We have portable/external hard drives, why not video cards? Or even sound cards? More importantly, do they exist?

They *do* exist but they suck. The only meathod of connecting it to the computer would be usb, and usb does not have the same transfer as an AGP slot. The only use for them is on a very old computer (of course if it is that old it won't have usb) or for people who are already using their agp slot with something more important and have no pci. I do, nowever, believe that external sound cards exist, and as I have heard, they are not as bad as it sounds. But I'll stick with my PCI/AGP.

External video cards do not serve the needs of todays home PC buying market.

The Extigy is an example of an external sound card. It is simply an external Audigy.

minus EAX effects because USB cant handle the data needed for them.

there are also PCMCIA videa cards for laptops. if youw ant to run two monitors on a laptop they are your only option but as everyone said already external videocards generaly suck.

Im hoping to see some low end video cards make their way into the mini pci form factor for laptop users in the near future since it seems mini pci is becoming a standard.

Well they won't work with a USB, however: what if it was changed to work through A lan card instead? 100MB's a second should work better than a simple USB 2.0

A "simple USB 2.0" is technically MUCH faster than 100Mbps. I believe the standard states 480Mbps.

...and its Megabits per second (Mbps) not Megabytes per second (MB/sec).

[This message has been edited by cense (edited 12-18-2002).]

and we all know how shitty ethernet is. it never even comes close to 100mbps

quote:

---

and we all know how shitty ethernet is. it never even comes close to 100mbps

---

it sure does. you have no idea what you're talking about.

Ok, that was a bit harsh. sorry syphon.

Here is the deal: when you are transfering over ethernet the max MB/sec (the measurement of most standard programs www, ftp) is 100bits/8bitsperbyte= 12.5MB/sec.

This can be easily achieved. I think what you are missing syphon is that there is more than just raw data sent over the line. There is the ethernet preamble (synchronization) and lots of other ethernet type stuff going on such as ARP.

Also, a HUB will really degrade your bandwidth because you are then effectively sharing that 12.5MB/sec rate over all the machines plugged into that hub. A switch will handle it much better. Ethernet can easily attain such speeds but you will rarely have the situation where your browser will tell you " @ 12.5Mb/sec".

edit: Ethernet has many collisions as well. Ethernet is multiplexed by means of CSMA/CD (Carrier Sense Multiple Access/Collision Detection), a scheme which does not even attempt to prevent collisions, it simply detects (and reports) them. Collisions are a major source of poor bandwidth over ethernet. Again, a GOOD switch will see few collisions.

I guess my point might be that Ethernet is only as good at the switch/hub.

edit: more info

[This message has been edited by cense (edited 12-18-2002).]

i know all about the overhaed, collision, and bandwidth issues created by using a hub. i also know all about the composition of an ethernet packet and it sucks. even if your counting everything over the line including the packet header, data, etc. then your still not getting close to 100mbps. not in my experience anyway.

Dammit I can never remember numbers,
Since USB runs at 480 Mbps, so how fast does a IDE or EIDE run? I think its around something like 600 MB/sec, so how about connecting the external Vid card though an external IDE port? (May not exist...yet)

IDE ports only word with storage devices.

And I think that the ata133 protocol maxes out at 133mb/s (surprise!).

correct!

i havent used USB 2.0 yet but if its anything like USB 1.2 (i think that was the spec number) then dont get too exited. USB was supposed to work at like 10 or 12 mbps but you would be lucky to get 2 alot of times.

I believe USB 2.0 is around 50mb/s or somewhere around there. Its to compete with firewire.

the way i understand it there was never any competition meant between the two. firewire and usb 2.0 are meant for fairly different aplications. it seems that disks are moving the usb 2.0 direction and all things video are staying firewire.

Firewire is engineered to provide the rock-steady bandwidth requirements necessary for things like video streaming. USB works in more of a burst fashion.