"USB is fundamentally flawed because it relies on a host CPU"
There is nothing in the spec that says that the host CPU needs to be involved in USB transfers; the CPU can offload as much as it likes to the controller.
You can see that CPU is not a limiting factor simply by looking at the CPU meter during USB operations; even video or disk I/O over USB are just not noticeable on modern hardware.
Furthermore, you're barking up the wrong tree; what matters isn't maximum speed, it's bang for the buck. USB has lower costs overall, so dollar for dollar it gives you more speed. Most people simply don't want to pay the extra money to get FW800 or FW3200 speeds. SATA is nice, but it's only suitable for disks.
USB 3.0 will be a success, and it deserves to be one. FireWire is dying out.
Discussion on:
Message 11 of 1
IBM Sponsored Resources
Resources from our Sponsor
- Oracle Exadata vs IBM: Netezza Compared
- Forrester TEI Report
- CIA Whitepaper
- Harnessing the Power of Advanced Analytics
- Tapping into Unleashed Business Potential with Advanced Analytics
- Unlock Analytic Performance with Revolution R for Enterprise and IBM: Netezza Data Warehouse Appliance
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox




