IEEE has approved IEEE 1394, “Standard for High Performance Serial Bus.” The revised specification combines and incorporates all previous IEEE 1394 standards developed since 1994.
Commercially known under the brand names of FireWire and i.LINK, the IEEE 1394 standard provides specifications for a high-speed serial bus which supports both asynchronous and isochronous communication and integrates well with most IEEE standard 32-bit and 64-bit parallel buses. More than 500 million IEEE 1394 ports have been produced since the standard was first published in 1995.
MacDailyNews Note: Apple’s Macs with FireWire 400 ports that support IEEE 1394a can operate at up to 400 megabits per second and Macs that include FireWire 800 ports that support IEEE 1394b operate at up to 800 megabits per second.
“The new standard includes all of the amendments, enhancements and more than 100 errata which have been added to the base standard over the last 12 years,” said Les Baxter, chair of the working group which developed the standard, in the press release. “This update provides developers with a single document they can rely upon for all of their application needs.”
The 1394-2008 standard updates and revises all prior 1394 standards, including 1394a, 1394b, 1394c, enhanced UTP, and the 1394 beta plus PHY-Link interface. It also incorporates the complete specifications for S1600 (1.6 Gigabit/second bandwidth) and for S3200, which provides 3.2 Gigabit/second speeds.
The standard is expected to be available this October.
Source: IEEE Standards Association
Apple’s FireWire information is here.
[Attribution 9 to 5 Mac. Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Judge Bork” for the heads up.]
Of course this probably means yet *another* new cable with a new shape end on it, I’ll bet.
@Brau
Nope its the same cable and connector just different controller.
Most camcorders use Firewire.
I Want My iTele,
Dude, you gotta lay off the Dust Off.
@smyhre
Just wondering how you know that? Is there another source? I couldn’t find any reference to cable specs in the press release.
amyhre,
And you know, most PC motherboards STILL have a FDD port. Pathetic.
“…most cameras use Firewire”
No, the new HD cameras use USB.
Too bad, this is why I’ll stick to movie camera that does Firewire 400…however, with the new HD cameras, one advantage of USB is the stick sticks into computer with flash card (up to 16 GB) and needs no wires at all.
1.6 Gbps and 3.2 Gbps have been part of the standard for quite a while. The issue has been that these, data rates as specified in the earlier variants of the standard, were only over fiber, not copper. This new iteration of the standard defines how to do 1.6 & 3.2 Gbps over copper. The benefit is that it defines the use of the same connector as was used for 800 Mbps. As has been mentioned already, one of the drawbacks to the adoption of 800 Mbps Firewire has been the switch to a different, more expensive connector than was used for 50 – 400 Mbps Firewire (and yes, Firewire started out at 50 Mbps back about 1990).
Being able to do backups to an external drive (which can then be taken off site to provide a REAL backup in case of a facility disaster) over a 3.2 Gbps link will be a significant enhancement.
The issue with Firewire’s competitor, USB, has been the processor overhead and the need for a single controller orchestrating everything. This adds overhead to the data stream and significantly lowers the effective information rate. Additionally you cannot just plug a camera into a TV with USB and expect it to work (no processor controlling everything), while you can with Firewire (assuming, of course, they both have Firewire connections!).
I’ve heard rumors that USB 3.0 at 4.8 Gbps will correct these issues (the greater overhead and the need for a central processor). *IF* USB 3.0 does correct these things that will be a great plus to USB. HOWEVER, I’ve also heard that USB 3.0 will require a new connector for any speeds beyond 480 Mbps. This may be a significant drawback to adoption (as was seen with Firewire needing a new connector for 800 Mbps).
Brau,
“Just wondering how you know that? Is there another source? I couldn’t find any reference to cable specs in the press release.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_1394_interface
“FireWire S1600 and S3200
In December 2007, the 1394 Trade Association announced that products will be available before the end of 2008 using the S1600 and S3200 modes which were already (mostly) defined in 1394b. The 1.6 Gbit/s and 3.2 Gbit/s devices will use the same 9-pin connectors as the existing FireWire 800 and will be fully compatible with existing S400 and S800 devices. The future products are intended to compete with the forthcoming USB 3.0.”
“All their Macs continue to have FireWire built-in.”
Firstly my comment wasn’t Mac specific, but looking at Apple’s overall strategy for Firewire. The low end Macs have stagnated at the 400Mbps version of the spec and the Air drops it. All consumer devices and phones have dropped it. So it’s not being enhanced in Mac hardware, the chances of seeing faster versions widely implemented by anyone are small. It’s slowly disappearing from Apple devices as a built in port. You can bet that trend will continue.
With camcorders migrating to USB and/or solid state memory, the last consumer use of firewire is going away. The disk market was the most recent other usage to fall, USB already rules the low end disk market, and esata the high end leaving no space for firewire which has neither the cost advantages of USB nor the performance of esata.
I can not for the life of me understand why Apple droped the “Firewire” for USB what ever… here’s hope’in some one come out with a PCI card with this new “Firewire” standard on it… cause if they do I’ll buy one for my Quicksilver and the hell with what Apple thinks!
I’m not one to differ from Apple all that much but on this one I do!
Another 2 types of Firewire plugs for a total of 4 different types?
The Firewire group should have picked two designs and stuck with them. One for desktop/stationary use and one for portable use (digicams, card readers, portable HDD).
If the FW800 plug was the same as the 400 plug, it would have become more accepted. Virtually no one outside of video/photography pros use FW800. FW1600/3200 may suffer the same fate.
—> Stick with one or two cable types!
MPC Guy,
The 400 and 800 are not interchangeable, but I believe the new speeds are supposed to be backward compatible. But, I wouldn’t bet money on it till they are released.
“I can not for the life of me understand why Apple droped the “Firewire” for USB”
Because the iPod primarily is a PC peripheral owned by PC owners. Therefore it needed USB to make it in the mainstream. Continuing firewire on the iPod just didn’t make any sense. As form factors shrank Steve probably chose a slightly smaller and cheaper to manufacturer iPods over having a second port that 97% of people would never use to sync it.
>Sir Gill Bates wrote: The 400 and 800 are not interchangeable
You’re just not pushing hard enough.
MPC Guy,
“You’re just not pushing hard enough.”
I’ve been told that before.
“I’ve been told that before.”
I’ll bet not to your face.
Ha Ha,
“I’ll bet not to your face.”
Actually, yes. Talk about ruining the moment.