plug one in, wait till its seen, then plug the other one in. both are seen.

    do some video capture to the external FW drive. works fine.

    unplug the camera. leave the drive connected.

    oops! drive goes from NTFS to 'raw' and loses its 'letter'.

    have to reset the whole thing to get the drive to be seen again.

    buggy buggy buggy. sigh. well, what do you expect?

    lesson learned: don't share bus types on M$. I'm going to try using a hotswap SATA drive instead of FW drive. (from what I hear, even THAT isn't a guarantee - the intel SATA chipset doesn't ALLOW hotplug. so I'll have to get a promise controller or maybe my preferred brand, SiliconImage).

    I'm hoping that by using diff bus types, I can plug and unplug the camera and NOT lose my disk device id.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  16. That's painful... by nick_danger · · Score: 1
    From MS site: This problem occurs because Windows XP SP2 changes 1394b ports to S100 speed when you upgrade.

    That's painful. The last S100 bus system I had only ran at 6MHz, and only had 64kb of RAM. But hey, those dual 8" floppy SSDD disk drives were schweet!

  17. Yes, it was. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 2

    Look on the page linked to in the article. They list a patch to set firewire back to its original speed.

    This is old news. Next!

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  18. Found a Problem? by BrainSurgeon · · Score: 1

    Hmmm...XP SP2 has been out now how long? And, this problem was just "found"?

    Peek into the Future:

    Year 2025 - It's been reported that Microsoft's Windows XP SP2 has broken...THE SAN ANDRES FAULT. In-depth coverage at 11!

    --
    "It's not rocket science, Smithers! It's only brain surgery!" --Mr. Burns
  19. Re:Article: -1, Troll by Synbiosis · · Score: 1

    "The open bias on Slashdot gets worse every day. I'm done with this POS site. News is supposed to be objective."

    I love how the only observant post on this page was modded troll.