USB 1.1 or USB 2.2?

[xAkirax2004]

Hey guys, I'm gettin a Creative Zen Xtra Mp3 player, and I know that it uses USB 2.0...although I'm not exactly sure what I have for an interface. Either USB 1.1 or 2.0. On Creative's website, it does say it supports the USB 1.1 format, but I fear that it will be pretty slow when transferring songs. How do I check for my USB interface? My computer was built in 2001, and the brand of the mobo is Asus.

Thanks.

 

[sUn]

Control Panel>System>Hardware>Device Manager>

I think it's somewhere in there.

 

[Iceman]

I'm pretty sure it would be USB 1 based on that date, but you would have to check to be sure.

 

[Sage]

It it is USB 1.1, be forewarned that it will be very slow… USB 1.1's stated maximum transfer speed is 12 MB/s, and I doubt it's every actually that fast. USB 2.2 is backwards-compatible though, so you can use any USB 2.2 device with a USB 1.1-enabled computer, but you'll only get the 1.1 transfer speeds.

 

[Race Idiot]

I used to use my Creative Zen Xtra (You've gone for the 60gb? Right?) on my old pc which was USB 1.1 and it worked fine, just fairly slowly. It works even better on my new pc with usb 2. If you go to the device manager and look under Universal serial bus controllers you should be able to tell.

 

[xAkirax2004]

Well, I was not able to find what version it was...Can someone point me in the right direction?

(You've gone for the 60gb? Right?)

40gb Model. Anything over that is for crazy bastiges.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

At any rate, you can buy a USB2.0 PCI card for buttons these days. eBuyer have a 5-port model for $22.97.

 

[emad]

in the device manager, the USB controller for usb2.0 will be labelled as either Enhanced host controller like it is on my desktop at home, or it will say USB 2.0 like my laptop does in this screenshot.

 

[xAkirax2004]

I guess something like this will do?...

http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproductdesc.asp?description=15-106-006&DEPA=1

And thanks for your help guys. Although I think it will be a pain in the arse to connect the Zen in the back if the cable is short.

 

[oosacker]

I have a Nomad jukebox2 on USB2.0, and it transfers songs very fast indeed.

 

[LoudMusic]

It it is USB 1.1, be forewarned that it will be very slow… USB 1.1's stated maximum transfer speed is 12 MB/s, and I doubt it's every actually that fast. USB 2.2 is backwards-compatible though, so you can use any USB 2.2 device with a USB 1.1-enabled computer, but you'll only get the 1.1 transfer speeds.

Actually I peg out 12mbit full speed every time I use it. Of course my computer is hella fast and my Sony camera is actually USB2, so they shouldn't have any issue with it (:

And I have to second GG's statement about getting a new card. It's nice to just have the extra ports.

 

[Apclps]

I bought a creative zen extra (30 gig) a few months ago. I'm very happy with the player and I've used it with both USB1 and USB2.

USB1 is indeed quite slow, especially with a player that can hold plenty of gigs. Transfering +-350 mp3s will easily take 20minutes. With USB2, this literally gets reduced to less than a second per mp3 (maybe 4minutes?). It will certainly work with USB1 and if you have enough time then even that isn't a problem.

What annoyed me most with usb1 was transfering large files (movie files, the usual 700mb a piece). Don't remember exactly but I think it managed to transfer 4 or 5 files in around an hour.

 

[LoudMusic]

Alright alright, you've made me do it. Here is the mathematical breakdown.

USB1.1 = 12mbit (1.5MB/s)
USB2 = 480mbit (60MB/s)

Average MP3 is 4MB

Average music album 12 songs

Standard speed of a hard drive (regardless of connection type) = 30MB/s

SO ... what do we know about this? We'll never see full USB2 speed unless we have amazing hard drives (which we don't). It will also take ...

32 seconds to copy an album with USB1.1
2 seconds to copy an album with USB2

320 seconds to copy 10 albums with USB1.1
16 seconds to copy 10 albums with USB2

Twenty times faster? That is, if you're getting best case scenario.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

And, following on from LM, you only do one big transfer. The rest is just delta.

 

[LoudMusic]

And, following on from LM, you only do one big transfer. The rest is just delta.

Well, depends on your software, but usually yes it's just updates. That's how the iPod / iTunes stuff works, as far as I know.

I've never really understood the point of having an "mp3 player" with more than 4 or 5 gigs. How is anyone possibly going to fill that with music they acutally listen to. More math ...

4GB of 4MB mp3s comes to 1024 songs. I DARE anyone here to list 1000 songs they will listen to before they fall asleep again, during which time their mp3 player could be updated with a new set of music. 1000 songs averaging 3.5 minutes a piece is 58 hours (can that be right?) of music. It would take me a year to get tired of that much music.

What I want from an mp3 player is mixed products. Mp3, camera, phone, PDA, all in one. Might as well take advantage of all that storage.

 

[Apclps]

Is it correct to say that if you are transferring mp3s (lots of "small" files), that it automatically takes longer because it has to start the next file each time a file has been uploaded? (one 700MB file is faster than 700MB worth of mp3s)

If you would add that to LoudMusic's figures, then they are spot on.

 

[Apclps]

I've never really understood the point of having an "mp3 player" with more than 4 or 5 gigs. How is anyone possibly going to fill that with music they acutally listen to. More math ...

I can't fill my 30GB player with mp3s from my PC, I currently use only 10GB (with music that I actually like).

As far as listening to it goes, I commute to college each day by bus. The bus alone takes 35 - 40 minutes to get there, in total it takes about 2 hrs per day for me to get to and from school (pretty damn stupid for a distance of about 25km). I have the music divided into playlists but I usually have it on "play any track". I rarely get the same track more than once and I get to listen to all my songs again. 👍 for random play

 

[emad]

I can't fill my 30GB player with mp3s from my PC, I currently use only 10GB (with music that I actually like).

As far as listening to it goes, I commute to college each day by bus. The bus alone takes 35 - 40 minutes to get there, in total it takes about 2 hrs per day for me to get to and from school (pretty damn stupid for a distance of about 25km). I have the music divided into playlists but I usually have it on "play any track". I rarely get the same track more than once and I get to listen to all my songs again. 👍 for random play

teehee, i got 30 megs free on my 40 gig. The only time i get the same tracks to repeat is when i tell them to repeat. It's been happening often lately with my renewed obsession for joe satriani and tool.

 

[LoudMusic]

Is it correct to say that if you are transferring mp3s (lots of "small" files), that it automatically takes longer because it has to start the next file each time a file has been uploaded? (one 700MB file is faster than 700MB worth of mp3s)

If you would add that to LoudMusic's figures, then they are spot on.

That is an excellent point. And that time can add up significantly.

I can't fill my 30GB player with mp3s from my PC, I currently use only 10GB (with music that I actually like).

As far as listening to it goes, I commute to college each day by bus. The bus alone takes 35 - 40 minutes to get there, in total it takes about 2 hrs per day for me to get to and from school (pretty damn stupid for a distance of about 25km). I have the music divided into playlists but I usually have it on "play any track". I rarely get the same track more than once and I get to listen to all my songs again. for random play

I still don't see the point in having so much music. With a 4GB library of music, from my example above, you still get 58 hours of music. That's enough for 29 trips to / from school - that's still over a month! 45 minutes one way is roughly 12 songs, 24 for the day. Assuming hearing the same song two days in a row is acceptable but not acceptable in the same day, you would have a 1:43 chance of hearing the same song twice in one session with a 1024 song (4GB) library of music. Those are some kick ass odds. The next thing is, if you have a 4GB player, it can be tiny. I'm talking keychain sized. And to me that's a good thing.

I guess what really matters first, at this point in the technology cycle, is what you're comfortable with size-wise. If it has to be tiny then you're stuck with a reasonable amount of storage space. If you're already lugging a backpack, purse, or other bagggage (fanny pack?) then you could go with something larger, hard drive equipped, and have more storage space than there is actually music to fill it with.

My issue with some of the larger models with bigger capacity is that instead of bigger capacity they need to make them provide more functions. I go back to wanting a device that does more than mp3 playing. You've got the CPU power, the audio output, and a nice screen - might as well make it a camera and PDA. And now that you have a phonebook and audio input you might as well make it a phone.