 |
 |
Reality Check: There are a lot of people who are kicking themselves in the ass for panic selling Apple stock at $13 because they believed the company was history (pre-iMac). One year later Apple stock is doing as well or better than many of the wintel computer manufacturers on the exchange.
|
| |
OPINION: "Hey, didn't you say FireWire is the next big thing?" OPINION: "Hey, didn't you say FireWire is the next big thing?" You may have been reading some disturbing reports regarding the survivability of FireWire as a bus standard. No doubt some of you reading this are already very well up to date about Intel's feeble coup attempt to supersede 1394 via USB 2, which reportedly matches FireWire's bandwidth and speed. If you're not familiar with this stuff, in February of '99, Intel announced the creation of a consortium of companies with the goal of making USB faster and better in order to compete with FireWire. According to Intel, the USB 2 spec is supposed to allow the bus to utilize a broader range of devices that inclue most devices that this bus had not been intended to use. Many do not realize the original USB was inspired by our old familiar Apple Desktop Bus (ADB). Other inspirations include some of the features found in Apple's new (but unreleased) FireWire (IEEE 1394). Intel's original intent was not to compete with the high end uses of FireWire with their new USB. Instead, they would target lesser speed and bandwidth demanding devices and let Apple dominate high speed AV and storage bus medium. There's an excellent breakdown of the whole 1394 vs. USB battle at MacKiDo, by David K. Every with much more insight to the technical/historical timeline, as well as very good reasons why FireWire is better. The point, rather the question is "why is Intel pushing this?" Because, IMHO, they are preparing themselves to supplement what may be for them a smaller chunk of a more competitive processor market with increased competition from AMD, IBM, et al as well as the commitment to support whatever half-implemented OS Redmond comes up with. Add to that the fact G3's & now G4's outpace the current Intel processor technology in many ways. The PowerPC has always been smaller, cooler and more efficient than Intels "P" counterparts. So Intel may be in panic mode with "Chipsets . . . we'll make up for the loss with forcing a USB 2 chipset on everyone." Merely speculation on my own behalf, but could this be too far from the truth? In any case, it probably is not a "circle the wagons" situation -- more likely a hedge bet. We might take USB 2 more seriously if Intel (or anyone) had been interested in pushing USB four years ago when nearly every PC motherboard began to include USB onboard, but no products or software support to use them. It took Apple Computer to present iMac, and then the B&WG3, to take a nearly non existent USB product industry to one that includes dozens of companies offering an estimate of hundreds of products for USB. I have neither seen nor heard anything of significance in the way new product possibilities being announced that will take advantage of the new USB 2 standard, yet I continue to read about new uses, products and solutions for FireWire and it's various implementations & nomenclature. You figure it out.
It is the big thing now. Catch up. Burn, Baby, Burn!
|
| |
So, is FireWire the next big thing? No.