GAWAE-FAP5K-699T3-C89MC-A8UA9-8M4C8-2X7JN-C5DYC-CQL46-4BNFE-LMZAD-HZKFD-LZN3Z-6YC5Q-DB59
Hmm. Not surprisingly, this is a very one-sided document, but I'm disappointed that the description of AVB systems is so very deceptive (where it is not blatantly incorrect).
1) Ethernet PHYs of up to 10Gb/s are readily available
2) Ethernet PHYs use almost any media imaginable, certainly more than 1394
3) We (Broadcom) have demonstrated guaranteed low-latency AVB systems with less than 2ms delays end-to-end across 7 switches, and that was at 100Mbit/sec ... delays scale roughly with speed ... so an end-to-end 1G system would be closer to 200us for 7 switches.
4) All the comments about data formats, encryption, and integration are irrelevant, since Ethernet systems already use DTCP, fast video codecs, even uncompressed video
5) The topology argument is bogus ... a modern Ethernet system can be built using any topology whatsoever ... and uses RSTP to dynamically (and VERY quickly) build a spanning tree and keep all redundant links alive to be used for backup or for productive use with the aid of the 802 link aggregation protocol.
6) And finally, the switched architecture allows bandwidth to be used where needed ... traffic is not shared throughout the entire network ... it only goes where needed, unlike 1394 which is fundamentally a shared media.
... and I do know what I'm talking about. I was the original chair of the 1394 effort, the technical lead on Apple's Firewire project, and a major contributor to the technology. In the early years of this century I found it was much easier to adapt Ethernet to provide Firewire QoS than it was to get Firewire down to Ethernet cost points ... so I switched my efforts, and I encouraged the 1394 TA to do so as well. Too bad they didn't.
