On 1 Oct 2006 at 13:55, Eric Dannewitz wrote: > David W. Fenton wrote: > > OK, if you're so smart, explain to me, if it's a fully open non- > > proprietary standard, it's not installed by default on any PCs > > except Apple and Sony? Why is it that the only hardware > > manufacturers who routinely provide firewire ports are the ones who > > created the standard? > > > > I'm not saying this is a good thing -- I think it's terrible, since > > it's a very good technology. But my surmise is the reason it's not > > universal (like the vastly inferior and unreliably USB) is that it > > was perceived as (or was) being controlled by two companies for > > their own interests. > > > > Maybe my explanation is wrong. > > > > Maybe you can provide a better explanation of why such an obviously > > superior technology (this I won't dispute) is not universally > > supported? > > I have no clue as to why it's not supported more.
I was offering one explanation as to why the adoption of Firewire would be slow, because it was proprietary. > However, a lot of > newer motherboards do have firewire on them now. Which? What major PC manufacturers have firewire ports on their default configurations (not an add-on)? > I imagine PC makers, > and it's users, are slow adapting to anything new. You mean like USB? Once it was supported well by the OS (i.e., with the Win2K), it took off like crazy. It was only delayed by Win98's patchy support of USB. > Look at PC cases. > They haven't changed in 20 years. Still boxes. Um, who cares? And so far as I can tell, there are lots of different form factors available in different product lines from different manufacturers. And top-of-the-line Macs are still just plain old boxes, too, no? Doesn't have anything to do with how good a computer they are. > They still have PS/2 > connectors. Because USB is so unreliable and problematic, it's a good thing that they still have PS/2 connectors. > And Parallel ports (though it looks like Dell isn't > offering Parallel ports on computers anymore) Really? The most recent Dell purchases my customers have made have all had parallel ports in them. I don't like USB printers, myself, because there's too much problem with contention on the single bus. I think it's better to have a port dedicated to printing, rather than sharing the bandwidth with a dozen or more other devices. http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/xpsdt_410?c=u > s&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs I can't find a single Dell desktop with a parallel port, and only two models with PS2 and serial ports. Sad, actually, since everything's been replaced with USB, which simply doesn't work very well. This is a quick change for Dell, as a machine ordered from them only 3 months ago had a parallel port (don't know if it had a PS2 port). > There are a lot of OPEN, non-proprietary things out there (bluetooth > for example). I don't see any purpose for bluetooth myself, but I'm unimpressed wireless input devices because of the battery issues and the potential radio interference (i.e., as with USB, you're sharing your bandwidth and, worse than USB, have no control over others' use of the bandwidth you're sharing). > I just thing the majority of PC users, mainly Windows > users, would stick with something forever......like having software > written in 1992 still run on their current system.......... Is there something wrong with that? If the software does what you want and runs reliably, why in the world would you want to replace it? -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
