I had the same comment for Computer Audio 1.0 and am sad to see the same statement, which I believe is in error.
Specifically, the false equivocation of USB and FireWire as protocols for transmitting digital audio. In the paragraph about asynchronous mode, the article states "The DAC controls the audio transfer from the computer, ignoring the computer's USB bus clock..." Are there any situations the author(s) can name where a FireWire DAC does *not* ignore the computer's USB bus clock?
Then, as last time, the article states "Currently the majority of USB and FireWire DACs operate in adaptive mode."
As I am not aware of a single FireWire implementation that is not in control of clocking, I would ask the authors to please name some as they assert "the majority" operate in a fashion I have never encountered with FireWire. Put another way, every single implementation of FireWire of which I'm aware is in control of the clocking - not some of the time but always, without exception.
Perhaps I am mistaken and have simply not yet encountered an adaptive FireWire DAC. This is why I ask for examples of such - especially when they are asserted to represent "the majority" of FireWire DACs. While USB certainly presents an opportunity for commerce, I believe the equivocation of a protocol designed for connection of a mouse and one designed from the start with streaming audio and video in mind is off the mark.