What good is Firewire 800?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
It seems clear that all new Macs from this point on will have at least one Firewire 800 port.



Anybody know what for?



I just read an article from <a href="http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/0000006.html"; target="_blank">MacWhispers</a> which is a site I've never heard of, but the premise does make sense.



Outside of making snide comments about USB 2.0, what are we going to use the new connect for?



Can hard drives or scanners or printers ever properly utilize such bandwidth, or are we going to rewire our houses for fast video transfers from room to room?



Anybody have any good ideas that would get mainstream buyers to feel they need this?



Firewire 800 is beginning to strike me as a solution in search of a problem.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 40
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    it's future proof for one thing



    it is also extremely useful in RAID situations.... firewire RAIDs are not uncommon.



    computer to computer connections will be significantly faster.



    im sure there are many other applications that will utilize the extra bandwidth
  • Reply 2 of 40
    kidredkidred Posts: 2,402member
    There are HDs out with FW2 already.
  • Reply 3 of 40
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    I too once thought this way but since that time people have shown me the error of my ways...



    Sure RAID systems sure would LOVE FW800/1600/3200 but the example below will show you how even 'home users' will benefit from the bigger bandwidth.



    Imagine:



    Grabbing data from a FW DVCam and Saving said data to a FW hard drive while at the same time burning a CD on a FW CDRW. This setup would pretty much kill a normal FW400 connection but with FW800/1600/3200 it would be a piece of cake...



    As HDTVs / DVDs / Set Top Boxes / AV Receivers move to FW (and they seem to be) FW800/1600/3200 will really show a clear benefit.



    Dave
  • Reply 4 of 40
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by KidRed:

    <strong>There are HDs out with FW2 already.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    but to what benefit?



    what ATA 5400 or 7200 drive exceeds 50MB/sec?
  • Reply 5 of 40
    kidredkidred Posts: 2,402member
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    <strong>



    but to what benefit?



    what ATA 5400 or 7200 drive exceeds 50MB/sec?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Don't know the specs of the drives, just that they support FW2, I think it's LaCie.
  • Reply 6 of 40
    henriokhenriok Posts: 537member
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    <strong>what ATA 5400 or 7200 drive exceeds 50MB/sec?</strong><hr></blockquote>Two surely will exceed that bandwidth.

    The LaCie Big Disk-series witch RAIDs two disks in one package can surely exceed FW400 quite easily.
  • Reply 7 of 40
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by Henriok:

    <strong>Two surely will exceed that bandwidth.

    The LaCie Big Disk-series witch RAIDs two disks in one package can surely exceed FW400 quite easily.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    any benchmarks?
  • Reply 8 of 40
    cowerdcowerd Posts: 579member
    take it with a dose of salt:

    <a href="http://www.barefeats.com/fire34.html"; target="_blank">http://www.barefeats.com/fire34.html</A>;
  • Reply 9 of 40
    [quote] take it with a dose of salt:

    <a href="http://www.barefeats.com/fire34.html"; target="_blank">http://www.barefeats.com/fire34.html</a>; <hr></blockquote>

    I think it is safe to say that once FW800 is out for a longer period of time beter FW to ATA bridges will be produced. Just like using the, correct me on the name, oxford 911 on FW400 is faster than the bridges before. Therefore I believe that FW800 will eventualy be a lot faster.



    How could you ever say that you don't need more bandwith, maybe right now it seems that FW400 is just fine but it is obvious that there will be new things that require more bandwith and FW 800, and then the faster versions, will be there while USB2, will hopefully, die.
  • Reply 10 of 40
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    faster speeds should allow firewire to replace PCI in most applications. Imagine daisy chaining 5 or six firewire devices as mentioned earlier. In this scenario, the faster the better. You may have a couple of HDD's a burner, an video camera and an outboard sound processor all sitting on the same bus. It wasn't too long ago that internal buses barely delivered 100MBps, when we get up to 400MB (3200Mbps) then Apple may finally be right about dropping internal expansion cards, except for video, CPU and RAM, which should always be upgradeable on a desktop machine of any value, and need to sit close to each other for performance reasons. FW800 is a step in that direction. 1600 and 3200 will fully realize the potential of a modular computer system. YAY.
  • Reply 11 of 40
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,129member
    [quote]Originally posted by cowerd:

    <strong>take it with a dose of salt:

    <a href="http://www.barefeats.com/fire34.html"; target="_blank">http://www.barefeats.com/fire34.html</a></strong><hr></blockquote>;



    No need. Unlike benchmarking Computers running applications there's not much fudging you can do testing a PCI FW800 card to a Drive. The results should stand just about anywhere.



    Look at Apples Firewire 800 pdf

    <a href="http://a992.g.akamai.net/7/992/51/93b28da05d3103/www.apple.com/firewire/pdf/FireWire_Tech_Brief-a.pdf"; target="_blank">here. </a>



    This clearly shows the benefits and hard work of the 1394 Group.



    1. Double the Speed.



    2. More efficient Device Arbitration. And improved Date Coding(8B10B) derived from codes used in Gigabit and Fibre channel.



    3. Expanded Cable types and length.

    a. Cat5

    b. Fiber(Glass and Plastic)



    4. Full Backwards Compatibility.



    There's a reason why it took so long to get FW800 here but it neatly paves the way for 1600 and 3200Mbps versions coming.



    This is FAR from a "Solution in search of a problem"
  • Reply 12 of 40
    cowerdcowerd Posts: 579member
    just meant that Bare Feats was testing non-shipping product. Production drives may perform better.
  • Reply 13 of 40
    It seems obvious that Apple plans to own the next networking evolution.



    In 5 years, CAT-5 and Ethernet will be groaning under the strain as EVERY company struggles to make their every product net-savvy and connect-ready. If you think bandwidth is king NOW, just wait until every appliance you own plugs into the family intranet.



    Hell, in 5 years, FW1600 will already be deployed, Ethernet will be on the way out, and all new construction is Firewired as a matter of course. The real hungry applications, like film production studios, TV networks, recording studios, phone networks and stock markets will be drumming their fingers by then, wondering if 3200 will be unleashed before their new SotA facilities go on-line.



    Have a look @ Appple's 1394 technology brief pdf:

    <a href="http://a992.g.akamai.net/7/992/51/93b28da05d3103/www.apple.com/firewire/pdf/FireWire_Tech_Brief-a.pdf"; target="_blank">http://a992.g.akamai.net/7/992/51/93b28da05d3103/www.apple.com/firewire/pdf/FireWire_Tech_Brief-a.pdf</a>;



    [ edit - murch! we tread the same waters again - and you beat me to the pdf, you dog! ]



    [ 01-23-2003: Message edited by: Capt. Obvious ]</p>
  • Reply 14 of 40
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    <strong>



    but to what benefit?



    what ATA 5400 or 7200 drive exceeds 50MB/sec?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    The bridges like the Osford 911 still have some overhead. I bet the new FireWire 800 bridges will decrease that overhead to virtually nil, and also improve CPU utilization in the process.



    I also do MiniDV to HDD video capturw, both via FireWire. That actually is not recommended by Apple. FW800 could help.
  • Reply 15 of 40
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by Eugene:

    <strong>



    The bridges like the Osford 911 still have some overhead. I bet the new FireWire 800 bridges will decrease that overhead to virtually nil, and also improve CPU utilization in the process.



    I also do MiniDV to HDD video capturw, both via FireWire. That actually is not recommended by Apple. FW800 could help.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    isnt that only 3.3 MB/sec though?
  • Reply 16 of 40
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,770member
    The Hard Drive connection struck me as far-fetched, until I read <a href="http://storage.ziffdavis.com/article2/0,3973,841928,00.asp"; target="_blank">this article.</a>



    Matsu's comment about replacing PCI makes sense.

    (Side note: Isn't Matsu a much happier guy since he bought that 12" Powerbook?)



    Replacing Ethernet with Firewire, on the other hand, is on much shakier ground. Apple's IP over Firewire moves are a nod to that direction, but every cable modem I know of has an Ethernet port and Jobs has demoed streaming video over Gigabit Ethernet at MacWorld, so I don't think it's going anywhere.



    Great replies all, but I guess I was looking more for a whiz-bang, Star Trek feature that would convince the average Joe that Firewire 800 was worth spurning a PC for.
  • Reply 17 of 40
    kidredkidred Posts: 2,402member
    [quote]Originally posted by Frank777:

    <strong>

    Matsu's comment about replacing PCI makes sense.

    (Side note: Isn't Matsu a much happier guy since he bought that 12" Powerbook?)

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    I did a double take when I saw his new sig. And I haven't seen much apple shreading going on either....that 12" must be some value
  • Reply 18 of 40
    gambitgambit Posts: 475member
    Aye. The world is a better place since Matsu bought his Powerbook.
  • Reply 19 of 40
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    [quote]Originally posted by Frank777:

    <strong>

    Great replies all, but I guess I was looking more for a whiz-bang, Star Trek feature that would convince the average Joe that Firewire 800 was worth spurning a PC for.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I don't think it will be one, frankly. At least not for a while.



    The benefits will be noticed as much or more by pros. But pros buy machines in large quantities too.
  • Reply 20 of 40
    709709 Posts: 2,016member
    [quote]Originally posted by Capt. Obvious:

    <strong>It seems obvious that Apple plans to own the next networking evolution.

    *snip*

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    I've been thinking this about FW800 as well. Maybe this (and the 1600-3200 versions) has something to Apple's upcoming 'XGrid'. An Apple-produced 8-32 port FW switch would be mighty sexy, and a lot less expensive than a similar gigabit ethernet switch I would imagine. Also, I've read that FW800 can use CAT-5 cable. If that's true, a new pair of crimpers are on my shopping list.
Sign In or Register to comment.