That is hardly a reason not to include it in a MacBook. There are more than a handful of Apple users that rely on Firewire, without respect to Windoze users.
You're missing the point here. You are assuming that Apple would be doing a "one MacBook case fits all" mentality. If Apple is really going to offer a new notebook model that is several hundred dollars cheaper than the current mid-range MacBook it would have to be a new line of Mac notebooks. To do otherwise would not be good business, as far as I'm concerned.
For example, an $800 Mac notebook would be almost 30% cheaper than the most inexpensive MacBook available now at $1100; and 47% cheaper than the most expensive white or black MacBook without any additional options.
There is a reason why Apple offers both the MacBook and MacBook Pro model types, and I think they have saturated their current US market to a point that warrants a new cheaper model that still offers many of the sought after Mac HW, OS and SW aspects.
You're missing the point here. You are assuming that Apple would be doing a "one MacBook case fits all" mentality. If Apple is really going to offer a new notebook model that is several hundred dollars cheaper than the current mid-range MacBook it would have to be a new line of Mac notebooks. To do otherwise would not be good business, as far as I'm concerned.
For example, an $800 Mac notebook would be almost 30% cheaper than the most inexpensive MacBook available now at $1100; and 47% cheaper than the most expensive white or black MacBook without any additional options.
There is a reason why Apple offers both the MacBook and MacBook Pro model types, and I think they have saturated their current US market to a point that warrants a new cheaper model that still offers many of the sought after Mac HW, OS and SW aspects.
Saturated? Then tell me why Apple's laptop market is growing. i do not agree with your assessments, and I must repeat, I did not ask Apple to produce a cheaper MacBook. I never said that I thought Apple should offer a one size fits all machine. Maybe you like crippled machines, I don't, and I'll be damed if I'm going to buy a MacBook Pro just to get Firewire, when I have desktops. I flat do not need a MacBook Pro, why is that so hard to understand? Hell, I want to move forward, not backward, I want the step up in performance over my old G4 Titanium that a MacBook offers, and with Firewire.
I didn't state it this time, but I usually state "getting nearly saturated". How else do you explain a 70% market domination among consumer PCs over $1000? That is why they need to go with a cheaper machine.
Then tell me why Apple's laptop market is growing.
If you don't know why Apple's marketshare is growing then there are no facts or stats I can show you that will convince you that the market for expanding well beyond it's previous boundaries.
Quote:
I did not ask Apple to produce a cheaper MacBook.
You didn't, you assumed that if a screnshot of a rumoured pic didn't show FW then Apple must be dropping FW. I made a point that making MacBook a mid-range line and offering a cheaper line with no-FW would be the most advantageous, IMO.
Quote:
I never said that I thought Apple should offer a one size fits all machine. Maybe you like crippled machines, I don't, and I'll be damed if I'm going to buy a MacBook Pro just to get Firewire, when I have desktops.I flat do not need a MacBook Pro, why is that so hard to understand?
Your first sentence contradicts your latter sentence. Why not buy the machine that best fits your needs. Should an $800/$900 MacBook offer FW3200 and DL-DVI or someone who has no idea what it's for and will probably never use it or would Apple be better off catering its PCs to fit the needs of the majority of its customers? It sounds like you want to have the cheapest Mac possible, but also want all the HW and ports that are found on high-end Macs. That simply isn't going to happen.
Quote:
Hell, I want to move forward, not backward, I want the step up in performance over my old G4 Titanium that a MacBook offers, and with Firewire.
If you want a major step up in performance", then buy the very first MacBook from May 2006. If you want FW400, then I suspect you'll have to buy a MacBook that costs more than $1,099.
You're missing the point here. You are assuming that Apple would be doing a "one MacBook case fits all" mentality. If Apple is really going to offer a new notebook model that is several hundred dollars cheaper than the current mid-range MacBook it would have to be a new line of Mac notebooks. To do otherwise would not be good business, as far as I'm concerned.
For example, an $800 Mac notebook would be almost 30% cheaper than the most inexpensive MacBook available now at $1100; and 47% cheaper than the most expensive white or black MacBook without any additional options.
There is a reason why Apple offers both the MacBook and MacBook Pro model types, and I think they have saturated their current US market to a point that warrants a new cheaper model that still offers many of the sought after Mac HW, OS and SW aspects.
I don't think that all the firewire yeasayers here are looking for a low-entry notebook with firewire, but more for a small, portable, on-the-road laptop with firewire.
we don't ask for a cheaper laptop with more possibilities, but a laptop at the same price, in the same size, with the same functions would do fine. I just don't want to suddenly have to spend $600 more just to keep firewire.
it feels silly to have a hardware upgrade be a usability downgrade.
I don't think that all the firewire yeasayers here are looking for a low-entry notebook with firewire, but more for a small, portable, on-the-road laptop with firewire.
we don't ask for a cheaper laptop with more possibilities, but a laptop at the same price, in the same size, with the same functions would do fine. I just don't want to suddenly have to spend $600 more just to keep firewire.
it feels silly to have a hardware upgrade be a usability downgrade.
I hear what you're saying and feel for you*, but it looks like Apple's goal is to attract the majority of the non-Mac PC notebook buyers, not add a few sales from their current marketbase at a lower profit margin.
In other words, I've read that $750 to $850 is the mean average for non-Mac notebook sales. If Apple can attract even a small percent of these buyers they can add a substantial percentage to their growth. This means that even at a lower profit margin they can still make bank.
It also brings about two more changes:
? They will severely cut into the profits and sales of major PC makers like HP and Dell.
? They will be able to introduce Macs in countries where the price was considered too high for the average middle class family/student.
But, in some of Apple's key markets -- e.g., audio and video applications -- the preponderance of Firewire devices is much higher. It doesn't impact me because I use already use my Mini-DV camcorder with an iMac running Final Cut Express. But, it certainly affects my decision to purchase a Macbook to replace my aging Dell laptop. Previously, that decision would have been a no-brainer. But, without the Firewire port, that leaves me with the option of putting off the purchase until I can afford a Macbook Pro or just putting off the purchase indefinitely.
Yes that is very true. For this reason I can agree Apple should offer FireWire either on more expensive MacBooks or in some way as an option.
Yes that is very true. For this reason I can agree Apple should offer FireWire either on more expensive MacBooks or in some way as an option.
Just throwing out ideas...
That large, rectangle port on the side of the MacBook image could be a proprietary slot that could allow for an EC34 card, 3G card, dual FW400 ports, dual FW800 ports, more USB2.0 ports, etc. In other words, make a cheap notebook and then sell a propriety card to fit the individual's needs.
That large, rectangle port on the side of the MacBook image could be a proprietary slot that could allow for an EC34 card, 3G card, dual FW400 ports, dual FW800 ports, more USB2.0 ports, etc. In other words, make a cheap notebook and then sell a propriety card to fit the individual's needs.
You have that now, there are cards for the express card slot that offer various ports, BUT, that requires a Macbook Pro!
You have that now, there are cards for the express card slot that offer various ports, BUT, that requires a Macbook Pro!
Yeah, but that port doesn't look like an EC slot to me. It doesn't have the rounded port hole, which seems like a simple, cheap aesthetic addition so I can't help but conclude it's either a fake image or Apple is purposely trying to differentiate the EC port on the MBP and whatever they are using for these extra-cheap Mac notebooks.
All less than $500. The Macbook is perfect for an audio editing computer. Remove
Firewire and what today gets you in the game for $1099 now costs $1999.
The only thing audio people can hope for is a
899/1099/1299 Macbook lineup
1499/1999/2499/2799 Macbook Pro lineup with a 13" Macbook Pro.
Losing FW makes absolutely NO sense and the cynic in me thinks this is going to happen.
One step forward...two steps back is almost an Apple hallmark.
I can see the need for FW for consumer video applications diminishing at new ways to import video from HD cameras are here but the audio landscape is going to see their market hobbled severely. A Macbook Pro is simply not needed for good audio performance. Dropping FW from the Macbook means that people are going to hold on to FW enabled Macbooks and hold out as long as they can.
I can see the need for FW for consumer video applications diminishing at new ways to import video from HD cameras are here but the audio landscape is going to see their market hobbled severely. A Macbook Pro is simply not needed for good audio performance. Dropping FW from the Macbook means that people are going to hold on to FW enabled Macbooks and hold out as long as they can.
I don't disagree with your reasons for wanting FW, but I have to ask why the products you linked to above can't be used via USB2.0. Does it need the extra power of FW400? Does the slightly higher sustained data rate make a big enough difference for these devices?
PS: With the MacBook having two USB2.0, one FW400, and zero FW800 ports it does seem like this is an inevitable move. What I hope happens is that: 1) The images are false; 2) Apple makes a sub-MacBook category without FW; 3) Apple keeps FW400 as is; or 4) Apple adds FW800/3200 to MacBooks while including a simple FW800/3200-to-FW400 port adaptor.
I don't disagree with your reasons for wanting FW, but I have to ask why the products you linked to above can't be used via USB2.0. Does it need the extra power of FW400? Does the slightly higher sustained data rate make a big enough difference for these devices?
PS: With the MacBook having two USB2.0, one FW400, and zero FW800 ports it does seem like this is an inevitable move. What I hope happens is that: 1) The images are false; 2) Apple makes a sub-MacBook category without FW; 3) Apple keeps FW400 as is; or 4) Apple adds FW800/3200 to MacBooks while including a simple FW800/3200-to-FW400 port adaptor.
There are plenty of USB Audio Interfaces but they generally skew towards the low end. Once you get to a few hundred bucks the hardware vendors seem to prefer FW.
Apple's gotta have a FW enabled notebook for < $1500. I think a lot of complaints will be generated by the need to spend more for FW but spending $2k to get FW is outlandish. The funny thing is both USB and FW were supposed to reduce needed ports. USB via hubs and FW via daisychaining yet that's not quiet how reality has worked out. What a paradox.
All less than $500. The Macbook is perfect for an audio editing computer. Remove
Firewire and what today gets you in the game for $1099 now costs $1999.
The only thing audio people can hope for is a
899/1099/1299 Macbook lineup
1499/1999/2499/2799 Macbook Pro lineup with a 13" Macbook Pro.
Losing FW makes absolutely NO sense and the cynic in me thinks this is going to happen.
One step forward...two steps back is almost an Apple hallmark.
I can see the need for FW for consumer video applications diminishing at new ways to import video from HD cameras are here but the audio landscape is going to see their market hobbled severely. A Macbook Pro is simply not needed for good audio performance. Dropping FW from the Macbook means that people are going to hold on to FW enabled Macbooks and hold out as long as they can.
This all depends on if there are actually a large number of people who are using the FireWire devices specifically with the MB. I imagine Apple will have done some research to find out.
Loosing FireWire does make sense if few people are actually using it. And if going without it helps Apple lower the price of the lowest price MB.
I don't understand why an audio device needs Firewire. Consumer video cameras are beginning to include USB. Even though I agree it does not work as well as FireWire.
I don't disagree with your reasons for wanting FW, but I have to ask why the products you linked to above can't be used via USB2.0.
I can answer that. The devices are simply not designed for USB 2.0. All MiniDV cameras transfer video with FireWire. They cannot transfer video over USB, they are not designed that way.
If Apple drops FireWire from a MacBook, that will discourage users. Anyone that claims it won't be missed, doesn't use a MiniDV camera or enjoy the speed benefits of FireWire. Apple always advertised iMovie and video editing for the consumer, and now they may be cutting that feature from a consumer laptop? The claims that the MacBook is a consumer notebook and should not have FireWire are claims from complete retards. FireWire has always been on the iMac, iBook, and MacBooks. It is not a "Pro" feature.
My iPod Classic and iPhone transfer data much slower over USB2 than my prior iPod with FireWire.
There are plenty of USB Audio Interfaces but they generally skew towards the low end. Once you get to a few hundred bucks the hardware vendors seem to prefer FW.
I can't help but wonder if this is an artificial choice to make the device look appealing (read: high-end) to potential customers. When FW400 was up against the non-powered 12Mbps USB1.0, I fully understood the reasoning for using FW400; but not anymore. Unless it's FW800, I see no real benefit to using FW400 over USB2.0, except in some very rare cases.
I've even moved a couple external HDDs on two computers to USB2.0 because FW400 on OS X 10.5.x was causing too many wonky issues with Time Machine on one machine and personal file storage on the other.
Quote:
The funny thing is both USB and FW were supposed to reduce needed ports. USB via hubs and FW via daisychaining yet that's not quiet how reality has worked out. What a paradox.
At least we no longer have RJ-11, Serial, Parallel, or PCMCIA ports clogging up our machines and Apple does tend to be futureforward when it comes to ports so I wouldn't rule out FW as an option on MBs just yet.
Having ExpressCard—which I recall people hating because no one had made cards for it—, FW400, FW800 and USB is a pretty good mix right now. Hopefully the next standard will use the host interface like FW, instead of the host processor. Is FW3200 ready for prime time yet? Will Apple introduce eSATA?
I can answer that. The devices are simply not designed for USB 2.0. All MiniDV cameras transfer video with FireWire. They cannot transfer video over USB, they are not designed that way.
Thanks.
Quote:
The claims that the MacBook is a consumer notebook and should not have FireWire are claims from complete retards.
Just to be clear, my argument that a sub-$1000 Mac would be targeting typical non-Mac users who don't use FW and that the current MacBook models would still have FW included.
Quote:
My iPod Classic and iPhone transfer data much slower over USB2 than my prior iPod with FireWire.
And it charged a lot faster using FW, too. The new iPhone not allowing for FW charging sure was an annoyance.
I don't disagree with your reasons for wanting FW, but I have to ask why the products you linked to above can't be used via USB2.0. Does it need the extra power of FW400? Does the slightly higher sustained data rate make a big enough difference for these devices?
Some FW audio peripherals simply doesn't exist in USB format (Apogee Duet, TC Electronics, Focusrite,...).
With good drivers, it's not just "slightly higher sustained data rate", it's day and night, it's stability instead of clicks and pops, and with firewire drives it's the possibility of running easily 32 recorded tracks simulteanously per drive, while USB is not even recommanded for audio playback (multitrack). This is for home-recording, we are not talking about recording studio hardware.
In the audio domain, FW = reliability, stability, power and expandability. USB = playing, personal use, not serious work (without being Pro work).
It would be sad if the 13" MB is loosing its FW port (still there's the possibility of a FW/Ethernet combo port). With 802.11n Wi-Fi, do most people really need Ethernet? You can still add a USB/Ethernet adaptor (from the MBA) if you really need both.
I can answer that. The devices are simply not designed for USB 2.0. All MiniDV cameras transfer video with FireWire. They cannot transfer video over USB, they are not designed that way.
While this has been true in years past, its not so true anymore. DV cameras have begun to use USB ports. Specifically Panasonic and JVC are using USB.
I agree FireWire is better, USB can be used for video.
Just to be clear, my argument that a sub-$1000 Mac would be targeting typical non-Mac users who don't use FW and that the current MacBook models would still have FW included.
I kinda agree with that, while I believe MOST Macs should have FW400/800/3200, I wouldn't mind if some models (like the current MBA) don't have FW, especially at a price point that isn't currently used.
Only what seems to be a 13" MacBook and a 15" MacBook (Pro) case have been leaked, maybe there will be more models unveiled tomorrow.
Comments
That is hardly a reason not to include it in a MacBook. There are more than a handful of Apple users that rely on Firewire, without respect to Windoze users.
You're missing the point here. You are assuming that Apple would be doing a "one MacBook case fits all" mentality. If Apple is really going to offer a new notebook model that is several hundred dollars cheaper than the current mid-range MacBook it would have to be a new line of Mac notebooks. To do otherwise would not be good business, as far as I'm concerned.
For example, an $800 Mac notebook would be almost 30% cheaper than the most inexpensive MacBook available now at $1100; and 47% cheaper than the most expensive white or black MacBook without any additional options.
There is a reason why Apple offers both the MacBook and MacBook Pro model types, and I think they have saturated their current US market to a point that warrants a new cheaper model that still offers many of the sought after Mac HW, OS and SW aspects.
You're missing the point here. You are assuming that Apple would be doing a "one MacBook case fits all" mentality. If Apple is really going to offer a new notebook model that is several hundred dollars cheaper than the current mid-range MacBook it would have to be a new line of Mac notebooks. To do otherwise would not be good business, as far as I'm concerned.
For example, an $800 Mac notebook would be almost 30% cheaper than the most inexpensive MacBook available now at $1100; and 47% cheaper than the most expensive white or black MacBook without any additional options.
There is a reason why Apple offers both the MacBook and MacBook Pro model types, and I think they have saturated their current US market to a point that warrants a new cheaper model that still offers many of the sought after Mac HW, OS and SW aspects.
Saturated? Then tell me why Apple's laptop market is growing. i do not agree with your assessments, and I must repeat, I did not ask Apple to produce a cheaper MacBook. I never said that I thought Apple should offer a one size fits all machine. Maybe you like crippled machines, I don't, and I'll be damed if I'm going to buy a MacBook Pro just to get Firewire, when I have desktops. I flat do not need a MacBook Pro, why is that so hard to understand? Hell, I want to move forward, not backward, I want the step up in performance over my old G4 Titanium that a MacBook offers, and with Firewire.
Saturated?
I didn't state it this time, but I usually state "getting nearly saturated". How else do you explain a 70% market domination among consumer PCs over $1000? That is why they need to go with a cheaper machine.
A more thorough posting of Apple's possibilities:
Then tell me why Apple's laptop market is growing.
If you don't know why Apple's marketshare is growing then there are no facts or stats I can show you that will convince you that the market for expanding well beyond it's previous boundaries.
I did not ask Apple to produce a cheaper MacBook.
You didn't, you assumed that if a screnshot of a rumoured pic didn't show FW then Apple must be dropping FW. I made a point that making MacBook a mid-range line and offering a cheaper line with no-FW would be the most advantageous, IMO.
I never said that I thought Apple should offer a one size fits all machine. Maybe you like crippled machines, I don't, and I'll be damed if I'm going to buy a MacBook Pro just to get Firewire, when I have desktops.I flat do not need a MacBook Pro, why is that so hard to understand?
Your first sentence contradicts your latter sentence. Why not buy the machine that best fits your needs. Should an $800/$900 MacBook offer FW3200 and DL-DVI or someone who has no idea what it's for and will probably never use it or would Apple be better off catering its PCs to fit the needs of the majority of its customers? It sounds like you want to have the cheapest Mac possible, but also want all the HW and ports that are found on high-end Macs. That simply isn't going to happen.
Hell, I want to move forward, not backward, I want the step up in performance over my old G4 Titanium that a MacBook offers, and with Firewire.
If you want a major step up in performance", then buy the very first MacBook from May 2006. If you want FW400, then I suspect you'll have to buy a MacBook that costs more than $1,099.
You're missing the point here. You are assuming that Apple would be doing a "one MacBook case fits all" mentality. If Apple is really going to offer a new notebook model that is several hundred dollars cheaper than the current mid-range MacBook it would have to be a new line of Mac notebooks. To do otherwise would not be good business, as far as I'm concerned.
For example, an $800 Mac notebook would be almost 30% cheaper than the most inexpensive MacBook available now at $1100; and 47% cheaper than the most expensive white or black MacBook without any additional options.
There is a reason why Apple offers both the MacBook and MacBook Pro model types, and I think they have saturated their current US market to a point that warrants a new cheaper model that still offers many of the sought after Mac HW, OS and SW aspects.
I don't think that all the firewire yeasayers here are looking for a low-entry notebook with firewire, but more for a small, portable, on-the-road laptop with firewire.
we don't ask for a cheaper laptop with more possibilities, but a laptop at the same price, in the same size, with the same functions would do fine. I just don't want to suddenly have to spend $600 more just to keep firewire.
it feels silly to have a hardware upgrade be a usability downgrade.
I don't think that all the firewire yeasayers here are looking for a low-entry notebook with firewire, but more for a small, portable, on-the-road laptop with firewire.
we don't ask for a cheaper laptop with more possibilities, but a laptop at the same price, in the same size, with the same functions would do fine. I just don't want to suddenly have to spend $600 more just to keep firewire.
it feels silly to have a hardware upgrade be a usability downgrade.
I hear what you're saying and feel for you*, but it looks like Apple's goal is to attract the majority of the non-Mac PC notebook buyers, not add a few sales from their current marketbase at a lower profit margin.
In other words, I've read that $750 to $850 is the mean average for non-Mac notebook sales. If Apple can attract even a small percent of these buyers they can add a substantial percentage to their growth. This means that even at a lower profit margin they can still make bank.
It also brings about two more changes:
? They will severely cut into the profits and sales of major PC makers like HP and Dell.
? They will be able to introduce Macs in countries where the price was considered too high for the average middle class family/student.
But, in some of Apple's key markets -- e.g., audio and video applications -- the preponderance of Firewire devices is much higher. It doesn't impact me because I use already use my Mini-DV camcorder with an iMac running Final Cut Express. But, it certainly affects my decision to purchase a Macbook to replace my aging Dell laptop. Previously, that decision would have been a no-brainer. But, without the Firewire port, that leaves me with the option of putting off the purchase until I can afford a Macbook Pro or just putting off the purchase indefinitely.
Yes that is very true. For this reason I can agree Apple should offer FireWire either on more expensive MacBooks or in some way as an option.
Yes that is very true. For this reason I can agree Apple should offer FireWire either on more expensive MacBooks or in some way as an option.
Just throwing out ideas...
That large, rectangle port on the side of the MacBook image could be a proprietary slot that could allow for an EC34 card, 3G card, dual FW400 ports, dual FW800 ports, more USB2.0 ports, etc. In other words, make a cheap notebook and then sell a propriety card to fit the individual's needs.
Just throwing out ideas...
That large, rectangle port on the side of the MacBook image could be a proprietary slot that could allow for an EC34 card, 3G card, dual FW400 ports, dual FW800 ports, more USB2.0 ports, etc. In other words, make a cheap notebook and then sell a propriety card to fit the individual's needs.
You have that now, there are cards for the express card slot that offer various ports, BUT, that requires a Macbook Pro!
You have that now, there are cards for the express card slot that offer various ports, BUT, that requires a Macbook Pro!
Yeah, but that port doesn't look like an EC slot to me. It doesn't have the rounded port hole, which seems like a simple, cheap aesthetic addition so I can't help but conclude it's either a fake image or Apple is purposely trying to differentiate the EC port on the MBP and whatever they are using for these extra-cheap Mac notebooks.
Only 17 hours to go.
http://www.apogeedigital.com/products/duet.php
http://www.presonus.com/products/Det...px?ProductId=4
http://www.roland.com/products/en/FA-66/index.html
http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/ProFire610.html
All less than $500. The Macbook is perfect for an audio editing computer. Remove
Firewire and what today gets you in the game for $1099 now costs $1999.
The only thing audio people can hope for is a
899/1099/1299 Macbook lineup
1499/1999/2499/2799 Macbook Pro lineup with a 13" Macbook Pro.
Losing FW makes absolutely NO sense and the cynic in me thinks this is going to happen.
One step forward...two steps back is almost an Apple hallmark.
I can see the need for FW for consumer video applications diminishing at new ways to import video from HD cameras are here but the audio landscape is going to see their market hobbled severely. A Macbook Pro is simply not needed for good audio performance. Dropping FW from the Macbook means that people are going to hold on to FW enabled Macbooks and hold out as long as they can.
I can see the need for FW for consumer video applications diminishing at new ways to import video from HD cameras are here but the audio landscape is going to see their market hobbled severely. A Macbook Pro is simply not needed for good audio performance. Dropping FW from the Macbook means that people are going to hold on to FW enabled Macbooks and hold out as long as they can.
I don't disagree with your reasons for wanting FW, but I have to ask why the products you linked to above can't be used via USB2.0. Does it need the extra power of FW400? Does the slightly higher sustained data rate make a big enough difference for these devices?
PS: With the MacBook having two USB2.0, one FW400, and zero FW800 ports it does seem like this is an inevitable move. What I hope happens is that: 1) The images are false; 2) Apple makes a sub-MacBook category without FW; 3) Apple keeps FW400 as is; or 4) Apple adds FW800/3200 to MacBooks while including a simple FW800/3200-to-FW400 port adaptor.
I don't disagree with your reasons for wanting FW, but I have to ask why the products you linked to above can't be used via USB2.0. Does it need the extra power of FW400? Does the slightly higher sustained data rate make a big enough difference for these devices?
PS: With the MacBook having two USB2.0, one FW400, and zero FW800 ports it does seem like this is an inevitable move. What I hope happens is that: 1) The images are false; 2) Apple makes a sub-MacBook category without FW; 3) Apple keeps FW400 as is; or 4) Apple adds FW800/3200 to MacBooks while including a simple FW800/3200-to-FW400 port adaptor.
There are plenty of USB Audio Interfaces but they generally skew towards the low end. Once you get to a few hundred bucks the hardware vendors seem to prefer FW.
Apple's gotta have a FW enabled notebook for < $1500. I think a lot of complaints will be generated by the need to spend more for FW but spending $2k to get FW is outlandish. The funny thing is both USB and FW were supposed to reduce needed ports. USB via hubs and FW via daisychaining yet that's not quiet how reality has worked out. What a paradox.
All less than $500. The Macbook is perfect for an audio editing computer. Remove
Firewire and what today gets you in the game for $1099 now costs $1999.
The only thing audio people can hope for is a
899/1099/1299 Macbook lineup
1499/1999/2499/2799 Macbook Pro lineup with a 13" Macbook Pro.
Losing FW makes absolutely NO sense and the cynic in me thinks this is going to happen.
One step forward...two steps back is almost an Apple hallmark.
I can see the need for FW for consumer video applications diminishing at new ways to import video from HD cameras are here but the audio landscape is going to see their market hobbled severely. A Macbook Pro is simply not needed for good audio performance. Dropping FW from the Macbook means that people are going to hold on to FW enabled Macbooks and hold out as long as they can.
This all depends on if there are actually a large number of people who are using the FireWire devices specifically with the MB. I imagine Apple will have done some research to find out.
Loosing FireWire does make sense if few people are actually using it. And if going without it helps Apple lower the price of the lowest price MB.
I don't understand why an audio device needs Firewire. Consumer video cameras are beginning to include USB. Even though I agree it does not work as well as FireWire.
I don't disagree with your reasons for wanting FW, but I have to ask why the products you linked to above can't be used via USB2.0.
I can answer that. The devices are simply not designed for USB 2.0. All MiniDV cameras transfer video with FireWire. They cannot transfer video over USB, they are not designed that way.
If Apple drops FireWire from a MacBook, that will discourage users. Anyone that claims it won't be missed, doesn't use a MiniDV camera or enjoy the speed benefits of FireWire. Apple always advertised iMovie and video editing for the consumer, and now they may be cutting that feature from a consumer laptop? The claims that the MacBook is a consumer notebook and should not have FireWire are claims from complete retards. FireWire has always been on the iMac, iBook, and MacBooks. It is not a "Pro" feature.
My iPod Classic and iPhone transfer data much slower over USB2 than my prior iPod with FireWire.
There are plenty of USB Audio Interfaces but they generally skew towards the low end. Once you get to a few hundred bucks the hardware vendors seem to prefer FW.
I can't help but wonder if this is an artificial choice to make the device look appealing (read: high-end) to potential customers. When FW400 was up against the non-powered 12Mbps USB1.0, I fully understood the reasoning for using FW400; but not anymore. Unless it's FW800, I see no real benefit to using FW400 over USB2.0, except in some very rare cases.
I've even moved a couple external HDDs on two computers to USB2.0 because FW400 on OS X 10.5.x was causing too many wonky issues with Time Machine on one machine and personal file storage on the other.
The funny thing is both USB and FW were supposed to reduce needed ports. USB via hubs and FW via daisychaining yet that's not quiet how reality has worked out. What a paradox.
At least we no longer have RJ-11, Serial, Parallel, or PCMCIA ports clogging up our machines and Apple does tend to be futureforward when it comes to ports so I wouldn't rule out FW as an option on MBs just yet.
Having ExpressCard—which I recall people hating because no one had made cards for it—, FW400, FW800 and USB is a pretty good mix right now. Hopefully the next standard will use the host interface like FW, instead of the host processor. Is FW3200 ready for prime time yet? Will Apple introduce eSATA?
I can answer that. The devices are simply not designed for USB 2.0. All MiniDV cameras transfer video with FireWire. They cannot transfer video over USB, they are not designed that way.
Thanks.
The claims that the MacBook is a consumer notebook and should not have FireWire are claims from complete retards.
Just to be clear, my argument that a sub-$1000 Mac would be targeting typical non-Mac users who don't use FW and that the current MacBook models would still have FW included.
My iPod Classic and iPhone transfer data much slower over USB2 than my prior iPod with FireWire.
And it charged a lot faster using FW, too. The new iPhone not allowing for FW charging sure was an annoyance.
I don't disagree with your reasons for wanting FW, but I have to ask why the products you linked to above can't be used via USB2.0. Does it need the extra power of FW400? Does the slightly higher sustained data rate make a big enough difference for these devices?
Some FW audio peripherals simply doesn't exist in USB format (Apogee Duet, TC Electronics, Focusrite,...).
With good drivers, it's not just "slightly higher sustained data rate", it's day and night, it's stability instead of clicks and pops, and with firewire drives it's the possibility of running easily 32 recorded tracks simulteanously per drive, while USB is not even recommanded for audio playback (multitrack). This is for home-recording, we are not talking about recording studio hardware.
In the audio domain, FW = reliability, stability, power and expandability. USB = playing, personal use, not serious work (without being Pro work).
It would be sad if the 13" MB is loosing its FW port (still there's the possibility of a FW/Ethernet combo port). With 802.11n Wi-Fi, do most people really need Ethernet? You can still add a USB/Ethernet adaptor (from the MBA) if you really need both.
I can answer that. The devices are simply not designed for USB 2.0. All MiniDV cameras transfer video with FireWire. They cannot transfer video over USB, they are not designed that way.
While this has been true in years past, its not so true anymore. DV cameras have begun to use USB ports. Specifically Panasonic and JVC are using USB.
I agree FireWire is better, USB can be used for video.
Just to be clear, my argument that a sub-$1000 Mac would be targeting typical non-Mac users who don't use FW and that the current MacBook models would still have FW included.
I kinda agree with that, while I believe MOST Macs should have FW400/800/3200, I wouldn't mind if some models (like the current MBA) don't have FW, especially at a price point that isn't currently used.
Only what seems to be a 13" MacBook and a 15" MacBook (Pro) case have been leaked, maybe there will be more models unveiled tomorrow.
Frankly FW isn't that expensive of a technology to implement which makes the decision to drop it fairly inscrutable of Apple IMO.
We'll see tomorrow.