MultiSwitch, the First USB Sharing Hub

Iddo Genuth writes "A new extension to USB that will enable sharing of various USB peripherals between computers will be available early in 2007. The new MultiSwitch hub technology, developed by SMSC, allows the sharing of information and content from devices such as DVD players, cameras, printers, and scanners, and between laptops and desktops using a simple USB cable. Future hubs may also allow wireless sharing of peripherals."

This Was Possible A While Ago

[illectro]

I remember a linux kernel module which would forward USB packets across the network to another machine which could access them like a virtual USB interface. It was kinda buggy and I don't think it ever made it into the main linux kernel, but it was a neat trick regardless, the guy who developed it told me he developed it after he was laid off and looking for work, but he got a job pretty quickly and stopped working on it.

usb vs. firewire vs. ethernet..

[radarsat1]

Sometimes I wonder, and this "multiswitch" idea just brings home the point, why we have USB and Firewire when it seems like it would be just as effective, and more standardized, for every device to just have built-in gigabit ethernet chips that can communicate using UDP or something.

Protocol? Why not USB over ethernet? Or use OpenSoundControl! _anything_ standardized... Think how much easier that would make it to write drivers. The point is that we can easily separate the protocol from the physical layer, or even from the transport layer. And yet we still have very specific protocols for USB and Firewire technology that are tied to the hardware they run on. It makes little sense to me.

It just seems silly to have all these communication standards that are basically just reinventing the IP protocol. IP has been "plug and play" for like a decade before USB was invented. At the time, of course, it was necessary to have something that could transfer data at certain rates that were unachievable otherwise, but now that most new computers have on-board gigabit ethernet, maybe it's time we took advantage of it. The nice thing about sticking to STANDARDS is that the next time they upgrade the ethernet hardware (10 Gb onboard, for example), device communication would automatically be upgraded with it. As a bonus, backwards compatibility would be easily assured.

Meanwhile, let's improve those damn ethernet connectors already. Goddamn tabs always breaking off...
I know the plastic tabs are a cost-effective solution, but I think we could do better, I honestly do.

It's called FireWire aka i.Link aka IEEE 1394

[maggard]

It's called FireWire [wikipedia.org] aka iLink aka IEEE 1394.

It's been out for years, it's a mature technology, it actually does support true sharing insofar as the devices can, and it doesn't require a host system. Add into that higher speeds with substantially less overhead (USB is dependent on your CPU) and it sure beats out the it's-USB-with-our-own-wonky-'extensions' stuff.

The downsides are a slightly higher hardware price due to a more sophisticated chipset and a bit of licensing fees (US$.25/device). And of course FW/1394 isn't as universal as USB, though whatever you're looking for is almost always available from somewhere.

Re:How is this better than a mechanical USB switch

[Belial6]

My father has been running a USB switch that has software swithing for well over a year. This isn't new. I wouldn't by one because they require the PCs to be right next to each other, and you had to click on an icon to use the device. Too much trouble. What seems more interesting to me, and given how cheap ethernet chips are, would be to just make all of your devices ethernet devices. USB is great for mice, joysticks and memory sticks. Basically personal devices to be used right there and then. But, for things like hard drives, scanners and printers, it seems that it would be almost as simple design wise and is already designed for sharing.