RE: [OT] USB2 on Laptops?

["Gerard McGovern" <stuff@xxxxxxx>]

> > So surely the same will be true of USB 2.0? Why do you expect=20
> > the adoption of USB 2.0 to be quicker that that of Firewire?
>=20
> No! USB 2.0 is *TRANSPARENT* to implement because as far as=20
> the user is
> concerned it's just a USB port which is standard fayre on all=20
> modern PCs
> whereas firewire still has limited market penetration.

You've missed the point. USB 2.0 may be transparent to implement but why
do you think the take up of USB 2.0 *devices* will be quicker than
Firewire?

> > No, I didn't say that at all. USB 2.0 is almost exactly the=20
> > same as Firewire.
>=20
> In the same way that IDE is similar to SCSI perhaps? After=20
> all they do a
> similar job...

No, not all. SCSI is *way* faster than IDE and supports more devices.
USB 2.0 is actually worse than Firewire for the reasons any poster
mentioned.

> > It is reinventing wheel when Firewire does almost the same=20
> > job. The example you gave of SCSI and IDE is an interesting=20
> > one as both standards do the same job very, very difrently.=20
> > USB 2.0 and Firewire are so close as to be pointless.
>=20
> Look ... I'm going to do the decent thing and make this the=20
> 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.=20

Oh I love this. You've made your points, and now you've decided that
enough is enough and your's will the last post. Please.

Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm not participating
in a discussion.

G

--

=BA =95 =BA =95 =BA =95 =BA =95 =BA =95 =BA =95 =BA =95 =BA =95
Gerard McGovern
Webmonkey to the stars

gerard@xxxxxxx
http://www.inkiboo.com

=BA =95 =BA =95 =BA =95 =BA =95 =BA =95 =BA =95 =BA =95 =BA =95