|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
USB 2.0 is going to be 480 Megabytes per second. This will compete directly with firewire, not to mention that it will be included on all Windows computers and iMacs. And it is plug and play. I agree totally about SCSI, it deserves to be retired. James > -----Original Message----- > From: email@example.com > [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Sutjahjo Ngaserin > Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2000 6:18 PM > To: email@example.com > Subject: Re: 1600 firewire > > > If we see how firewire video capture card able to capture dv > cameras at full > screen, mostly without dropping frame (if you have enough RAM and cpu > speed), you know the future is in the firewire > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "david stock" <firstname.lastname@example.org> > To: <email@example.com> > Sent: 21 February, 2000 04:26 > Subject: Re: 1600 firewire > > > > on 2/19/00 7:19 PM, Gary L. Hunt at firstname.lastname@example.org wrote: > > > > > It's a high speed bus being promoted for things > > > like video. It's use for a scanner is probably > > > overkill, since it is doubtful that the scanner > > > can generate output faster than a SCSI interface > > > would be able to handle. I just went back and > > > looked at the specs, and the rated scanning > > > speed of 9.2 ms per line (even at the maximum > > > rated width of 13,600 pixels for an 8.5 inch line > > > and 36 bits per pixel) requires a throughput > > > of less than 7 MB per second. Hard to imagine > > > very many people are going to scan subjects > > > 8.5 inches wide in 1600 dpi mode, especially > > > in 36 bit mode. (This would give about a 1.5 GB > > > file for an 8.5x11 page.) So even a SCSI-II > > > interface is probably fast enough to keep up for > > > any practical use. But I suppose if you already > > > had a computer with a 1394 interface, you might > > > want to use it for something. > > > > > > Firewire is still evolving. Current firewire software limits > its speed, so > > that it really isn't faster than fast SCSI for most > applications. One test > I > > saw of the Epson scanner showed that it was faster with the > SCSI interface > > than with firewire. On the other hand, I will probably insist > on firewire > > for my next scanner. I can't wait to get away from SCSI, which can cause > all > > kinds of stability problems. And I like the fact that firewire is > > hot-pluggable and allows easy chaining of devices. But most of all, once > > firewire reaches its full potential (standards and drivers are being > > constantly upgraded), it will definitely speed up scanners, drives, etc. > > > > --David Stock > > > > - > > Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use > > accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions. > > - > Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use > accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions. > - Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions.
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp] Users