Forget 3200. It's not likely that Apple will support it, and I can't think of a singlereason they should.
FW is now on the dying edge, before, it was on the bleeding edge.
In a year, there will no longer be a need for it.
Look, Apple never properly supported it. Once they saw they wouldn't be able to get the 25¢ per port licensing fees they were counting on, they lost interest. And that was many years ago. Since then they've supported it reluctantly.
800 was 18 months late. 1600 should have been here almost 18 months ago, and 3200 should have been here already.
These delays have cost it leadership.
Now, USB 3 and Power Over SATA will take over in 2009.
It will take a bit of time to completely fade away, but it's already started.
there are many reason why firewire should be (and hopefully will be) supported by everyone !
I'm not convinced that USB3 or ESata can take over...
while I don't know too much about USB 3 architecture there is a massive difference between all current wired 'mobile' connections
GigE - peer-to-peer architecture but no power
Firewire - peer-to-peer with power up to 45 W
USB2 - host controlled and power limited (5V at 500 mA = 2.5W = two plugs often needed)
ESata - host controlled only no power available (some take power from USB but most need much more than that to even work = you have to plug your HDD in to the wall at starbucks !!?)
everyone spouting about how good ESata is should realise that this was only ever designed to connect to mass storage
so it's no replacement for the peer-to-peer functionality of Firewire or GigE
...but yes it is very fast if you're just transferring files - and if you can plug in to a power socket.
so Firewire is currently the only peer-to-peer type network connection that can power devices...
also, remember that to get the blazing speeds that USB 3 is promising they have to integrate an optical connection - which will be expensive and potentially fragile (for cables at least)
while I don't know too much about USB 3 architecture there is a massive difference between all current wired 'mobile' connections
GigE - peer-to-peer architecture but no power
Firewire - peer-to-peer with power up to 45 W
USB2 - host controlled and power limited (5V at 500 mA = 2.5W = two plugs often needed)
ESata - host controlled only no power available (some take power from USB but most need much more than that to even work = you have to plug your HDD in to the wall at starbucks !!?)
everyone spouting about how good ESata is should realise that this was only ever designed to connect to mass storage - so it's no replacement for the peer-to-peer functionality of Firewire or GigE - but yes it is very fast if you're just transferring files.
so Firewire is currently the only peer-to-peer network that can power devices...
also, remember that to get the blazing speeds that USB 3 is promising they're going to integrate an optical connection - which will be expensive and potentially fragile (for cables at least)
Then you should go back and read some more posts where it's explained.
Nah, I'll explain it for the fifth time.
USB 3 isn't really USB as we know it. It's much more like FW. It's called USB because it supports legacy products. It's plenty fast, faster than FW 3200 will be. It's 4,800. It uses optical and copper. Making adapters for Fw 400 and 800 will be fairly easy.
The cables won't be fragile. It won't cost that much either.
Do you remember SCSI? The best cables for the faster standards cost about $150. Stop complaining!
Power Over SATA is exactly what it looks like, E-SATA with power.
Now, you need to hook it to either FW or USB to get power, fine for small and medium drives. This will allow more.
Power Over SATA - to my knowledge - doesn't have a firm release date yet.
(And you really have to wonder what they're going to do about that acronym.)
FW800 remains the best choice TODAY for hard drive expansion, supplied power over bus, audio & video bandwidth and more. Leaving it out was an extremely boneheaded move.
Then you should go back and read some more posts where it's explained.
Nah, I'll explain it for the fifth time.
USB 3 isn't really USB as we know it. It's much more like FW. It's called USB because it supports legacy products. It's plenty fast, faster than FW 3200 will be. It's 4,800. It uses optical and copper. Making adapters for Fw 400 and 800 will be fairly easy.
The cables won't be fragile. It won't cost that much either.
Do you remember SCSI? The best cables for the faster standards cost about $150. Stop complaining!
Power Over SATA is exactly what it looks like, E-SATA with power.
Now, you need to hook it to either FW or USB to get power, fine for small and medium drives. This will allow more.
you haven't explained anything
"it's much more like firewire" ???
USB3 is still host controlled - it's not all about speed.
check this if you need help understanding that there will still be a difference and we won't just be able to plug in an adapter and get all our firewire devices to work...
again Esata with power (even if they figure that out to work on a single port) is not peer to peer.... it's host controlled and is only good for storage devices...
Power Over SATA - to my knowledge - doesn't have a firm release date yet.
(And you really have to wonder what they're going to do about that acronym.)
FW800 remains the best choice TODAY for hard drive expansion, supplied power over bus, audio & video bandwidth and more. Leaving it out was an extremely boneheaded move.
Both are expected in 2009 from what I've been hearing. First silicon for POSATA (I guess that's it) has come out, and is in the testing stage. Supposedly USB 3 is coming close to that stage. They had a prototype running in September 2007.
Forget 3200. It's not likely that Apple will support it, and I can't think of a singlereason they should.
FW is now on the dying edge, before, it was on the bleeding edge.
In a year, there will no longer be a need for it.
Look, Apple never properly supported it. Once they saw they wouldn't be able to get the 25¢ per port licensing fees they were counting on, they lost interest. And that was many years ago. Since then they've supported it reluctantly.
800 was 18 months late. 1600 should have been here almost 18 months ago, and 3200 should have been here already.
These delays have cost it leadership.
Now, USB 3 and Power Over SATA will take over in 2009.
It will take a bit of time to completely fade away, but it's already started.
I can think of one reason. Device to Device communication. There won't be a need for FW3.2Gpbs if computer users continue to
settle for lowest common denominator tech.
Apple, like most corporations, seek profits and will only entertain the idea of developing new technology if significant profits are attainable. It is here where I am at odds with Capitalism. Once companies become slaves to shareholders/Wall Street innovation and progressive movement forward is only ventured with profit potential in tow. Apple did not want to invest in the Firewire as you said ..not because it wasn't not worthy but because they could not see the profit potential.
All use Firewire at some level...all could have been supported via Apple as a testament to the instrinsic benefits of a peer to peer, realtime smart connection.
Though remember...the Apple "dream" was that they would change the world. Steve Jobs recruited John Sculley from Pepsi by asking him "do you want to sell sugar water your whole life or change the world?"
USB3 is still host controlled - it's not all about speed.
check this if you need help understanding that there will still be a difference and we won't just be able to plug in an adapter and get all our firewire devices to work...
again Esata with power (even if they figure that out to work on a single port) is not peer to peer.... it's host controlled and is only good for storage devices...
Well, cripes!!! Look it up if that's not enough to give you an idea, which is all I was doing.
We know what E-SATA does. It's far better for drives than FW ever was, or could be.
I read that article ages ago, and it says nothing except that it's wrong about cable lengths. FW cables can be 15 feet long, about the same as USB 2. For both, you need repeaters. USB 3 isn't as bus intensive as USB 2, and it doesn't matter anyway. That mattered years ago with single cpu's that were, slow, along with a slow bus. It's trivial today.
USB3 is still host controlled - it's not all about speed.
check this if you need help understanding that there will still be a difference and we won't just be able to plug in an adapter and get all our firewire devices to work...
again Esata with power (even if they figure that out to work on a single port) is not peer to peer.... it's host controlled and is only good for storage devices...
The only way USB 3 is like FireWire is that it is Bi-Directional, (that is where they are getting a big speed increase) but because it is host controled, it still relies on the processor to direct the traffic, also means it is all controlled through the drivers rather than through the peer itself. Just leave me my FireWire, (also cooler marketing name). I think I'm going to have to make "Save FireWire" T-Shirts.
The only way USB 3 is like FireWire is that it is Bi-Directional, (that is where they are getting a big speed increase) but because it is host controled, it still relies on the processor to direct the traffic, also means it is all controlled through the drivers rather than through the peer itself. Just leave me my FireWire, (also cooler marketing name). I think I'm going to have to make "Save FireWire" T-Shirts.
It makes no difference whatsoever. The only time that matters is if you connect two FW devices together without a host computer.
does that matter when you are using your Mac? No. Besides, USB 3 offloads more from the host. It also uses a newer controller.
True, but it also means having a port on the computer just for hard drive expansion.
FW is far more flexible, while being almost as fast.
As we never had one before?
FW 800 is slow baby!
The best it can do is 80MB/s, and it never gets to that, maybe 70-72. But, SATA 3.0 can get a new drive all the way to its 165MB/s maximum, and has room for several more. With port sharing you can get to 750MB/s on a RAID. Try that with FW.
Guys, how many of you were around in 1990? do you remember reading about USB? The standard was published in 1989.
1989!
That was before Windows 3.1. Hell, it was before Windows 3.0.
Remember where the Mac was then?
At the time, the Mac had a 20 MHz bus, and the PC had an 8 MHz bus.
It was long before both the Pentium and the PPC.
Having audio and video wasn't on the minds of the designers. Just getting mice to work was.
In fact, until Apple got it working in the first iMacs, it didn't really work at all. MS and Intel finally got it to work in Windows 98 Service Pack II.
That was about the time FW was announced.
FW got around the need for a computer host because computers were still too slow to work reliably, and they had bigger plans for it.
Computers are just a bit faster today. It no longer matters.
I remember when FW was announced as part of the HDTV specification. a lot of jumping around, hands clapping, faces getting red kind of thing in the Mac community. Ow wow! So cool, Apple is just going to CONTROL HDTV. Dreams, dreams, dreams.
Well, today, where's that FW on HDTV? I'll tell you, it's not. Very few HDTV's ever did have it, and pretty much none today.
Cable boxes had it, but today, what do most have? USB 2 and E-SATA. unless you still have an old one (about two years).
Soon, all anyone will be able to connect their camcorders up to will be another camcorder. And, hey, that's just what was intended. Camcorder to camcorder FW editing. Sheesh! I tried that once. Once! Never again. What a DUMB idea!
So yeah. I do think Apple moved too fast on this one, but they have the right idea. Before you know it, it will be gone.
Most of Sony's new cameras have USB 2. Once their older ones are discontinued next year, they too will start dropping iLink from their computers. They and Apple are by far, the biggest supporters of this. And Apple is already moving on. Sony won't be far behind.
If Apple decides that USB3 is superior tech to whatever Firewire can implement in the same timeframe, I'm happy to jump onboard.
I have multiple FW hard drives that need to be converted and other peripherals that will need upgrading. And I'm happy to do it.
But don't tell me to jump sideways. USB 2.0 is a downgrade in performance, and we all know that.
USB 3.0 isn't slated to debut until 'late-2009', at the earliest. Which means 2010 until all the bugs are worked out.
Similarly, eSATA might be an excellent choice for Time Machine hookups, but Apple hasn't adopted that either.
Leaving FW800 on the MacBook for one more year would not have hurt anyone. Removing it has damaged Apple's reputation for higher-end tech, and angered users for no good reason.
If Apple decides that USB3 is superior tech to whatever Firewire can implement in the same timeframe, I'm happy to jump onboard.
I have multiple FW hard drives that need to be converted and other peripherals that will need upgrading. And I'm happy to do it.
But don't tell me to jump sideways. USB 2.0 is a downgrade in performance, and we all know that.
USB 3.0 isn't slated to debut until 'late-2009', at the earliest. Which means 2010 until all the bugs are worked out.
Similarly, eSATA might be an excellent choice for Time Machine hookups, but Apple hasn't adopted that either.
Leaving FW800 on the MacBook for one more year would not have hurt anyone. Removing it has damaged Apple's reputation for higher-end tech, and angered users for no good reason.
Frank, I'm not telling you that, am I?
This will be the, what 6th or 10th time I'm saying that I think Apple jumped the gun on this?
I agree!!
I'm just saying that I understand, from their point of view, why they did it. Which is different.
Guys, how many of you were around in 1990? do you remember reading about USB? The standard was published in 1989.
1989!
That was before Windows 3.1. Hell, it was before Windows 3.0.
Remember where the Mac was then?
At the time, the Mac had a 20 MHz bus, and the PC had an 8 MHz bus.
It was long before both the Pentium and the PPC.
Having audio and video wasn't on the minds of the designers. Just getting mice to work was.
In fact, until Apple got it working in the first iMacs, it didn't really work at all. MS and Intel finally got it to work in Windows 98 Service Pack II.
That was about the time FW was announced.
FW got around the need for a computer host because computers were still too slow to work reliably, and they had bigger plans for it.
Computers are just a bit faster today. It no longer matters.
I remember when FW was announced as part of the HDTV specification. a lot of jumping around, hands clapping, faces getting red kind of thing in the Mac community. Ow wow! So cool, Apple is just going to CONTROL HDTV. Dreams, dreams, dreams.
Well, today, where's that FW on HDTV? I'll tell you, it's not. Very few HDTV's ever did have it, and pretty much none today.
Cable boxes had it, but today, what do most have? USB 2 and E-SATA. unless you still have an old one (about two years).
Soon, all anyone will be able to connect their camcorders up to will be another camcorder. And, hey, that's just what was intended. Camcorder to camcorder FW editing. Sheesh! I tried that once. Once! Never again. What a DUMB idea!
So yeah. I do think Apple moved too fast on this one, but they have the right idea. Before you know it, it will be gone.
Most of Sony's new cameras have USB 2. Once their older ones are discontinued next year, they too will start dropping iLink from their computers. They and Apple are by far, the biggest supporters of this. And Apple is already moving on. Sony won't be far behind.
some good points here and yes the CPU speeds have increased
but it's not only about speed
it's about devices being allowed to both control themselves and be controlled
when on the same network
i'm using one right now (Focusrite Liquid Mix) to finish producing an album
a device that is specifically designed to work in parallel with the main computer
(a great option for adding to CPU power on non-expandable mobile machines)
BTW, the earnings call is going on now. Hopefully someone will ask Jobs about Firewire's future.
Or ask why with a billion dollars in profit they feel the need to reduce features in their products. I love to see a company profit but damn....there is a line between healthy profitability and outright greed. Apple's treading that line precariously.
Comments
Forget 3200. It's not likely that Apple will support it, and I can't think of a singlereason they should.
FW is now on the dying edge, before, it was on the bleeding edge.
In a year, there will no longer be a need for it.
Look, Apple never properly supported it. Once they saw they wouldn't be able to get the 25¢ per port licensing fees they were counting on, they lost interest. And that was many years ago. Since then they've supported it reluctantly.
800 was 18 months late. 1600 should have been here almost 18 months ago, and 3200 should have been here already.
These delays have cost it leadership.
Now, USB 3 and Power Over SATA will take over in 2009.
It will take a bit of time to completely fade away, but it's already started.
there are many reason why firewire should be (and hopefully will be) supported by everyone !
I'm not convinced that USB3 or ESata can take over...
while I don't know too much about USB 3 architecture there is a massive difference between all current wired 'mobile' connections
GigE - peer-to-peer architecture but no power
Firewire - peer-to-peer with power up to 45 W
USB2 - host controlled and power limited (5V at 500 mA = 2.5W = two plugs often needed)
ESata - host controlled only no power available (some take power from USB but most need much more than that to even work = you have to plug your HDD in to the wall at starbucks !!?)
everyone spouting about how good ESata is should realise that this was only ever designed to connect to mass storage
so it's no replacement for the peer-to-peer functionality of Firewire or GigE
...but yes it is very fast if you're just transferring files - and if you can plug in to a power socket.
so Firewire is currently the only peer-to-peer type network connection that can power devices...
also, remember that to get the blazing speeds that USB 3 is promising they have to integrate an optical connection - which will be expensive and potentially fragile (for cables at least)
not convinced that USB3 or ESata can take over...
while I don't know too much about USB 3 architecture there is a massive difference between all current wired 'mobile' connections
GigE - peer-to-peer architecture but no power
Firewire - peer-to-peer with power up to 45 W
USB2 - host controlled and power limited (5V at 500 mA = 2.5W = two plugs often needed)
ESata - host controlled only no power available (some take power from USB but most need much more than that to even work = you have to plug your HDD in to the wall at starbucks !!?)
everyone spouting about how good ESata is should realise that this was only ever designed to connect to mass storage - so it's no replacement for the peer-to-peer functionality of Firewire or GigE - but yes it is very fast if you're just transferring files.
so Firewire is currently the only peer-to-peer network that can power devices...
also, remember that to get the blazing speeds that USB 3 is promising they're going to integrate an optical connection - which will be expensive and potentially fragile (for cables at least)
Then you should go back and read some more posts where it's explained.
Nah, I'll explain it for the fifth time.
USB 3 isn't really USB as we know it. It's much more like FW. It's called USB because it supports legacy products. It's plenty fast, faster than FW 3200 will be. It's 4,800. It uses optical and copper. Making adapters for Fw 400 and 800 will be fairly easy.
The cables won't be fragile. It won't cost that much either.
Do you remember SCSI? The best cables for the faster standards cost about $150. Stop complaining!
Power Over SATA is exactly what it looks like, E-SATA with power.
Now, you need to hook it to either FW or USB to get power, fine for small and medium drives. This will allow more.
Power Over SATA - to my knowledge - doesn't have a firm release date yet.
(And you really have to wonder what they're going to do about that acronym.)
FW800 remains the best choice TODAY for hard drive expansion, supplied power over bus, audio & video bandwidth and more. Leaving it out was an extremely boneheaded move.
Then you should go back and read some more posts where it's explained.
Nah, I'll explain it for the fifth time.
USB 3 isn't really USB as we know it. It's much more like FW. It's called USB because it supports legacy products. It's plenty fast, faster than FW 3200 will be. It's 4,800. It uses optical and copper. Making adapters for Fw 400 and 800 will be fairly easy.
The cables won't be fragile. It won't cost that much either.
Do you remember SCSI? The best cables for the faster standards cost about $150. Stop complaining!
Power Over SATA is exactly what it looks like, E-SATA with power.
Now, you need to hook it to either FW or USB to get power, fine for small and medium drives. This will allow more.
you haven't explained anything
"it's much more like firewire" ???
USB3 is still host controlled - it's not all about speed.
check this if you need help understanding that there will still be a difference and we won't just be able to plug in an adapter and get all our firewire devices to work...
firewire-s3200-vs-usb-3
again Esata with power (even if they figure that out to work on a single port) is not peer to peer.... it's host controlled and is only good for storage devices...
USB 3 devices won't be here till 2010.
Power Over SATA - to my knowledge - doesn't have a firm release date yet.
(And you really have to wonder what they're going to do about that acronym.)
FW800 remains the best choice TODAY for hard drive expansion, supplied power over bus, audio & video bandwidth and more. Leaving it out was an extremely boneheaded move.
Both are expected in 2009 from what I've been hearing. First silicon for POSATA (I guess that's it
Forget 3200. It's not likely that Apple will support it, and I can't think of a singlereason they should.
FW is now on the dying edge, before, it was on the bleeding edge.
In a year, there will no longer be a need for it.
Look, Apple never properly supported it. Once they saw they wouldn't be able to get the 25¢ per port licensing fees they were counting on, they lost interest. And that was many years ago. Since then they've supported it reluctantly.
800 was 18 months late. 1600 should have been here almost 18 months ago, and 3200 should have been here already.
These delays have cost it leadership.
Now, USB 3 and Power Over SATA will take over in 2009.
It will take a bit of time to completely fade away, but it's already started.
I can think of one reason. Device to Device communication. There won't be a need for FW3.2Gpbs if computer users continue to
settle for lowest common denominator tech.
Apple, like most corporations, seek profits and will only entertain the idea of developing new technology if significant profits are attainable. It is here where I am at odds with Capitalism. Once companies become slaves to shareholders/Wall Street innovation and progressive movement forward is only ventured with profit potential in tow. Apple did not want to invest in the Firewire as you said ..not because it wasn't not worthy but because they could not see the profit potential.
Apple could have supported:
HAVI
www.havi.org
HANA
http://www.hanaalliance.org/
mLAN
http://www.yamahasynth.com/products/mlan/index.html
All use Firewire at some level...all could have been supported via Apple as a testament to the instrinsic benefits of a peer to peer, realtime smart connection.
Though remember...the Apple "dream" was that they would change the world. Steve Jobs recruited John Sculley from Pepsi by asking him "do you want to sell sugar water your whole life or change the world?"
Steve should heed his own advice.
you haven't explained anything
"it's much more like firewire" ???
USB3 is still host controlled - it's not all about speed.
check this if you need help understanding that there will still be a difference and we won't just be able to plug in an adapter and get all our firewire devices to work...
firewire-s3200-vs-usb-3
again Esata with power (even if they figure that out to work on a single port) is not peer to peer.... it's host controlled and is only good for storage devices...
Well, cripes!!! Look it up if that's not enough to give you an idea, which is all I was doing.
We know what E-SATA does. It's far better for drives than FW ever was, or could be.
I read that article ages ago, and it says nothing except that it's wrong about cable lengths. FW cables can be 15 feet long, about the same as USB 2. For both, you need repeaters. USB 3 isn't as bus intensive as USB 2, and it doesn't matter anyway. That mattered years ago with single cpu's that were, slow, along with a slow bus. It's trivial today.
you haven't explained anything
"it's much more like firewire" ???
USB3 is still host controlled - it's not all about speed.
check this if you need help understanding that there will still be a difference and we won't just be able to plug in an adapter and get all our firewire devices to work...
firewire-s3200-vs-usb-3
again Esata with power (even if they figure that out to work on a single port) is not peer to peer.... it's host controlled and is only good for storage devices...
The only way USB 3 is like FireWire is that it is Bi-Directional, (that is where they are getting a big speed increase) but because it is host controled, it still relies on the processor to direct the traffic, also means it is all controlled through the drivers rather than through the peer itself. Just leave me my FireWire, (also cooler marketing name). I think I'm going to have to make "Save FireWire" T-Shirts.
We know what E-SATA does. It's far better for drives than FW ever was, or could be.
True, but it also means having a port on the computer just for hard drive expansion.
FW is far more flexible, while being almost as fast.
Well, cripes!!! Look it up if that's not enough to give you an idea, which is all I was doing.
We know what E-SATA does. It's far better for drives than FW ever was, or could be.
no probs
but if you had to choose a connection for the 2009 macbook upgrade (here's hoping)
what would you prefer ?
remember that you can only choose one
(since apple's gone all cheap and nasty on us...
The only way USB 3 is like FireWire is that it is Bi-Directional, (that is where they are getting a big speed increase) but because it is host controled, it still relies on the processor to direct the traffic, also means it is all controlled through the drivers rather than through the peer itself. Just leave me my FireWire, (also cooler marketing name). I think I'm going to have to make "Save FireWire" T-Shirts.
It makes no difference whatsoever. The only time that matters is if you connect two FW devices together without a host computer.
does that matter when you are using your Mac? No. Besides, USB 3 offloads more from the host. It also uses a newer controller.
http://arstechnica.com/journals/hard...xhci-goes-gold
True, but it also means having a port on the computer just for hard drive expansion.
FW is far more flexible, while being almost as fast.
As we never had one before?
FW 800 is slow baby!
The best it can do is 80MB/s, and it never gets to that, maybe 70-72. But, SATA 3.0 can get a new drive all the way to its 165MB/s maximum, and has room for several more. With port sharing you can get to 750MB/s on a RAID. Try that with FW.
no probs
but if you had to choose a connection for the 2009 macbook upgrade (here's hoping)
what would you prefer ?
remember that you can only choose one
(since apple's gone all cheap and nasty on us...
USB 3. It's the most versatile, and it's fast.
1989!
That was before Windows 3.1. Hell, it was before Windows 3.0.
Remember where the Mac was then?
At the time, the Mac had a 20 MHz bus, and the PC had an 8 MHz bus.
It was long before both the Pentium and the PPC.
Having audio and video wasn't on the minds of the designers. Just getting mice to work was.
In fact, until Apple got it working in the first iMacs, it didn't really work at all. MS and Intel finally got it to work in Windows 98 Service Pack II.
That was about the time FW was announced.
FW got around the need for a computer host because computers were still too slow to work reliably, and they had bigger plans for it.
Computers are just a bit faster today. It no longer matters.
I remember when FW was announced as part of the HDTV specification. a lot of jumping around, hands clapping, faces getting red kind of thing in the Mac community. Ow wow! So cool, Apple is just going to CONTROL HDTV. Dreams, dreams, dreams.
Well, today, where's that FW on HDTV? I'll tell you, it's not. Very few HDTV's ever did have it, and pretty much none today.
Cable boxes had it, but today, what do most have? USB 2 and E-SATA. unless you still have an old one (about two years).
Soon, all anyone will be able to connect their camcorders up to will be another camcorder. And, hey, that's just what was intended. Camcorder to camcorder FW editing. Sheesh! I tried that once. Once! Never again. What a DUMB idea!
So yeah. I do think Apple moved too fast on this one, but they have the right idea. Before you know it, it will be gone.
Most of Sony's new cameras have USB 2. Once their older ones are discontinued next year, they too will start dropping iLink from their computers. They and Apple are by far, the biggest supporters of this. And Apple is already moving on. Sony won't be far behind.
If Apple decides that USB3 is superior tech to whatever Firewire can implement in the same timeframe, I'm happy to jump onboard.
I have multiple FW hard drives that need to be converted and other peripherals that will need upgrading. And I'm happy to do it.
But don't tell me to jump sideways. USB 2.0 is a downgrade in performance, and we all know that.
USB 3.0 isn't slated to debut until 'late-2009', at the earliest. Which means 2010 until all the bugs are worked out.
Similarly, eSATA might be an excellent choice for Time Machine hookups, but Apple hasn't adopted that either.
Leaving FW800 on the MacBook for one more year would not have hurt anyone. Removing it has damaged Apple's reputation for higher-end tech, and angered users for no good reason.
Mel, I think you're arguing the wrong point here.
If Apple decides that USB3 is superior tech to whatever Firewire can implement in the same timeframe, I'm happy to jump onboard.
I have multiple FW hard drives that need to be converted and other peripherals that will need upgrading. And I'm happy to do it.
But don't tell me to jump sideways. USB 2.0 is a downgrade in performance, and we all know that.
USB 3.0 isn't slated to debut until 'late-2009', at the earliest. Which means 2010 until all the bugs are worked out.
Similarly, eSATA might be an excellent choice for Time Machine hookups, but Apple hasn't adopted that either.
Leaving FW800 on the MacBook for one more year would not have hurt anyone. Removing it has damaged Apple's reputation for higher-end tech, and angered users for no good reason.
Frank, I'm not telling you that, am I?
This will be the, what 6th or 10th time I'm saying that I think Apple jumped the gun on this?
I agree!!
I'm just saying that I understand, from their point of view, why they did it. Which is different.
As an ex-manufacturer, I can see the other side.
Guys, how many of you were around in 1990? do you remember reading about USB? The standard was published in 1989.
1989!
That was before Windows 3.1. Hell, it was before Windows 3.0.
Remember where the Mac was then?
At the time, the Mac had a 20 MHz bus, and the PC had an 8 MHz bus.
It was long before both the Pentium and the PPC.
Having audio and video wasn't on the minds of the designers. Just getting mice to work was.
In fact, until Apple got it working in the first iMacs, it didn't really work at all. MS and Intel finally got it to work in Windows 98 Service Pack II.
That was about the time FW was announced.
FW got around the need for a computer host because computers were still too slow to work reliably, and they had bigger plans for it.
Computers are just a bit faster today. It no longer matters.
I remember when FW was announced as part of the HDTV specification. a lot of jumping around, hands clapping, faces getting red kind of thing in the Mac community. Ow wow! So cool, Apple is just going to CONTROL HDTV. Dreams, dreams, dreams.
Well, today, where's that FW on HDTV? I'll tell you, it's not. Very few HDTV's ever did have it, and pretty much none today.
Cable boxes had it, but today, what do most have? USB 2 and E-SATA. unless you still have an old one (about two years).
Soon, all anyone will be able to connect their camcorders up to will be another camcorder. And, hey, that's just what was intended. Camcorder to camcorder FW editing. Sheesh! I tried that once. Once! Never again. What a DUMB idea!
So yeah. I do think Apple moved too fast on this one, but they have the right idea. Before you know it, it will be gone.
Most of Sony's new cameras have USB 2. Once their older ones are discontinued next year, they too will start dropping iLink from their computers. They and Apple are by far, the biggest supporters of this. And Apple is already moving on. Sony won't be far behind.
some good points here and yes the CPU speeds have increased
but it's not only about speed
it's about devices being allowed to both control themselves and be controlled
when on the same network
i'm using one right now (Focusrite Liquid Mix) to finish producing an album
a device that is specifically designed to work in parallel with the main computer
(a great option for adding to CPU power on non-expandable mobile machines)
Frank, I'm not telling you that, am I?
This will be the, what 6th or 10th time I'm saying that I think Apple jumped the gun on this?
I agree!!
I'm just saying that I understand, from their point of view, why they did it. Which is different.
As an ex-manufacturer, I can see the other side.
But that's the thing. I don't see why they did it.
It ticks off users and adds no benefit.
It marginalizes their own interface without adopting a better standard (yet.)
It removes the awe of the new design process with grumbling about a Mac's 'lack of features'.
The only plus I can see is that it shaved a bit of engineering time and a few cents off the MacBook price.
BTW, the earnings call is going on now. Hopefully someone will ask Jobs about Firewire's future.
Or ask why with a billion dollars in profit they feel the need to reduce features in their products. I love to see a company profit but damn....there is a line between healthy profitability and outright greed. Apple's treading that line precariously.