Will USB 2.0 Flash memory work on a USB 1.0 port?
phule92
I'm planning on upgrading my PowerMAC G4 to a Mac Pro in a month or
so. I've got a lot (10+ Gb) of sensitive data files I'd like to backup
on a small USB drive.
TIA
Bob
David Empson
It should work, but will be slow.
Assume USB's best possible throughput is about 50% of the rated bus
speed. That means USB 1.1 will be limited to about 6 Mbps, which is 0.75
MB/s. Copying 10 GB to the USB flash drive will take about 10000/0.75 =
13333 seconds which is about 3.75 hours. Probably longer if dealing with
lots of relatively small files.
Copying it off the USB flash drive on a computer with USB 2.0 will be
limited by the speed of the flash memory, which will probably be in the
order of ten times faster.
Assuming you will be able to set up both computers beside each other,
you will get a much faster transfer by putting one of the computers in
Firewire Target Mode, connecting them via a Firewire cable and copying
the files directly.
I'd expect average transfer speed in the order of 10 MB/s or better.
--
David Empson
dem...@actrix.gen.nz
Erik Richard Sørensen
Yes, in most cases both USB 1.x sticks and disks will be recognized by
USB 2.0. The other way round - USB 2.0 sticks/disks on USB 1.x - can be
more difficult. I have more different sticks - two of these are USB 2.0
only and will not be recognized in the built-in USB 1.1 in my old
QuickSilver but very well in the USB 2.0 PCI card...
Cheers, Erik Richard
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Erik Richard Sørensen, Member of ADC, <mac-m...@Mstofanet.dk>
NisusWriter - The Future In Multilingual Text Processing - www.nisus.com
OpenOffice.org - The Modern Productivity Solution - www.openoffice.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
nospam
S�rensen <NOS...@NOSPAM.dk> wrote:
> Yes, in most cases both USB 1.x sticks and disks will be recognized by
> USB 2.0. The other way round - USB 2.0 sticks/disks on USB 1.x - can be
> more difficult.
nonsense
> I have more different sticks - two of these are USB 2.0
> only and will not be recognized in the built-in USB 1.1 in my old
> QuickSilver but very well in the USB 2.0 PCI card...
something is defective.
phule92
> In article <040220101616070001%nos...@nospam.invalid>,
>
> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > In article <4b6b61e2$0$8546$ba624...@nntp06.dk.telia.net>, Erik Richard
> > Sørensen <NOS...@NOSPAM.dk> wrote:
>
> > > Yes, in most cases both USB 1.x sticks and disks will be recognized by
> > > USB 2.0. The other way round - USB 2.0 sticks/disks on USB 1.x - can be
> > > more difficult.
>
> > nonsense
>
> > > I have more different sticks - two of these are USB 2.0
> > > only and will not be recognized in the built-in USB 1.1 in my old
> > > QuickSilver but very well in the USB 2.0 PCI card...
>
> > something is defective.
>
> fine in my MDD G4, which I am pretty sure is 1.1. It also works on some
> old Windows XP laptops I have which I am sure are 1.1, because you get a
> pop up window saying that "this device can perform faster if you plug it
> into a USB 2.0 port".
>
> USB 2.0 is supposed to auto fall back to 1.1. Its part of the spec.
> If you have a 2.0 device that doesn't work on a 1.1 port then the device
> or the port is broken.
Thanks for the replies!!
Erik Richard Sørensen
Dan wrote:
> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> Erik Richard Sørensen <NOS...@NOSPAM.dk> wrote:
>>> Yes, in most cases both USB 1.x sticks and disks will be recognized by
>>> USB 2.0. The other way round - USB 2.0 sticks/disks on USB 1.x - can be
>>> more difficult.
>> nonsense
>>
>>> I have more different sticks - two of these are USB 2.0
>>> only and will not be recognized in the built-in USB 1.1 in my old
>>> QuickSilver but very well in the USB 2.0 PCI card...
>> something is defective.
>
> fine in my MDD G4, which I am pretty sure is 1.1. It also works on some
> old Windows XP laptops I have which I am sure are 1.1, because you get a
> pop up window saying that "this device can perform faster if you plug it
> into a USB 2.0 port".
>
> USB 2.0 is supposed to auto fall back to 1.1. Its part of the spec.
> If you have a 2.0 device that doesn't work on a 1.1 port then the device
> or the port is broken.
As I wrote these two USB memory stisks are USB 2.0 only. It was clearly
written on the case. - How would you else explain that the same sticks
do work on an USB 2.0 PCI card and on my MacPro or with my USB 2.0 hubs
connected to my two MDDs? - My two other memory sticks are both USB
1.1/2.0 and works just fine on any machine on any UsB port or hub...
nospam
S�rensen <NOS...@NOSPAM.dk> wrote:
> > USB 2.0 is supposed to auto fall back to 1.1. Its part of the spec.
> > If you have a 2.0 device that doesn't work on a 1.1 port then the device
> > or the port is broken.
>
> As I wrote these two USB memory stisks are USB 2.0 only.
usb 2.0 is required to support 1.1.
> It was clearly written on the case.
what exactly was written on the case? post a photo of it.
> - How would you else explain that the same sticks
> do work on an USB 2.0 PCI card and on my MacPro or with my USB 2.0 hubs
> connected to my two MDDs? - My two other memory sticks are both USB
> 1.1/2.0 and works just fine on any machine on any UsB port or hub...
one or more components is defective and not compliant with the spec.
or more likely, you're confused and delusional.
David Empson
> In article <040220101616070001%nos...@nospam.invalid>,
> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
> I agree. I have a 6 month old Kensington 4 GB USB stick. It works
> fine in my MDD G4, which I am pretty sure is 1.1. It also works on some
> old Windows XP laptops I have which I am sure are 1.1, because you get a
> pop up window saying that "this device can perform faster if you plug it
> into a USB 2.0 port".
>
> USB 2.0 is supposed to auto fall back to 1.1. Its part of the spec.
> If you have a 2.0 device that doesn't work on a 1.1 port then the device
> or the port is broken.
A device which requires a certain minimum bandwidth (e.g. real time
video) might only work on a USB 2.0 port, because USB 1.1 isn't fast
enough.
Hard to believe this could apply to any USB flash drive unless it has a
design fault.
--
David Empson
dem...@actrix.gen.nz
Erik Richard Sørensen
Dan wrote:
> Erik Richard Sørensen <NOS...@NOSPAM.dk> wrote:
>> As I wrote these two USB memory stisks are USB 2.0 only. It was clearly
>> written on the case. - How would you else explain that the same sticks
>> do work on an USB 2.0 PCI card and on my MacPro or with my USB 2.0 hubs
>> connected to my two MDDs? - My two other memory sticks are both USB
>> 1.1/2.0 and works just fine on any machine on any UsB port or hub...
>
> fundamentally broken. That the package clearly states they are broken
> does not change anything. They are not valid USB devices, since they
> are not following the spec.
>
> What brand are they, so I know to avoid them in the future.
Well... That's your opinion, but not the manufacturer's... Those of mine
that is USB 2.0 only are one from Sony and one from MemoryTech. the two
others that do work are both noname products. I've also seen USB 2.0
only sticks from TDK, Verbatim, RiData, Sandisk, Olympus and Trust. the
two from Sandisk and Olympus are card readers for memory cards for
cameras and digital voice recorders. - So since there are many
well-known brands among, you have to be veeeeery carefull next time you
go out and buy one.
Btw. I have also an USB 'mini-hub' from Infinion that claims to be USB
2.0 only, but this one does work on my MDDs but not on the QuickSilver.
Mike Rosenberg
> > As I wrote these two USB memory stisks are USB 2.0 only.
>
> usb 2.0 is required to support 1.1.
>
> > It was clearly written on the case.
>
> what exactly was written on the case? post a photo of it.
That'll happen when pigs fly, which, come to think of it, may have been
another of his claims. Anyway, his MO is to make incorrect claims, then
stick to them come hell or high water.
> > - How would you else explain that the same sticks
> > do work on an USB 2.0 PCI card and on my MacPro or with my USB 2.0 hubs
> > connected to my two MDDs? - My two other memory sticks are both USB
> > 1.1/2.0 and works just fine on any machine on any UsB port or hub...
>
> one or more components is defective and not compliant with the spec.
Perhaps, but...
> or more likely, you're confused and delusional.
Bingo!
--
My latest dance performance <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_9pudbFisE>
Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts <http://designsbymike.net/shop/mac.cgi>
Prius shirts/bumper stickers <http://designsbymike.net/shop/prius.cgi>
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <4b6b8a7e$0$4814$ba62...@nntp02.dk.telia.net>):
>
> Dan wrote:
>> Erik Richard Sï¿œrensen <NOS...@NOSPAM.dk> wrote:
>>> As I wrote these two USB memory stisks are USB 2.0 only. It was clearly
>>> written on the case. - How would you else explain that the same sticks
>>> do work on an USB 2.0 PCI card and on my MacPro or with my USB 2.0 hubs
>>> connected to my two MDDs? - My two other memory sticks are both USB
>>> 1.1/2.0 and works just fine on any machine on any UsB port or hub...
>>
>> I would explain it by saying - again - that those devices are
>> fundamentally broken. That the package clearly states they are broken
>> does not change anything. They are not valid USB devices, since they
>> are not following the spec.
>>
>> What brand are they, so I know to avoid them in the future.
>
> Well... That's your opinion, but not the manufacturer's... Those of mine
> that is USB 2.0 only are one from Sony and one from MemoryTech. the two
> others that do work are both noname products. I've also seen USB 2.0
> only sticks from TDK, Verbatim, RiData, Sandisk, Olympus and Trust. the
> two from Sandisk and Olympus are card readers for memory cards for
> cameras and digital voice recorders. - So since there are many
> well-known brands among, you have to be veeeeery carefull next time you
> go out and buy one.
Bullshit. I have right in my hand a Verbatim 1 GB thumb drive, which was
marketed as being _compatible_ with USB 2, not as _requiring_ USB 2. There is
a considerable difference... and I _know_ without any doubt whatsoever that
that stick will work with USB 1.1 ports because it is, right now as I type
this, connected to a USB 1.1 port on a Sonnet aftermarket card installed in a
beige G3 and I am copying files over from it to the beige.
At least in the case of Verbatim you are absolutely, incontrovertibly,
totally, completely, obviously, WRONG.
I also have a SanDisk 4 GB stick... let's plug it into another port on the
Sonnet card... hey, guess what? The SanDisk stick works with USB 1.1, too.
And it was also marketed as being _compatible_ with USB 2.
And here's a PNY 2 GB stick... hey, it works too. Looks like you're wrong
again, laddie. I can't try any more, that PCI card only has three USB ports,
and a beige didn't ship with built-in USB. And, besides, I figure I've made
my point.
Why do you _insist_ on chatting total bullshit that is easily refuted by a
simple experiment? Anyone who has access to any Mac (or WinBox) which had
older USB ports or an older aftermarket USB card installed in a PCI slot can
simply and easily _plug a stick into a USB port_ and see for themselves
whether you're talking rot or not. And, oh, YOU'RE TALKING UTTER ROT. You are
mistaking the vendors claim of being able to use USB 2 for a statement that
it can't use USB 1.1. There are a few (a very few) USB 2 devices which can't
use USB 1.1 for good reasons, and they will so state on the box... but thumb
drives are not among those few. I own an example of a USB device which can't
use USB 1.1: a USB-only external DVD burner from LG. And even with _that_
device, I can _play_ CDs and DVDs on it from USB 1.1, and even burn CDs when
attached by USB 1.1, though it's a Very Bad Idea(tm) to try to burn DVDs when
attached by USB 1.1 unless you like coasters.
>
> Btw. I have also an USB 'mini-hub' from Infinion that claims to be USB
> 2.0 only, but this one does work on my MDDs but not on the QuickSilver.
>
> Cheers, Erik Richard
>
>
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
Mike Rosenberg
> Why do you _insist_ on chatting total bullshit that is easily refuted by a
> simple experiment?
Eh, he STILL claims that Photoshop Elements 2.0 can only run in OS 9
(including Classic) despite the fact that I posted screen shots of it
installing and running on an Intel Mac running Tiger.
Barry OGrady
<heoq...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>Will USB 2.0 Flash memory work on a USB 1.0 port?
Yes.
>Bob
=-=-=
Barry
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
David Empson
> In article <4s3pm5trs8kubbgii...@4ax.com>,
> Barry OGrady <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 13:20:31 -0800 (PST), phule92
> > <heoq...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Will USB 2.0 Flash memory work on a USB 1.0 port?
> >
> > Yes.
>
> I have found through experience that "work" is more a theoretical
> concept for flash drives over 2GB. "Works-with-some-coaxing" might be
> more accurate. Examples follow...
>
> I have a 4GB Kingston drive that works without complaint on the USB 2.0
> Macs I've tried it on, but often requires a reboot to properly mount on
> USB 1.1 Macs. On the older Macs the drive occasionally becomes
> unresponsive during file writes.
This might be more than just a question of capacity: different file
systems are probably involved.
2 GB or smaller USB flash drives can use FAT16 and almost all will be
preformatted as FAT16.
Anything larger than that cannot use FAT16 and will be preformatted as
FAT32.
The problem you are observing might be an issue with FAT32 support on
old Mac OS or Mac OS X versions, rather than anything to do with USB 1.1
vs USB 2.0.
Proving this would require something like a PowerMac G4 with an add-on
USB 2.0 card: if the USB flash drive misbehaves when plugged into a USB
1.1 port but the same drive works fine when plugged into USB 2.0 on the
same computer, then there is some compatibility issue between that
device and USB 1.1.
At the very least, it would be helpful to note which file system and Mac
OS or Mac OS X version is involved so see whether that might be a
factor.
> Someone showed up at our user group meeting with an 8GB drive of unknown
> pedigree. I witnessed the same phenomenon, but under less controlled
> conditions.
>
> The 2GB (or smaller) drives I've encountered exhibit no discernible
> compatibility issues.
>
> I'd like to hear from folks who have used 4GB or larger flash drives on
> USB 1.1 systems, and experienced no problems. What brand drive? That's
> the one I buy next time.
--
David Empson
dem...@actrix.gen.nz