Come over to my place, and I'll show you the two "USB 1.1" ports on the G4. And the smoking 1MB/sec transfer rate to an external drive.
Yes, at the time, I was pleased to discover that. Nice work.
Paul
They used to add 1394 ports to PC motherboards, and this was the source of them.
VIA VT6315N IEEE 1394a port
It's not listed as Firewire in the user manual. The test machine has a 1394a, and my two dead computers have 1394a as well. Likely never used on any of them (don't have a camcorder). I used to turn it off at BIOS level, so not even any driver would load for it.
I have two Firewire enclosures, the first in the chain ran at 30MB/sec, the daisy-chained second enclosure (off the first enclosure) ran at 20MB/sec. Not exactly a source of "shock and awe".
Microsoft has removed "Firewire networking" support from Windows, but the other more popular interface options are still supported.
61882 might have been a standard for AV transfer from a Camcorder. I don't know whether the mass storage one had a number like that (since most PC users were doing camcorders with Firewire). A Google search can't find any good info.The Firewire networking, required a kind of router board if you expected to do a subnet with it. You could still connect two PCs together with a Firewire cable and set up a network connection. But support for that is removed. Maybe it was still working in WinXP days ?
I think if it got any traction, it was for the camcorders that had a Firewire 4 pin connector on them (the two missing pins are bus power).
Paul
I cant be arsed to provide a video to someone I know cant get something to work that I don't need to work.
It was merely an example of apple incompatibility
If we assume the USB 1.1 transfer test ran at 1MB/sec, the engine in the box (CCD based), seems limited to 2MB/sec. This is consistent with the scanner I got back in the era. It was CCD and relatively slow, and no amount of interface magic would make the engine go faster. It needs exposure time per step on the stepper. Reducing the scan resolution will help the scan finish faster. But if you compare scan file size to the number of seconds to do the scan, the speed of the engine should come out in the wash. I would expect engines like that (CCD based single row) to manage 1-2MB/sec or so. It's possible someone made a CCD or a CMOS element which was multiple rows, and may have overlapped the scan to improve scan quality and speed. Some newer scanners used a camera to "cheat" but then you need excellent pincushion correction to make a decent scan. That's a little bit too much parallelism.
USB 1.1 800dpi A4 4min40sec 182Mb USB 2.0 800dpi A4 2min 182Mb
USB 1.1 2400dpi 35mm Slide 3min 18Mb USB 2.0 2400dpi 35mm Slide 3min 18Mb
"Regarding the USB cable that comes with the 2450 -- it is NOT USB 2.0 compliant. I got one on ebay for about five bucks to go with the 2450 that I got at Sam's Club (online) for $299."
Google is not coughing up a thorough enough test result.
With modern odds and ends available, I'd re-bench the thing, if it still runs with the software we have today.
Firewire Networking was removed from Windows, but there are two other stacks for Firewire that might still work (automatically). One should do AV transfers from a camcorder, the other should do mass storage.
Motherboard docs identify Firewire as 1394a, so searching the PDF for Firewire can be a waste of time. I checked the Test Machine, and the manual only references a VIA 1394a chip (50MB/sec phy, slower transfers when you do real things). USB2 is 60MB/sec phy and 30MB/sec mass storage and 35MB/sec with UASP (USB Attached SCSI Protocol). The slowest USB2 ever made, that's an ATI Southbridge at only 20MB/sec. Might have been SB400 or so. Can't find a reference in Google to verify.
Paul
See, it's not just me that says that WebM is now fully supported by Apple.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.