FW 800 on iPods

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
apple needs to incorporate FW800 on the iPods!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 13
    Just to raise prices further?



    BTW, I saw 10 gig iPods on sale at Best Buy today for US $249 dollars...that oughta confuse customers when considering the mini...\
  • Reply 2 of 13
    flounderflounder Posts: 2,674member
    The hard drives in the iPod don't spin fast enough for FW800 to even make a difference, do they?
  • Reply 3 of 13
    cosmocosmo Posts: 662member
    I agree that FW 800 on iPods would be complete overkill, but with the new dock and dock connector adding FW800 would be as easy as releaseing a new cable and a slightly updated iTunes.



    either way its a waste of money.
  • Reply 4 of 13
    the ipods dont even max out a regular fw port, so where is this "need"?
  • Reply 5 of 13
    Plus, the vast majority of macs out there only have FW400. Apple would have to provide adaptors with every iPod to convert from 800 to 400.
  • Reply 6 of 13
    well, it took me forever to copy 14 GBs of music on to my iPod, and i just wish it would be faster
  • Reply 7 of 13
    foadfoad Posts: 697member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by mattjohndrow

    well, it took me forever to copy 14 GBs of music on to my iPod, and i just wish it would be faster



    First off 14GBs of music is a serious amount and you won't be doing that often. The first time is always the slower time.



    Secondly, as a couple others mentioned, the iPod doesn't even eat up a huge amount of FW400s bandwidth. The bottleneck is the harddrives. They aren't insanely fast drives. When you copied that 14GBs worth of data, that is the fastest it would ever get with THAT drive. In awhile, when tiny drives get faster than you will see faster syncing, even with that we would still have a lot of room for growth without even going to FW800 because we haven't even fully utilized FW400.



    Just be happy you aren't doing it over USB 1.1
  • Reply 8 of 13
    foadfoad Posts: 697member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Cosmo

    I agree that FW 800 on iPods would be complete overkill, but with the new dock and dock connector adding FW800 would be as easy as releaseing a new cable and a slightly updated iTunes.



    either way its a waste of money.




    They would also have to update the FW controller in the iPod. It is a little more work than they need to be doing, considering the hard drive wouldn't even care. It wouldn't be able to handle the amount of data that FW800 would be pushing.
  • Reply 9 of 13
    Quote:

    Originally posted by foad

    Just be happy you aren't doing it over USB 1.1



  • Reply 10 of 13
    O.K. here's a question. Since the transfer speed is limited by the HD, is there much of a difference in using FW 400 compared to USB 2.0?
  • Reply 11 of 13
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by k squared

    O.K. here's a question. Since the transfer speed is limited by the HD, is there much of a difference in using FW 400 compared to USB 2.0?



    Not much, but I would say that on average FW is still faster.
  • Reply 12 of 13
    foadfoad Posts: 697member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by k squared

    O.K. here's a question. Since the transfer speed is limited by the HD, is there much of a difference in using FW 400 compared to USB 2.0?



    It's not enough that you would notice.
  • Reply 13 of 13
    Not only is FW still a bit faster, but it uses quite a bit less processor too. Every time a USB port is utilized on your computer, it takes up a percentage of your processors available speed, FW uses almost no processing power, and therefore is still, IMO, the best option.
Sign In or Register to comment.