esata to firewire 800 hub for PT?

[newdawg]

I have 2 7200rpm drives mounted in ezquest firewire 400/usb 2.0 enclosures, and they both have esata ports. I just noted an esata to fw800 hub.

<http://www.firmtek.com/seritek/seritek-spyder/>

It shows 2 esata and one FW800 in, with FW800 out.

Would this be a potential option to up my external drive transfer rate to FW800 into my iMac AL 2.66. I know the esata would be limited to the FW800 rate. Not sure of any chipset or other issues, not familiar with esata, seems like a fairly new option... wondering about possible PT applicability.

Any feedback on this would be appreciated. Thanks.

[albee1952]

It looks interesting, but its going to take a guinea pig to pony up the cash and try it.

[Obsidian Dragon]

Originally Posted by newdawg

I have 2 7200rpm drives mounted in ezquest firewire 400/usb 2.0 enclosures, and they both have esata ports. I just noted an esata to fw800 hub.

<http://www.firmtek.com/seritek/seritek-spyder/>

It shows 2 esata and one FW800 in, with FW800 out.

Would this be a potential option to up my external drive transfer rate to FW800 into my iMac AL 2.66. I know the esata would be limited to the FW800 rate. Not sure of any chipset or other issues, not familiar with esata, seems like a fairly new option... wondering about possible PT applicability.

Any feedback on this would be appreciated. Thanks.

What I find interesting about this is that for people with a non firewire Mac (1st generation unibody Macbook, Macbook Air, current curved edge white Macbook) they can use a USB based Digidesign interface (Mbox, Mbox 2, Mbox 2 Mini, Mbox 2 Micro, Eleven Rack and be able to connect a eSATA external drive for the second physical drive. The questions is the throughput since it must will still go through the USB host connection (again firewire is not available for the host connection on these Macs). If the througput (I suspect) is the same as USB since that is the slowest point in the chain, then it will be just like connecting an external USB drive which is not supported. I'm just thinking out loud.

[Craig F]

$130 is not the worst cost for an experiment