Why FireWire Failed in Front of the USB in Computers
FireWire was first created by Apple in 1995. Known also as the IEEE 1394 High Performance Serial Bus, its functioning is fairly similar to the Universal Serial Bus (USB). The USB is its main competitor in hardware products. However despite a head start Fi
New applications in computer hardware emerge every day. One of the applications in computer hardware is FireWire. The official name of FireWire is i.Link or IEEE 1394. The basic purpose of FireWire is to facilitate hook up different pieces of equipment, for an optimum end result that helps to quickly and easily share information and data. FireWire was first created by Apple in 1995. Known also as the IEEE 1394 High Performance Serial Bus, its functioning is fairly similar to the Universal Serial Bus (USB). The USB is its main competitor in hardware products. When FireWire was designed the manufacturers had some definite goals in mind for the product. The various goals can be summarized as:- Fast and easy transfer of data Ability to devices connect any number of devices to the bus Hot-pluggable ability Provision of power through the cable Plug-and-play performance Low cabling and implementation cost FireWire however has not set the market on fire and despite being in the field for more than a decade is second to USB. Though it has better thru-put than a USB 2.0, FireWire is not very common. Generally Think pads have no FireWire at all and only a few computers like the Dell M 90 have one FireWire compared to 6 USB ports. This shows that USB has scored over Fire Wire. Many people have a question in their mind, in case Fire Wire is basically good then why is it not popular. There are many reasons for this. One of the reasons is the marketing strategy of Apple. When Apple launched their product in the market very few people wanted to pay their licensing fees. Despite a head start they allowed USB 2.0 and Serial ATA to enter the market with no fees. Though Apple Computer had initially demanded a low usage fee from consumers and users, their hardware to add to the efficacy of the Fire Wire was costly. This deterred many users from opting for it. In the low cost mass market computer peripherals, FireWire could not displace the USB. The result was that once Fire Wire slipped, it could not cover the lost ground. Discerning users are of the opinion that there is not much difference between the speeds of USB and FireWire. But the difference lies in the way the product was launched initially. Secondly itÃÂÃÂ¢ÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs all about convenience. A user can plug almost anything in a USB port right from optical devices like mouse to hard drives. FireWire thus lost to USB and never recovered, though the product is good. FireWire did bring in the FW 800, but it is not on most devices. Despite it being faster, particularly with regard to transfer of data, yet it is not popular. Modern developments of new hardware like eSata, has pushed FW 800 back. Its speed is just about 1/3 to 1/4 compared to the 3.0gbps max speed of SATA II. This makes it slow and inevitable got left behind in the race. Is it any wonder that FireWire is left behind in the race of computer hardware?