I think 0x04D8 is Microchip's VID. For a commercial product you would have
to obtain your own from USBIF. However for the lab, as long as it doesn't
conflict with something else you are using, anything is fine.
Marc Reinig
System Solutions
-----Original Message-----
From: pic microcontroller discussion list [PICLISTKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU]On
Behalf Of Ken Hewitt
Subject: [PIC]:USB Vendor Id
Does anyone know what the correct USB Vendor Id is, in the sample code
it is shown as 0x04D8 in the comments but is set at 0461 in the code.
> Does anyone know what the correct USB Vendor Id is, in the sample code
> it is shown as 0x04D8 in the comments but is set at 0461 in the code.
Ken:
Microchip's VID is 0x04D8; 0x0461 probably belongs to the consultant
who wrote the appnote you're reading.
Of course, you can't use either of those VIDs in your own products;
if you develop a USB product, you'll need to get your own VID.
-Andrew
=== Andrew Warren --- aiwspam_OUTcypress.com
=== IPD Systems Engineering, CYSD
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
There are USB vendor ID's specifically for development work
they are also available from usb.org . The last time I checked
development ID's are free.
Walter Banks
Ken Hewitt wrote:
>
> Does anyone know what the correct USB Vendor Id is, in the sample code
> it is shown as 0x04D8 in the comments but is set at 0461 in the code.
>
> Ken.
> There are USB vendor ID's specifically for development work
> they are also available from usb.org . The last time I checked
> development ID's are free.
Where are these id's or where is there information about them?
This is a common question in the USBIF forum, and unless things have changed
in the last month or so, I don't think there are any educational or
development VID's.
You can just put in an arbitrary one and hope it doesn't collide with
something else on your system, but I'm pretty sure the USBIF has not set
aside any specifically for this purpose.
In article <3B56BD7D.15398.294935FE@localhost>, Andrew Warren
<spamBeGoneaiwspamBeGoneCYPRESS.COM> writes
>Ken Hewitt <TakeThisOuTPICLISTEraseMEspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu> wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know what the correct USB Vendor Id is, in the sample code
>> it is shown as 0x04D8 in the comments but is set at 0461 in the code.
>
>Ken:
>
>Microchip's VID is 0x04D8; 0x0461 probably belongs to the consultant
>who wrote the appnote you're reading.
>
>Of course, you can't use either of those VIDs in your own products;
>if you develop a USB product, you'll need to get your own VID.
>
>-Andrew
I was hoping that Microchip would do a similar thing to PCI chip
companies and allow people to use their VID with a managed product ID
issued by Microchip, otherwise I can't see why they would want a VID as
they are not going to make USB products.
If I have to get a VID I might as well give up on my product now with
the cost of it.
> I was hoping that Microchip would do a similar thing to PCI chip
> companies and allow people to use their VID with a managed product
> ID issued by Microchip, otherwise I can't see why they would want a
> VID as they are not going to make USB products.
Ken:
I would guess that Microchip IS going to make USB products.
Even if they don't use their VID for reference designs, etc.,
they'll certainly use it for the inevitable USB-based versions of
their development tools.
> If I have to get a VID I might as well give up on my product now
> with the cost of it.
If you're making a commercial USB product, your own VID is
required. USB-IF membership (which includes a VID, free
compliance testing at USB Plugfests, a license to use the USB
logo, etc.) has been priced at $2500/year for a while; VIDs for
non-members used to cost $200 but were inexplicably repriced to
$1500 last year.
-Andy
=== Andrew Warren --- RemoveMEaiwTakeThisOuTspamcypress.com
=== IPD Systems Engineering, CYSD
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
> I was hoping that Microchip would do a similar thing to PCI chip
> companies and allow people to use their VID with a managed product
> ID issued by Microchip, otherwise I can't see why they would want a
> VID as they are not going to make USB products.
Ken:
I would guess that Microchip IS going to make USB products.
Even if they don't use their VID for reference designs, etc.,
they'll certainly use it for the inevitable USB-based versions of
their development tools.
> If I have to get a VID I might as well give up on my product now
> with the cost of it.
If you're making a commercial USB product, your own VID is
required. USB-IF membership (which includes a VID, free
compliance testing at USB Plugfests, a license to use the USB
logo, etc.) has been priced at $2500/year for a while; VIDs for
non-members used to cost $200 but were inexplicably repriced to
$1500 last year.
-Andy
=== Andrew Warren --- aiwSTOPspamspam_OUTcypress.com
=== IPD Systems Engineering, CYSD
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
> What a crock! Compare the USB procedure to what it takes to get an
> enterprise number for SNMP: http://www.iana.org/cgi-bin/enterprise.pl
>
> Maybe the Sopranos are in the IT bidness now - looks like extortion to me.
Let's see... who was it that came up with USB again?
Dale
--
A train stops at a train station. A bus stops at a bus station.
On my desk I have a workstation...
Andrew Warren wrote:
>
> If you're making a commercial USB product, your own VID is
> required. USB-IF membership (which includes a VID, free
> compliance testing at USB Plugfests, a license to use the USB
> logo, etc.) has been priced at $2500/year for a while; VIDs for
> non-members used to cost $200 but were inexplicably repriced to
> $1500 last year.
>
<speculation>
At a $200 price, there were probably a lot of VIDs being issued to people
who ended up never using them. It's hard to imagine that they could even
cover their costs at that price.
At a $1500 price, two things happen:
1. People are much less likely to get a VID until they're serious about
developing a commercial product.
2. The price difference between just getting a VID and becoming a member
shrinks quite a bit. This may induce people to join rather than just getting
the VID. (The $2500/year price tag becomes insignificant if it can be
amortized across enough units sold.)
</speculation>
Just my $0.02, Bob
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> unless things have changed in the last month or so, I don't think
> there are any educational or development VID's.
I, too, believe that there are no free "development or
educational use" VIDs set aside by the USBIF.
> You can just put in an arbitrary one and hope it doesn't collide with
> something else on your system
... or with any VID/PID combination that happens to be included
with the default Windows installation. Do a search on your
computer for *.ini files containing the text "VID" and you'll see
that the default Windows installation contains support for
HUNDREDS of devices. If you pick an arbitrary VID, it must not
conflict with ANY of those.
John Hyde, author of "USB Design By Example", gives permission
in his book for readers to use his own VID during development of
their products. Since no one but John can sell devices which
use his VID -- and he's not in the business of selling USB
devices -- the devices in your lab are guaranteed not to
conflict with any others if you use his VID.
Presumably, John's generous offer applies only to purchasers of
his book: "USB Design By Example", published by Intel Press,
ISBN 0-9702846-5-9.
-Andy
=== Andrew Warren --- .....aiwspam_OUTcypress.com
=== IPD Systems Engineering, CYSD
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
> What a crock! Compare the USB procedure to what it takes to get an
> enterprise number for SNMP
> ....
> [The procedure for getting a USB Vendor ID number] looks like
> extortion to me.
Chuck:
A telephone number costs very little to get; a number on the waiting
list at your local Bentley dealership is rather expensive. So what?
The USB-IF is a non-profit organization; no one is getting rich off
VID registrations.
If you have a product idea that's good enough to be worth developing,
the one-time $1500 cost of a VID falls into the noise.
-Andy
=== Andrew Warren --- .....aiwRemoveMEcypress.com
=== IPD Systems Engineering, CYSD
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
> > looks like extortion to me.
>
> Let's see... who was it that came up with USB again?
Dale:
I assume you're implying that Microsoft's involvement with the
development of USB has some bearing on the current price of a USB
VID.
I'm also assuming that you didn't mean for that comment to be taken
too seriously... But still, I think it's worth pointing out that the
original USB 1.0 specification was developed jointly by Compaq, DEC,
IBM, Intel, Microsoft, NEC, and Northern Telecom; the committees that
developed the 1.1 and 2.0 versions of the specification included
people from even more companies; and the USBIF, which is responsible
for maintaining and promoting the USB standard, is an independent
organization.
Microsoft doesn't have an unreasonably-large influence over the USB
specification or the policies of the USBIF.
-Andy
=== Andrew Warren --- TakeThisOuTaiwspamcypress.com
=== IPD Systems Engineering, CYSD
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
No, I was not Microsoft-bashing (honest!!). Just pointing out that all of
the developers of USB are/were large, for-profit enterprises.
Considering the players, you can expect the mentality that a $2500
registration fee is negligible.
> Dale Botkin <RemoveMEPICLISTEraseMEspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > > looks like extortion to me.
> >
> > Let's see... who was it that came up with USB again?
>
> Dale:
>
> I assume you're implying that Microsoft's involvement with the
> development of USB has some bearing on the current price of a USB
> VID.
>
> I'm also assuming that you didn't mean for that comment to be taken
> too seriously... But still, I think it's worth pointing out that the
> original USB 1.0 specification was developed jointly by Compaq, DEC,
> IBM, Intel, Microsoft, NEC, and Northern Telecom; the committees that
> developed the 1.1 and 2.0 versions of the specification included
> people from even more companies; and the USBIF, which is responsible
> for maintaining and promoting the USB standard, is an independent
> organization.
>
> Microsoft doesn't have an unreasonably-large influence over the USB
> specification or the policies of the USBIF.
>
> -Andy
>
>
> === Andrew Warren --- @spam@aiwRemoveMEEraseMEcypress.com
> === IPD Systems Engineering, CYSD
> === Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
> ===
> === Opinions expressed above do not
> === necessarily represent those of
> === Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
> email EraseMElistserv@spam@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body
>
>
--
A train stops at a train station. A bus stops at a bus station.
On my desk I have a workstation...
> Considering the players, you can expect the mentality that a $2500
> registration fee is negligible.
Just to clarify a little. What you also get for the $2500 is free testing
and certification for all your new USB devices for a year. Plug fests are
held about 5 times a year in various locations. The testing takes 2 to 3
days. If there are problems, they will help you identify the cause and
solutions, and time permitting allow retesting at the same plug fest.
Considering the cost, it's an incredible bargain for any company. IMHO ;=)
> No, I was not Microsoft-bashing (honest!!). Just pointing out that all of
> the developers of USB are/were large, for-profit enterprises.
> Considering the players, you can expect the mentality that a $2500
> registration fee is negligible.
That still sucks particularly when considering that there's a push toward
dropping the COM ports on PCs.
Sure, USB may be more flexible for end users of commodity products, stuff
like this and the extra complexity of the protocol simply doesn't help the
development of limited-run devices, particularly for niche industries, such
as what I've seen with the moves to kill the ISA bus.
Will USB to RS-232 devices also be forced off the face of the market too?
Has anyone been successfull in using custom RS-232 projects through such a
USB adaptor?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Dale Botkin <.....daleSTOPspam@spam@BOTKIN.ORG>
>
>
> > No, I was not Microsoft-bashing (honest!!). Just pointing out that all
of
> > the developers of USB are/were large, for-profit enterprises.
> > Considering the players, you can expect the mentality that a $2500
> > registration fee is negligible.
>
> That still sucks particularly when considering that there's a push toward
> dropping the COM ports on PCs.
And the Parallel Port, And the PS/2 Ports. The latest PC's we have on
pre-production testing have 5 sockets. Power In, Video Out, and 4 USB.
>
> Sure, USB may be more flexible for end users of commodity products, stuff
> like this and the extra complexity of the protocol simply doesn't help the
> development of limited-run devices, particularly for niche industries,
such
> as what I've seen with the moves to kill the ISA bus.
The ISA Bus was killed of a year ago and no longer is a requirement in the
latest PC Specification.
>
> Will USB to RS-232 devices also be forced off the face of the market too?
> Has anyone been successfull in using custom RS-232 projects through such a
> USB adaptor?
Yes, but you must use the drivers which does place a lot of restrictions on
what you can do. But then you shouldn't be directly addressing hardware
anyway unless you are doing it in a Micro$oft approved fashion. Oh, and when
Windows XP is released your software will have to be approved by Micro$oft
as well. Now let me see, apart from Intel who is a major supporter of USB
surely not Micro$oft. Will Micro$oft do the approvals for free? Will they do
it free but insist on having the Source Code as part of the approvals
process ???
From my experiences to date, It is easier and cheaper to use a USB/Parallel
Port adapter to interface your products.
In article <3B56F237.28178.2A1737FA@localhost>, Andrew Warren
<RemoveMEaiwspamBeGoneCYPRESS.COM> writes
>Ken Hewitt <spamBeGonePICLISTKILLspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu> wrote:
>
>> I was hoping that Microchip would do a similar thing to PCI chip
>> companies and allow people to use their VID with a managed product
>> ID issued by Microchip, otherwise I can't see why they would want a
>> VID as they are not going to make USB products.
>
> Ken:
>
> I would guess that Microchip IS going to make USB products.
>
> Even if they don't use their VID for reference designs, etc.,
> they'll certainly use it for the inevitable USB-based versions of
> their development tools.
Yes I can see that, but the Product ID allows for 64,000 products and I
can't see them making that many. So for a reasonable fee (less than
$1500) they could issue product ID's too users of their USB PIC's this
is what is done in the PCI world I believe.
>
>> If I have to get a VID I might as well give up on my product now
>> with the cost of it.
>
> If you're making a commercial USB product, your own VID is
> required. USB-IF membership (which includes a VID, free
> compliance testing at USB Plugfests, a license to use the USB
> logo, etc.) has been priced at $2500/year for a while; VIDs for
> non-members used to cost $200 but were inexplicably repriced to
> $1500 last year.
For this cost I can't do my product as it only has a limited market, any
idea where these Plugfests happen in the UK ?.
>
> The ISA Bus was killed of a year ago and no longer is a
> requirement in the
> latest PC Specification.
> >
PCB design magazine each month has a centerfold with somebody's latest
high tech board. Their July 2001 centerfold is an ISA bus board. For
industrial use ISA still rules (along with PC104). It will not die as
long as it has market share.
Douglas Butler wrote:
>
>PCB design magazine each month has a centerfold with somebody's latest
>high tech board. Their July 2001 centerfold is an ISA bus board. For
>industrial use ISA still rules (along with PC104). It will not die as
>long as it has market share.
>
With your having described it as a centerfold, I've gotta ask:
Do they have photos of the bare board? :=)
Regards, Bob
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> the Product ID allows for 64,000 products and I can't see
> [Microchip] making that many. So for a reasonable fee (less than
> $1500) they could issue product ID's too users of their USB PIC's
Yes, they could... But then what? You're not allowed to put the
USB logo on your product until it's passed USB compliance
testing, and one of the tests is "Does the device report the
correct VID?" The "correct" VID, of course, is the one that's
been assigned to the manufacturer of the device; no one but
Microchip is allowed to use Microchip's VID.
Also... Even if sharing the VID were allowed, think about the
problems that a Microchip-managed database of Product IDs (PIDs)
would cause. With the current system -- in which each vendor has
a unique, USBIF-assigned VID and is allowed to assign assign PIDs
to his devices as he sees fit -- there are no collisions between
the VID/PID of USB-logoed devices in the marketplace because:
a) the USBIF ensures that every vendor uses a unique VID,
and
b) each vendor ensures that his PIDs don't clash, since it's
both in his best interest and trivially easy to do so.
If Microchip were to allow others to use their VID, and set up
some sort of registration database to try to keep track of which
PIDs were being used, I bet we'd have clashing VID/PIDs out in
the marketplace within 6 months.
And... Where would the manufacturers of these USB devices go for
compliance testing? Just as all RF devices need to pass FCC
tests (in the States) and all mains-powered devices need to pass
UL tests, all USB devices must pass USBIF compliance tests. The
$2500 yearly USBIF membership includes free testing and
re-testing of as many devices as you can carry to the frequent
plugfests; if you're not a member, you can have the testing
performed by an independent testing firm, but that will cost MORE
than $2500 -- PER DEVICE.
> this [subletting of Vendor IDs] is what is done in the PCI world I
> believe.
Has your user experience with all PCI cards been perfect? Mine
hasn't, and I suspect that it's because lots of those cards are
manufactured by non-PCISIG members who just sublet someone
else's PCI Vendor ID and never went through compliance testing.
-Andy
=== Andrew Warren --- aiw@spam@cypress.com
=== IPD Systems Engineering, CYSD
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
> Has anyone been successfull in using custom RS-232 projects through such a
> USB adaptor?
I've had good luck with Belkin Part Number: F5U103. I mostly use it with
Win32 software I've written for communicating with my embedded designs. The
Belkin drivers include a DOS compatibility setting that assigns a standard
I/O address and IRQ for using the serial port with DOS software inside of
Windows. I've only used the DOS compatibility setting once but, it did work
OK.
> Sure, USB may be more flexible for end users of commodity products,
> stuff like this and the extra complexity of the protocol simply
> doesn't help the development of limited-run devices, particularly for
> niche industries
True, but USB isn't unique in that regard. The required
regulatory approvals for RF devices, for example, makes it
difficult to manufacture limited runs of THEM... But no one's
really complaining.
> Will USB to RS-232 devices also be forced off the face of the
> market too?
I don't think they'll be "forced" off; they'll just gradually be
replaced by straight USB devices, much as DOS and WIN16 programs
have gradually been replaced by Win32 applications.
> Has anyone been successfull in using custom RS-232 projects through
> such a USB adaptor?
Most USB-to-Serial converters work well only for very generic
applications (i.e., PC to modem via Dial-Up Networking). If
your application does something unusual with the handshake
lines, or if it requires timing that isn't guaranteed by the
TIA232 spec, it may or may not work through a USB adapter.
-Andy
=== Andrew Warren --- RemoveMEaiwspam_OUTcypress.com
=== IPD Systems Engineering, CYSD
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
> Jeff DeMaagd <PICLISTspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > Sure, USB may be more flexible for end users of commodity products,
> > stuff like this and the extra complexity of the protocol simply
> > doesn't help the development of limited-run devices, particularly for
> > niche industries
>
> True, but USB isn't unique in that regard. The required
> regulatory approvals for RF devices, for example, makes it
> difficult to manufacture limited runs of THEM... But no one's
> really complaining.
I am. It's an additional big artificial hurdle that IMO isn't needed for
semi-pro or limited run devices. I don't need a stupid logo, I just want to
be able to connect my projects to my computer and eventually be able to sell
them, and the industry is trying to push for additional complexity by
forcing out the simpler interfaces, in particular, with the PC200x
standards. Some day I'd like to be able to sell devices that connect to
computers and every additional artificial burden makes that goal harder.
I'm all for compatibility and rigid standards testing but the IT industry
simply seems to have an outright loathing of anything "small time", as
evidenced in part by the fact that there is no hobbyist, experimental or
small business classification in the standards.
> > this [subletting of Vendor IDs] is what is done in the PCI world I
> > believe.
>
> Has your user experience with all PCI cards been perfect? Mine
> hasn't, and I suspect that it's because lots of those cards are
> manufactured by non-PCISIG members who just sublet someone
> else's PCI Vendor ID and never went through compliance testing.
I haven't really had any problems on a PCI-only system, but when mixing PCI
and ISA devices it can cause IRQ problems, something inherent in the way
that PCI IRQs are assigned by slot.
In my present system, I've had up to 3 video cards, up to 2 SCSI cards, up
to 2 NICs and a video capture card in my computer (in many combinations)
with zero problems.
Of course, even Intel is said to have an occasional problem or two making
their production chipsets totally PCI standards compliant.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Andrew Warren <spam_OUTaiwKILLspamCYPRESS.COM>
>
>
> > Jeff DeMaagd <RemoveMEPICLISTRemoveMEEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > Sure, USB may be more flexible for end users of commodity products,
> > > stuff like this and the extra complexity of the protocol simply
> > > doesn't help the development of limited-run devices, particularly for
> > > niche industries
> >
> > True, but USB isn't unique in that regard. The required
> > regulatory approvals for RF devices, for example, makes it
> > difficult to manufacture limited runs of THEM... But no one's
> > really complaining.
>
> I am. It's an additional big artificial hurdle that IMO isn't needed for
> semi-pro or limited run devices. I don't need a stupid logo, I just want to
> be able to connect my projects to my computer and eventually be able to sell
> them, and the industry is trying to push for additional complexity by
> forcing out the simpler interfaces, in particular, with the PC200x
> standards. Some day I'd like to be able to sell devices that connect to
> computers and every additional artificial burden makes that goal harder.
> I'm all for compatibility and rigid standards testing but the IT industry
> simply seems to have an outright loathing of anything "small time", as
> evidenced in part by the fact that there is no hobbyist, experimental or
> small business classification in the standards.
I feel your pain. This is why niche products are usually horridly
expensive. What could be simpler than, say, a 48-port digital I/O board
for your PC? Now, how much will one cost you? Limited production, costly
certification, and probably $5 a board just for the glossy catalog photos.
Dale
--
A train stops at a train station. A bus stops at a bus station.
On my desk I have a workstation...
Warning!!! This is just a rumor but from what I have been told, USB is
DEAD!! From what I have been told, the industry is pushing towards
Firewire instead so be careful about developing around USB. If anyone
knows the REAL story, I would like to know also.
> Charles Craft <PICLISTspammitvma.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > What a crock! Compare the USB procedure to what it takes to get an
> > enterprise number for SNMP
> > ....
> > [The procedure for getting a USB Vendor ID number] looks like
> > extortion to me.
>
> Chuck:
>
> A telephone number costs very little to get; a number on the waiting
> list at your local Bentley dealership is rather expensive. So what?
>
> The USB-IF is a non-profit organization; no one is getting rich off
> VID registrations.
>
> If you have a product idea that's good enough to be worth developing,
> the one-time $1500 cost of a VID falls into the noise.
>
> -Andy
>
> === Andrew Warren --- RemoveMEaiwspamBeGoneRemoveMEcypress.com
> === IPD Systems Engineering, CYSD
> === Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
> ===
> === Opinions expressed above do not
> === necessarily represent those of
> === Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
> email KILLspamlistservspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body
>Warning!!! This is just a rumor but from what I have been told, USB is
>DEAD!! From what I have been told, the industry is pushing towards
>Firewire instead so be careful about developing around USB. If anyone
>knows the REAL story, I would like to know also.
So that explains all those cheap firewire mice and keyboards... :-)
newell
-- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
> Warning!!! This is just a rumor but from what I have been told, USB is
> DEAD!! From what I have been told, the industry is pushing towards
> Firewire instead so be careful about developing around USB. If anyone
> knows the REAL story, I would like to know also.
-- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
>Warning!!! This is just a rumor but from what I have been told, USB is
>DEAD!! From what I have been told, the industry is pushing towards
>Firewire instead so be careful about developing around USB. If anyone
>knows the REAL story, I would like to know also.
Dunno the REAL, but with firewire, what's the meaning of USB????
At 02:23 PM 7/21/01 -0300, Alexandre Domingos F. Souza wrote:
> >Warning!!! This is just a rumor but from what I have been told, USB is
> >DEAD!! From what I have been told, the industry is pushing towards
> >Firewire instead so be careful about developing around USB. If anyone
> >knows the REAL story, I would like to know also.
>
> Dunno the REAL, but with firewire, what's the meaning of USB????
If you put out a product that says "Firewire", you have to pay money to Apple.
Notice the large number of products that say IEE-1394 instead. http://www.firewirestuff.com/whatis.html
They also mention going to 3200Mbit/s in the future.
I'm somewhat skeptical on that one.
I would have a link to http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/find.cgi?KC6ETE-9 here
in my signature line, but due to the inability of sysadmins at TELOCITY to
differentiate a signature line from the text of an email, I am forbidden to
have it.
-- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
>>Warning!!! This is just a rumor but from what I have been told, USB is
>>DEAD!! From what I have been told, the industry is pushing towards
>>Firewire instead so be careful about developing around USB. If anyone
>>knows the REAL story, I would like to know also.
>
> Dunno the REAL, but with firewire, what's the meaning of USB????
I read a story in an electronics paper today that one maker had
abandoned their USB2.0 controller chip in favour of Firewire.
Slow USB (1.<whateveritis>) is very well established, and I wouldn't
worry about it dying anytime soon. It's 'good enough' for most of the
applications for which it was designed. IMO, the future of USB 2.0 is somewhat more uncertain though, as it
does seem to be competing more directly with Firewire/1394
-- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
> They also mention going to 3200Mbit/s in the future.
> I'm somewhat skeptical on that one.
No reason to. IEEE1394 has a solid transmission line data path (two of
those) using 2xUTP or 2xSTP. If they manage to make chips that do not melt
at 3.2Gb it will work over the short distance it is specced for. Remember
it is peer to peer.
What I'd liek to see, is the OS platform that can exercise such a link
fully (I am snickering at the thought of that certain platform mastering
it). It's about 400Mbytes/sec, 10 times faster than high end disks
available on the market are now.
> Warning!!! This is just a rumor but from what I have been told,
> USB is DEAD!! From what I have been told, the industry is pushing
> towards Firewire instead so be careful about developing around USB.
Um, no.
Although they're both high-speed plug-and-play serial protocols,
USB and Firewire don't really compete against each other; USB is
overwhelmingly dominant in the PC/Macintosh market, while
Firewire dominates Sony's line of video cameras and recorders.
> If anyone knows the REAL story, I would like to know also.
Every major desktop operating system (Windows, Mac, Linux)
supports and will continue to support USB, and PCs will continue
to include USB ports for the foreseeable future. Neither
Intel/Microsoft nor Apple have announced plans to replace USB
with anything else.
The 480-Mbit high-speed USB 2.0 is real: You can buy USB 2.0
host-controller cards at almost any retail consumer-electronics
store, drivers are available from Microsoft, and USB 2.0 support
will be integrated on PC motherboards in a few months.
My company is shipping samples of and development kits for our
USB 2.0 microcontroller, our USB 2.0-to-IDE chip, and our USB
2.0 SIE chip. Other semiconductor vendors are also shipping USB
2.0 chips. USB 2.0 hard-drives -- ATA/100 drives that run at
their full speed over a plug-and-play USB wire! -- are currently
available, and there should be LOTS of USB 2.0 products released
in time for Christmas.
Meanwhile, many millions of 1.5- and 12-Mbit/sec USB 1.1 devices
(keyboards, mice, printers, scanners, digicams, modems, etc.) are
being sold every month.
USB is alive and doing QUITE well.
-Andy
=== Andrew Warren --- spam_OUTaiwSTOPspamcypress.com
=== IPD Systems Engineering, CYSD
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
welwyn.demon.co.uk |
