Jobs responds to outrage over MacBook's missing FireWire

[AppleInsider]

In one of his characteristically terse email replies, Apple chief executive Steve Jobs has reportedly told one Mac user that changes in video camera technology have reduced the need for FireWire on his company's 13-inch MacBooks.

The one-line response to a fan complaining over the lack of FireWire on the new entry level aluminum MacBooks is blunt but also points out that technology has changed since the company began including FireWire with Macs in 1999.

"Actually, all of the new HD camcorders of the past few years use USB 2," Jobs supposedly wrote in an email, a copy of which was posted to the popular Flickr image sharing website.

Jobs is likely not pleased about the*current state of FireWire himself. Apple invented the standard in the late 80s as a hot pluggable replacement for SCSI, with a special emphasis on supporting media streaming with*isochronous, real-time data transfers. The company then released the specification through a standards body to become IEEE 1394, where others including DEC, Texas Instruments, and Sony contributed to its*development*as well.*

Upon*returning*to the*beleaguered*Apple in 1997, Jobs hoped to earn*Apple some licensing royalties from the technology, which was quickly becoming an emerging standard not just to replace SCSI but also in video and music applications. Jobs' plan resulted in Intel offering to upgrade its USB standard to speeds approaching FireWire at a lower cost. The 'master to slave' USB 2.0 protocol was cheaper to implement than the 'smart peers' design of FireWire because USB required less intelligence in the controllers.

Somewhat ironically, Apple's 1998 iMac originated the push behind USB that allowed it to gain rapid adoption among consumers. USB 2.0 built upon that ubiquity to push into the peripheral*territory*that had been wholly owned by FireWire. In 2001, Apple's iPod began to popularize FireWire as an interface that was much faster for syncing the then*relatively*large MP3 files compared to existing players that used USB 1.0. However, by 2003, Apple started adding USB 2.0 support to target PC buyers, where FireWire ports were rare. By the end of 2005, Apple had removed FireWire sync from the iPod line as a cost savings measure.

While USB 2.0 ate into the casual peripheral market for consumer hard drives and web cams, FireWire retracted to support applications where USB 2.0 wasn't suitable. It retains clear advantages over USB 2.0 among higher performance hard drives, but in that market, FireWire is now competing against eSATA, which developed from ATA cabling. Historically, FireWire has been the way to import video from digital cameras, but as Jobs' purported email announced that is no longer always the case.

A glance at the product pages for Canon, Hitachi, JVC, Samsung and Sony as well as Amazon's top camcorder list indicates that virtually all new compact consumer HD cameras now use USB 2.0*to transferring footage directly to a computer instead of the FireWire. Some camcorders also offer the option of burning directly to DVD and a few*can transfer video over a USB-to-FireWire bridge cable.

A purported email reply from Apple chief executive Steve Jobs.

That reality is little comfort to those who fall outside of Apple's market for the new entry-level portables, many of whom are vocal in their opinions in Apple's support discussions as well as AppleInsider's own forums.

Support for older cameras, many of which (particularly DV tape models) depend on FireWire, is ruled out by Apple's aluminum MacBook update; so too are prosumer cameras such as Sony's HDR-FX1000, which needs the faster throughput of FireWire (called i.LINK by Sony) to deliver raw content if a card reader isn't used. To serious amateurs or professionals who prefer a smaller system, the loss of FireWire on the new entry level MacBooks is a vexing problem.*

"I am a video producer and use my MacBook on site to ingest footage taken from FireWire cameras, even occasionally hooking the camera right up to the MacBook," says one Mac user with the previous generation system. *"Well, it looks like there isn't a FireWire port on it anymore... how the heck am I supposed to do that? I am sure I am not the only one with this concern."

Professional musicians also use FireWire in recording equipment.*Others have noted that the lack of FireWire additionally rules out Target Disk Mode for managing files or cloning systems, as USB 2.0's architecture lacks the capacity to support that feature. Apple's Migration Assistant software now alternatively supports importing files from another machine over Ethernet, from USB drives, or Time Machine backups, however.

Even so, many argue that Apple's move appears built to upsell any serious user to the MacBook Pro, which starts at $800 more than the entry level new MacBook, despite the fact that Apple*continues*to sell the previous-generation white MacBook, with FireWire intact, for $300 less than the new aluminum MacBooks.

There's no doubt that the removal of FireWire from the MacBook was as difficult of a decision for Apple as it is a mourned loss for many Mac users. With FireWire increasingly receding into the professional space, Apple had to weigh several variables, including the cost of incorporating another port to its entry level laptop that many of its new users wouldn't even recognize. After all, half of the buyers Apple is selling to in its retail stores are new to the Mac. Being able to offer them a lower price will likely help more than trying to sell them on the concept of Target Disk mode, which is entirely foreign to PC users.

The future of FireWire is still up in the air. Apple retained the FW800*version*(running at 800Mbps, twice the speed of the original specification) on the new MacBook Pro, providing substantially faster throughput than USB 2.0. On the MacBook, FW400 doesn't offer most users enough of an advantage over USB 2.0 to warrant taking up the limited space on the port panel and on the logic board.

"Many of us don't have great confidence that FireWire is here to stay on MacBook Pro, Mac Pro, or iMac, either," one forum user wrote.

With the advancement of USB 2.0 on the low end, erosion from eSATA among hard drives, and a migration away from FireWire even in its home field advantage among digital video users, Apple is probably wondering the same thing.

Update: Jobs continues serve at times as Apple's unofficial public relations department, and AppleInsider can now nod to the authenticity of the aforementioned email with a high degree of certainty. Since our publication of his original email Thursday, Jobs has since exchanged another pair of emails with David, both of which be seen here:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Steve Jobs
Date: Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Subject: Re: Firewire RIP?
To: Xxxxx

The new HD camcorders start around $500.*

Sent from my iPhone


On Oct 16, 2008, at 12:41 PM, Xxxxx wrote:

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the fast response! In answer to your statement, though, I decided to look at the selection of camcorders on BestBuy.com since I believe they represent a pretty average staple of what consumer electronics people are buying. Although you are correct that (almost) all of the new HD camcorders use USB 2.0, there are still many, many standard definition camcorders (read:*affordable*for average Joes) that require firewire. Does this mean to say that Apple no longer supports average Joes from making home movies on their computers? In other words, if I have a $300 firewire camcorder and a new MacBook, shouldn't I be able to edit videos of my kid's birthday just as easily as someone who has a MacBook Pro and a $1200 HD camcorder?

Sincerely,

-David

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

"Actually, all of the new HD camcorders of the past few years use USB 2," Jobs supposedly wrote in an email, a copy of which was posted to the popular Flickr image sharing website.

I'm pretty sure that is "most", not "all". I don't think HDV can be captured over the USB port of an HDV camcorder, and it's still an active format, with models still available new in the consumer market from several brands.

But the point remains, new consumer purchases should emphasize solid state storage & USB transfer.

[problemchild]

So why not this .Firewire 800 devices use a nine-pin connector, and if you need the maximum throughput you have to connect a FW800 device via a nine-pin to nine-pin FW800 'Beta' cable to a FW800 port, and run them in 'Beta' mode. On the other hand, FW400 devices use six-pin (powered) or four-pin (unpowered) connectors, although it's easy enough to buy nine-pin to six-pin or nine-pin to four-pin 'bilingual' cables so you can plug a FW400 device into a FW800 port (or vice versa) and run it in backward-compatible legacy mode.

[Dave K.]

My brand new Canon HV30 (a HD camcorder) doesn't support USB 2 for video transfer....

[Dave K.]

Why not drop the Ethernet port and replace it with FireWire 400? Apple already sells a USB to Ethernet adapter for the MacBook Air's. This would have been the best solution for everyone...

[retroneo]

All you need is a simple cable

USB to Firewire

It encapsulates DV in USB Video Class. Needs no drivers since 10.4.9.

No recompression - it's the original DV stream!

And this has been available for over four years.



http://www.everythingusb.com/news/index/3889.htm

[Dave K.]

Originally Posted by retroneo

All you need is a simple cable

USB to Firewire

It encapsulates DV in USB Video Class. Needs no drivers.

And this has been available for over four years.

http://www.everythingusb.com/news/index/3889.htm

Never mind...

[dreyfus2]

Well, a few things:

- I think this answer (assuming it is legit) is rude
- Jobs is, as usual in most current statements, plain wrong. Even HDV camcorders being as current and best-selling as the Canon HV20 do only use FW for transfer (the USB port is for stills only), who buys a 1k camcorder just for lousy stills?
- A lot of more professional camcorders (well up into the 20k range) still depend on FW for capturing of SD material - with HD(V) capturing does not require realtime transfer, so USB can suffice (while still having a sustained throughput problem that can make the process more lengthy)
- I do have a total of 23 external FW HDs (more than half of them not having USB in addition) and 2 external FW DVD burners (mainly because the "Superdrives" are abysmal and highly picky with media), am I expected to throw all this away?
- I do have two FW audio interfaces (including the Apogee Ensemble, a 2k device being highly touted by Apple as the premier partner for Logic)? So I have to schlep a 15 or 17" monolith just to record some audio on the go? At least 17" if I want to be able to actually see the screen on stage vs. myself?

People have invested in FW peripherals for many years as this was the standard promoted by Apple (for good reasons). If you remove it, at least give people an advanced warning. This is simply bad treatment of customers and downright shameful.

PS: Even funnier is the laughable support for AVCHD, disk, SD and DVD based camcorders in OS X and iMovie. People really want to get their feet wet with converting all of their stuff using something as comfortable as ffmpegX to edit their home videos... it simply does not work is Apple's new slogan?

[TenoBell]

I also lament the state of Firewire. Intels lack of support ultimately set its fate. Apple has more invested in Firewire than consumers. Just the way these things go.

[dreyfus2]

Originally Posted by retroneo

All you need is a simple cable

USB to Firewire

It encapsulates DV in USB Video Class. Needs no drivers.

1. Does not work under OS X, 2. Is too slow to capture MiniDV even under Windows (dropped frames will result in footage that cannot be edited later on, but it's a nice waste of time).

[coolfactor]

Apple's thinking is and always will be slightly ahead of consumers' thinking. Sure, we hate to lose Firewire, a technology that has a cool name, great performance, and bragging rights, since Apple invented it. But if you stop and think about it... the MacBook (which no longer has Firewire) is targeted to a market that probably won't ever use Firewire. The vocal minority here are the ones that should be looking at a MacBook Pro anyway, which still has their beloved port.

(Firewire has saved my butt many times over with Target Disk Mode, but I understand that the landscape changes, and so will our products. Just look at the myriad of display/video ports we've gone through in the past few years).

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by dreyfus2

1. Does not work under OS X, 2. Is too slow to capture MiniDV even under Windows (dropped frames will result in footage that cannot be edited later on, but it's a nice waste of time).

Bandwidth shouldn't be a problem here. DV/ HDV maxes out at 25Mbps, USB can sustain 200Mbps or so.

[AHeneen]

Originally Posted by Dave K.

Why not drop the Ethernet port and replace it with FireWire 400? Apple already sells a USB to Ethernet adapter for the MacBook Air's. This would have been the best solution for everyone...

No. Ethernet is necessary. I've been to several places in the past two years to know. My school did not allow wireless routers in dorms and the only way to access the internet was via ethernet, and now I work in an office where I plug my MacBook Pro into the company network (and to the internet) via ethernet. For networks and internet access, ethernet provides a faster connection (so I'm told). You will loose the speed when changing to USB, I think. Not to mention the fact you will loose a USB port doing so. My point is that Firewire should not replace ethernet...I do think that Apple was stupid in removing it, though!

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by dreyfus2

... I think this answer (assuming it is legit) is rude
- Jobs is, as usual in most current statements, plain wrong. Even HDV camcorders being as current and best-selling as the Canon HV20 do only use FW for transfer (the USB port is for stills only), who buys a 1k camcorder just for lousy stills?...

Nah, you are the one that is "plain wrong."

1) Apple has pushed FireWire constantly and persistently, and I don't think they can be blamed that no one else took it up.

2) Apple still supports FireWire on every single product it makes *except* the entry-level "cheap" (for Apple) MacBook.

3) You are not differentiating between consumer level cameras and Pro gear.

Bottom line is if you have a camera that only does FireWire, it's either old or "pro enough" that you should be comfortable affording the extra $700 bucks for the MacBook Pro.

The guy above that says he's a "video producer" but can only afford a MacBook and not a Pro? Give me a break. What a bunch of whiners.

[OriginalMacRat]

Steve Jobs has finally lost it. (Well, actually he's been a bit loopy for the past year.)

Time for him to go.

[dreyfus2]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

Bandwidth shouldn't be a problem here. DV/ HDV maxes out at 25Mbps, USB can sustain 200Mbps or so.

I am doing videos for a living. You cannot capture DV via USB and the FW-to-USB adapter mentioned does not even provide the full USB 2.0 bandwidth (it may be able to sustain 80-100 Mbps, assuming the CPU is not stalling, which in reality does happen).

[Dave K.]

Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2

2) Apple still supports FireWire on every single product it makes *except* the entry-level "cheap" (for Apple) MacBook.

$1300 for a cheap notebook. Yeah right!

[corinhorn]

All that I know for sure is I will not spend one bloody dime on an Apple notebook until FireWire is back on the MacBook. I'm not going to spend an extra $500 to get the MacBook Pro.

I've been a Mac user for 10 years, and for the first time ever I am considering buying a Dell.

[Zandros]

Originally Posted by Dave K.

Why not drop the Ethernet port and replace it with FireWire 400? Apple already sells a USB to Ethernet adapter for the MacBook Air's. This would have been the best solution for everyone...

We have IP over Firewire, and there's a spec for Firewire over standard ethernet cable. It's very doable to have both in one port.

/Adrian

[hmurchison]

Originally Posted by Dave K.

My brand new Canon HV30 (a HD camcorder) doesn't support USB 2 for video transfer....

Nice camera. There are plenty of cameras that don't support video over USB yet the real question should be "out of the millions of DV cameras sold over the last few years ..most require firewire for video download and you've just obsoleted them if they don't purchase a $2000 laptop"

Originally Posted by TenoBell

I also lament the state of Firewire. Intels lack of support ultimately set its fate. Apple has more invested in Firewire than consumers. Just the way these things go.

Apple cannot blame Intel here. They use the same chipset in the Macbook Pro and it has FW. This is a needless distinction between the two.

There's no doubt that the removal of FireWire from the MacBook was as difficult a decision for Apple as it is a mourned loss for Mac users. With FireWire increasingly receding into the professional space, Apple had to weigh several variables, including the cost of adding a port to its entry level laptop that many of its new users wouldn't even recognize. After all, half of the buyers Apple is selling to in its retail stores are new to the Mac. Being able to offer them a lower price will likely help more than trying to sell them on the concept of Target Disk mode, which is entirely foreign to PC users. *

I'm sure the cost of adding the port was much lower than the overengineering of the aluminum case. PC users aren't morons..they have Firewire too and they capture video with their computers. Where is this smarmy "PC users are dolts and have sought refuge within the Mac domain to ease their burden" coming from? If a PC user spends $1299 on a laptop it has a hell of a lot more features than a $1299 Macintosh does.


Jobs is such a liar and a charlatan. Yeah he's rich but he's the same egotistical "form over function" dictator he was before.

The alu Macbook is a closed device that offers less functionality than its predecessor. That's not progress.

[corinhorn]

Originally Posted by Zandros

We have IP over Firewire, and there's a spec for Firewire over standard ethernet cable. It's very doable to have both in one port.

/Adrian

Why didn't Apple do this for the MacBook

[TenoBell]

Originally Posted by dreyfus2

I am doing videos for a living. You cannot capture DV via USB and the FW-to-USB adapter mentioned does not even provide the full USB 2.0 bandwidth (it may be able to sustain 80-100 Mbps, assuming the CPU is not stalling, which in reality does happen).

I've captured 50Mbps DVC-Pro HD across USB. It does work.

[TenoBell]

Originally Posted by hmurchison

Apple cannot blame Intel here. They use the same chipset in the Macbook Pro and it has FW. This is a needless distinction between the two.

Its because of Intel's lack of support that the computer market so overwhelmingly favors USB over Firewire.

[dreyfus2]

Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2

Nah, you are the one that is "plain wrong."

1) Apple has pushed FireWire constantly and persistently, and I don't think they can be blamed that no one else took it up.

2) Apple still supports FireWire on every single product it makes *except* the entry-level "cheap" (for Apple) MacBook.

3) You are not differentiating between consumer level cameras and Pro gear.

Bottom line is if you have a camera that only does FireWire, it's either old or "pro enough" that you should be comfortable affording the extra $700 bucks for the MacBook Pro.

The guy above that says he's a "video producer" but can only afford a MacBook and not a Pro? Give me a break. What a bunch of whiners.

You have positively no idea whatyou are talking about. Not the faintest clue...

2) I cannot carry a Mac Pro, Mini or iMac around in my video backpack which weighs 80 lbs already. The MacBook is not cheap - it is something like 100% more expensive than competitive laptops on the market (that may be uglier and do not have a Unibody, sure, but many other features Apple users will not see in a decade). With most laptops I can add least add a FW-port using the PCMCIA or ExpressCard slot - the MacBook offers nothing at all while approaching the price of a Lenovo W500 when fully equipped.
3) I did exactly that. The mentioned HV20 as well as the current HV30 are both consumer gear and they (and a slew of others) do support capturing via FW only.

I mentioned gear that is current, consumer level and you should get your facts straight. Affording a laptop is not the question. Carrying more weight and volume than needed is the question.

People who are forced to change their entire infrastructure and maybe have to move back to Windows because of Apple's stupid decisions are whiners? Without all these creative whiners that have kept Apple alive for a decade there would be no Apple today.

[alansky]

The way I see it, removing firewire from the new MacBook was a very unfriendly move on Apple's part that makes everyone's life a little harder without any appreciable benefit to anyone but Apple. Camcorder connectivity is just one of the many thorny issues that Mac users now face. How, for example, does one transfer data from an older Mac to a new MacBook without using Migration Assistant, which requires firewire? Perhaps ethernet can be used, but ethernet's much slower transfer speed means it will take an entire afternoon just to migrate your data.

SCSII was really long in the tooth when Apple dropped it in favor of USB and firewire. This abrupt and unexpected transition, on the other hand, is like a bombshell out of the blue that scatters shrapnel everywhere, hurting a whole lotta people. Bad for you, Apple.

[ascii]

Computer peripherals are all digital these days, so there's really no need for different kinds of ports any more. Even the monitor could be USB if the standard was fast enough.

Perhaps Apple could relaunch/rebrand Firewire as a new kind of "Universal port"

[pmjoe]

One should not forget that FireWire is also still the "standard" way to do digital recordings off of cable STBs. I believe the FCC still requires cable companies to provide a box with FireWire when asked (there is no other alternative). My STB has it. I have a FireWire scanner and drives too. Plus, I've used FireWire target mode too many times to count.

Keep pressing Apple to get FireWire back into the next revision. I'd suggest everyone skip this model and either go with the lower end MacBook or the 15" Pro.

[someoneinca]

So what does Steve want people to do? Throw out their firewire cameras and buy new USB based ones? What about Time Machine. I use FW800 with Time Machine and I can't even imagine having to use USB to back up my stuff

[mpantone]

As a MacBook owner with a couple of Firewire devices (one external disk drive and a Plextor DVD burner from the days when I only had a Combo Drive), I understand Apple's decision to eighty-six Firewire from their entry-level notebook. (Well, not quite their entry-level notebook, since the "white plastic" version still has it.) Apple has a long history of discontinuing support for legacy interfaces quickly (DB-9 serial ports, floppy drives, etc.) and moving on.

Steve's right: my Canon VIXIA HF10 transfers HD video via USB 2.0.

Had the previous generation MacBook been equipped with Firewire 800, there would be more reason to gripe with this loss, but right now, it looks like Firewire is on its way out. One hope: perhaps this will encourage the adoption of a high-speed wireless peripheral transfer interface.

I'll pick up one of the new aluminum MacBooks in about six months. Before that happens, I guess I'll look for an external USB 2.0 drive enclosure to replace the Firewire one. The DVD burner I don't need to worry about since it has both interfaces (Firewire 400 and USB 2.0).

[johnqh]

Originally Posted by dreyfus2

If you remove it, at least give people an advanced warning.

Apple removed FW from iPod...iPhone connection is USB only...what kind of additional warning do you want? It looked pretty obvious to me.

OK, considering this (no FW on Macbook) as the warning then. It will next be removed from Mini, then iMac, then MBP and Mac Pro...

[OriginalMacRat]

Originally Posted by someoneinca

I use FW800 with Time Machine and I can't even imagine having to use USB to back up my stuff

Yup. FW800/400 is slow. USB is slower.

If Steve Jobs hadn't gone senile, the iPods would have Gigabit Firewire (FW3200) now with heavy marking about how fast you can load up your must compared to USB.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by Dave K.

Why not drop the Ethernet port and replace it with FireWire 400? Apple already sells a USB to Ethernet adapter for the MacBook Air's. This would have been the best solution for everyone...

You use Gigabit Ethernet, which I find to be very necessary for my home network.

Originally Posted by retroneo

All you need is a simple cable

USB to Firewire
http://www.everythingusb.com/news/index/3889.htm

Windows only and $86? Not an ideal soltuion by any means.

Originally Posted by Dave K.

$1300 for a cheap notebook. Yeah right!

The cheapest MacBook that Apple sells with FW400 costs $999, and it's a fine machine that is tried and true.

Originally Posted by corinhorn

All that I know for sure is I will not spend one bloody dime on an Apple notebook until FireWire is back on the MacBook. I'm not going to spend an extra $500 to get the MacBook Pro.

Problem solved, spend $300 less for a MacBook with FW400.

[Zandros]

Originally Posted by corinhorn

Why didn't Apple do this for the MacBook

Because market support is nonexistent, and therefore Apple will have to bear all costs.

I haven't found any Ethernet to Firewire routers, and there's no implementation of IEEE1394c.

/Adrian

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by OriginalMacRat

If Steve Jobs hadn't gone senile, the iPods would have Gigabit Firewire now with heavy marking about how fast you can load up your must compared to USB.

1) Gigabit Firewire? There is a standard in the works for FW3200 which is 3.2Gbps.

2) If Apple offered only FW there would be little to no uptake of iPods on non-Mac PCs.

[rawhead]

Real pros need to get the bestest and the fastest; i.e., MacBook Pros and FW800 so there's not a problem.

If you're not a real pro, OR, are a pro but are willing to sacrifice horse power (CPU/GPU), expandability (CardBus), faster throughput (FW800), screen size and res, etc. for the smaller footprint of a Macbook, THEN you can grab a previous gen 2.4GHz MacBook refurb for $1050 at store.apple.com. Mind you, this was the TOP OF THE LINE Macbook till 48 hours ago.

By the time that machine is obsolete--say 2-3 years from now--the aluminum Macbooks will have USB3, or maybe even FW800.


So really, I don't know what all the effing bitching is about here.


Whining because you can't have the latest and the coolest without having to sacrifice FW400? Tough luck. Call the whaaaaambulance. And here's the world's tiniest violin playing a song just for you (T_T)/\

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by someoneinca

So what does Steve want people to do? Throw out their firewire cameras and buy new USB based ones? What about Time Machine. I use FW800 with Time Machine and I can't even imagine having to use USB to back up my stuff

If you are using FW800 then you aren't using a MacBook, so your point on this is moot since MacBook has never had a FW800 port.

[eatapc]

Originally Posted by dreyfus2

I am doing videos for a living. You cannot capture DV via USB and the FW-to-USB adapter mentioned does not even provide the full USB 2.0 bandwidth (it may be able to sustain 80-100 Mbps, assuming the CPU is not stalling, which in reality does happen).

Agree. Many newer camcorders have USB2 connectors, but I wonder how many will allow device control and full bandwidth into iMovie. My Canon HV30 doesn't. Some of the new cameras provide proprietary drivers and software for Windows PCs to enable video transfer via USB, but how will they work with a MacBook? Apologies to Mr. Jobs, but video via USB is a "world of hurt."

Firewire may be going away eventually, but it's much too early to remove it from MacBooks. What about normal consumers with FW DV/HDV cameras and FW hard drives? Unfortunately, the MacBook Pro is now the minimum laptop for regular, non-professional users. MacBooks are for ... who? My mother, maybe. With the world going into a recession, Apple now is saddled with a poorly priced and limited lineup of laptops.

Jobs is really out of touch on this issue. He has always been pig headed but brilliant; now he's pig-headed but flat out wrong.

[hmurchison]

People keep thinking that Firewire is some one trick pony.


Video- Yes many of the "current" camcorders are moving to USB transfer. Who here can tell me exactly how the process of transporting clips into iMovie works? Is it even standardized? What about the thousands of DV cameras sold within the last few years? Requiring people to upgrade their equipment to support Apple's new hardware is indeed an "Apple Tax"

Audio- Here is where USB is improving but Firewire still offers decent advantage. The Apogee Duet is such a slick audio interface. It's wholly powered by the FW bus and integrates so well with Core Audio you can control it from within Logic or Garageband. It is spendy at $500 but easy to tote around.

USB 3.0 is going to be a decent upgrade and offer some of the bi-directional capability of FW today but it's still 6 months or so away. Apple should kept FW on this revision. Such a poor decision.

[Macrooster]

Well I may not be recording HD video, but I do use it with time machine and other external drives. Since it takes less time to transfer large files over firewire than USB 2. But I guess Steve knows what he is talking about and doing.

[ascii]

I don't think only professionals need fast ports. These days even consumers need to transfer large video files around.

Case in point: try syncing a movie to your iPhone and be prepared for a long wait. The first time I did this I thought something must be wrong, but no.