No. There are 4 USB buses listed for the new MacBook in System Profiler. There are two USB1.0 buses and two USB2.0 buses. I tested this by plugging in my iPhone to each USB port, which clearly showed the iPhone showing up under a different High Speed USB bus.
USB Bus (USB 1.0)
. . . • Apple Internal Keyboard / Trackpad
. . . • IR Reciever
USB Bus (USB 1.0)
. . . • Bluetooth USB Host Controller on a Broadcom BCM2045B2
like i said this comes from a trade association - and i warned it would be biased.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
Look, when it says FW is better than eSATA and HDMI for their OWN NATIVE PURPOSES I call bullshit. Given that 1394 ports have been DISAPPEARING from set top boxes rather than increasing I doubt HANA will get any traction. My old HD cable box had Firewire (disabled by Comcast but it was there). The new ones from Dish and FiOS do not. They all have HDMI ports. For HD.
Why? Because for a point to point interface from CE to CE to TV HDMI is superior to Firewire. For whole house distribution, ethernet is already present in the form of 802.11a/b/g/n or wired ethernet and if HANA had any likely future Jobs wouldn't have dropped FW on the MacBook even if aTV is just a "hobby".
Slingbox, aTV, PS3, 360, TiVO, and a large number of IPTV devices are all already IP based and sent over the internet. Yea and verily streamed HD over U-verse IPTV service.
No microsoft on HANA is very telling.
telling for what?
that it's a good thing for Apple to have left FW off a portable notebook?
why are you bringing home networks into this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
If there was a "white paper" from Intel touting the superiority of USB you would call it what it is: Marketing.
It cites that FW is better than USB for external disk drives and camcorders because of speed/performance but that FW is better than eSATA because...get this...speed/performance doesn't matter...it is convienence.
first things first
when you compare technologies you should cover:
- intended market
- similarities
- differences
I think they do that quite well given that a trade association wrote it...
like i said this comes from a trade association - and i warned it would be biased.
I'm biased toward Apple and BMW. That's different than marketing.
Quote:
telling for what?
Telling that HANA is not taken too seriously if none of the set top makers are involved and Microsoft has dumped a lot of money into the set top wars including a hefty amount of development of IPTV. These companies join pretty much everything relevant just so they have a say in things. Or at least an ear.
Quote:
that it's a good thing for Apple to have left FW off a portable notebook?
It's telling that Apple dropped FW of their most common laptop and one of the potential providers of media content for aTV. Evidently they don't see FW getting traction in the home media network environment.
Quote:
why are you bringing home networks into this?
Because HANA has been touted as the reason why FW has a future beyond a niche interface. The whole reason that FW is "better" than HDMI is because it isn't point to point but now available via coax.
Maybe so. Maybe not. But the required industry players are not at the table yet so at this point the technology is nothing but a white paper and a trade show demo. And amusingly the trade show demo that HANA talks about with "wireless" HANA is the Pulse-Link and Westinghouse is wireless HDMI using UWB demo. Not 1394 over UWB.
Freescale demo'd high data rate room to room IPTV over coax using Pulse-Link's chipset for ethernet over coax (same chipset doing firewire over coax). Same with HDMI over coax.
HDMI over UWB is far more likely to hit the market than FW over coax or FW over UWB. Belkin, Monster, Gefen and a host of other companies are moving toward wireless HDMI.
Quote:
their first reason that FW comes close to ESata is because of.... speed
(to be precise bottlenecks in drives meaning increased interface speed is useless)
Except it's not useless for raid arrays and the same argument can be made for USB2. There have been several examples already posted where drives area no faster using their FW400 interface than their USB2 interface. This is even more likely with the slower notebook drives many notebook owners choose for their external drives.
i'm not sure it's useful to say that it's marketing 'bullshit'
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
It's telling that Apple dropped FW of their most common laptop and one of the potential providers of media content for aTV. Evidently they don't see FW getting traction in the home media network environment.
ok, you can have an opinion on what the next connection tech is going to be.
i'm not sure that matters for the point of this thread
either way apple has just released a pretty looking, lemon of a notebook
with a very sturdy case, which is going to last forever
and have a very low resale value as soon as the next update comes out
because it's missing any / all of the future intelligent connections
it's like they had option paralysis and said
"arrrgh can't choose !!!! so let's just not put any decent interface on it !!"
I've read quite a few arguments here for why it made sense for Apple to eliminate FireWire on the MacBook. I'm not sure one of them applies to the MacBook but not the MacBook Pro. Why did Apple keep FW on the MacBook Pro?
I've read quite a few arguments here for why it made sense for Apple to eliminate FireWire on the MacBook. I'm not sure one of them applies to the MacBook but not the MacBook Pro. Why did Apple keep FW on the MacBook Pro?
Besides the MBP being a pro machine, Apple did remove the same FW400 port from both the MB and MBP. I think it came down to needing to remove a port due to new space constraints and FW400 being the weakest link, because it wasn't replaced by FW800 or another USB port, which would have been nice.
Yah I still don't get that. Can you plug a fw400 device into a fw800 port? There are so few and far between fw800 devices. All my harddrives are fw400. /sigh.
Yah I still don't get that. Can you plug a fw400 device into a fw800 port?
You can, but you'll need a new cable or a cable adapter that goes from FW400 to FW800. These are cheap because FW800 is backwards compatible to FW400 in every way... expect for the port interface design, or course.
Yah I still don't get that. Can you plug a fw400 device into a fw800 port? There are so few and far between fw800 devices. All my harddrives are fw400. /sigh.
Few? All 8 of my firewire drives have fw800. I even have a fw800 iPod cable. :-)
But all you need to do is get a 6 pin (fw400) to 9 pin (fw800) cable.
Besides the MBP being a pro machine, Apple did remove the same FW400 port from both the MB and MBP. I think it came down to needing to remove a port due to new space constraints and FW400 being the weakest link, because it wasn't replaced by FW800 or another USB port, which would have been nice.
I wasn't considering the distinction between FW400 and FW800 since they are compatible without any trouble at all. In other words, if Apple simply converted the FW400 port on the MacBook to FW800, no one would mind in the least. You mentioned the space constraint issue but I was referring to all of the reasons posted in this thread about why FW isn't needed on the MB. What are those reasons that apply to the MB but not the MBP? I don't recall one that's been mentioned.
What are those reasons that apply to the MB but not the MBP? I don't recall one that's been mentioned.
Pros are more likely to use FireWire while the vast majority of MacBook consumers have never used it or even heard of it. Apple did the same thing on both machines, it removed FW400. I don't think FW is dying, but I do think that FW400 is a dead-end port interface. It's too bad that Apple didn't make FW800 use the same port interface as FW400, like USB has down with all 3 iterations.
For 100BaseT. Again, which part of the current spec is 10x faster than what HANA evaluated confuses you?
Again. None.
Quote:
GigE is more than capable of streaming HD without drops.
I don't know how to put this without repeating myself. HANA needs guaranteed QoS.
Why don't you just say 'Gigabit ethernet guarantees real-time HD content delivery without drops'? Why hedge your words with 'more than capable'. If current ethernet standards and equipment can do what HANA needs, just say so.
The fact that you, your brother or your best friend has a full blown computer with ample resources outputting content to a HD TV panel over Gigabit ethernet does not make it the solution to the issues that have been put here.
I thought the white paper listed here was an interesting read. Everybody is free to make their own conclusions.
I brought up the subject of HANA as an example because somebody said that firewire was not good (or a good option - I can't remember now) for moving/streaming A/V content. It was only an example to support my post.
I'm not a proponent of HANA. I don't even know if it will get off the ground and I said so right from the start. However, from a technological viewpoint it does raise some issues for the people that say FW now has no reason to exist.
I still say FW has no single competitor out there that is better for a broad spectrum of uses. I haven't seen anything here to make me think otherwise.
That white paper raised an interesting point on the cost of silicon for USB3.0. If that proved to be correct Apple may be missing a good opportunity to really push newer FW versions. Not that it matters much now as I think Apple already considers FW as legacy.
And yet, for all that Mel, even you agree that Apple pulled FireWire off the MacBook too soon.
So, who are you trying to convince here? Us? Or you?
Y'know what would've been cool? Steve, about a year from now, unveiling USB 3.0 on new MacBooks... that still had FW ports on them. And Steve saying, very publicly, "Firewire's been great, but now we've got something even better. The torch has been passed... and I'd plan accordingly."
Then, next MB rev after that... FW goes bye-bye. And no one can say boo, because it got replaced with something (at least arguably) better, and Stevie gave everyone very fair warning.
But, y'know, I guess that course of action would be too sane and reasonable, or something.
...
There are two arguments here. And I certainly don't have to convince myself with a false argument as others are doing for the opposite reasons.
The truth is that Apple did move too soon for their current customer base that needs (wants) FW on the less expensive machines. That's pretty obvious, and I've stated it numerous times.
But, the bigger picture is that FW is going away. While it was a great choice, it's become less so.
Before too long, few will be interested in it at all. Apple's moving it off their more consumer orinted machines will push FW further to the background. It will disappear more quickly than it would have done had Apple continued its use. Apple knows that as well.
I'm in sympathy with that small percentage of Apple users that find FW to be useful. But make no mistake about it, FW s only used by a minority.
There are a lot of emotional reasons why some want FW to stay. One of the biggest is that some people really want to buy a new really cool aluminum MB machined from a block. It's a great bragging point. Of course, few will admit to that, but we all know that it's always a big reason to upgrade to new machinery.
Some really may need the power, but it also must be remembered that the new machines aren't more powerful than the older ones. Apple even moved back in cpu speeds. So the GPU is the main advantage here, and it's no advantage for audio, 2D graphics, or even video. It's an advantage for 3D work and some games.
If someone now has a FW based device that works well with their current machine, then I don't understand the fuss. Keep the machine until sometime when you really need to upgrade. The excuse that a MBP weighs a pound more, or is a bit larger isn't really a great argument. Not if you lug equipment around. If the extra $500 is too much, then buy the older model at discount, or a refurbished model. Either will be more powerful than any MB, and will include FW 800 as well, which no MB ever did.
The arguments being presented here by those few who are pissed by this are overblown. I'm not saying they're without any merit, but they can be worked around.
I'm rather late to this whole debate since I've been on vacation for the past two weeks. I think one argument that isn't getting enough of a hearing in this situation isn't so much the merits of FireWire vs USB 2/3 but the fact that the new MacBook computers only have two multi-purpose I/O ports now as oppose to the 3 that are available on the old MacBook computers. If I have a printer, iPod and a backup/data HD I'm now one port short. I know hubs are cheap but still it's a level of complexity I could have avoided with the previous generation of computer.
OK, continue on with the USB vs FireWire deathmatch! May the best eSATA win!
anyone wanting further info on FW compared to other techs should check out this whitepaper by the 1394 trade association
yes it'll be biased based on it's source... find me one that isn't \
but it's no more biased than some posts here who keep insisting either
- FW is dead
- or that it can be easily replaced with existing technologies...
for those who think that the USB performance of the MBPs (note how the MB hasn't been tested) is up to that of firewire (and keep posting the barefeets test results) please have a look at 'compared to USB paragraph'
...pure speed has little to do with performance (and no one would really argue over single direction file transfer speed, as if that's the most critical for any of us...).
I hope you aren't referring to me here. I NEVER said that FW can be completely replaced by USB 2 in all circumstances. There are places where it can be, and those where it can't.
That's why I said it would have been better if Apple had waited.
I hope you aren't referring to me here. I NEVER said that FW can be completely replaced by USB 2 in all circumstances. There are places where it can be, and those where it can't.
That's why I said it would have been better if Apple had waited.
no I wasn't actually
i like reading your replies
generally well thought out and of balanced opinion.
(i'm serious btw)
although i do question your idea that "firewire is going away"
From the Apple/Users/Firewire perspective I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head.
Apple has goofed IMO and although it's unlikely they'll change their stance and put FW back on the MacBook, I won't be buying one without FW.
I had to take the MacBook off my Christmas list and if, when I finally need to upgrade, there is no portable mac in my price range, it will be a hackintosh for me. I sent feedback to Apple but I doubt anything will be done to change things.
Comments
Are the USB ports on the MacBook on the same bus?
No. There are 4 USB buses listed for the new MacBook in System Profiler. There are two USB1.0 buses and two USB2.0 buses. I tested this by plugging in my iPhone to each USB port, which clearly showed the iPhone showing up under a different High Speed USB bus.
AKA marketing.
errr duh !?
like i said this comes from a trade association - and i warned it would be biased.
Look, when it says FW is better than eSATA and HDMI for their OWN NATIVE PURPOSES I call bullshit. Given that 1394 ports have been DISAPPEARING from set top boxes rather than increasing I doubt HANA will get any traction. My old HD cable box had Firewire (disabled by Comcast but it was there). The new ones from Dish and FiOS do not. They all have HDMI ports. For HD.
Why? Because for a point to point interface from CE to CE to TV HDMI is superior to Firewire. For whole house distribution, ethernet is already present in the form of 802.11a/b/g/n or wired ethernet and if HANA had any likely future Jobs wouldn't have dropped FW on the MacBook even if aTV is just a "hobby".
Slingbox, aTV, PS3, 360, TiVO, and a large number of IPTV devices are all already IP based and sent over the internet. Yea and verily streamed HD over U-verse IPTV service.
No microsoft on HANA is very telling.
telling for what?
that it's a good thing for Apple to have left FW off a portable notebook?
why are you bringing home networks into this?
If there was a "white paper" from Intel touting the superiority of USB you would call it what it is: Marketing.
It cites that FW is better than USB for external disk drives and camcorders because of speed/performance but that FW is better than eSATA because...get this...speed/performance doesn't matter...it is convienence.
first things first
when you compare technologies you should cover:
- intended market
- similarities
- differences
I think they do that quite well given that a trade association wrote it...
regarding FW vs ESata
their first reason that FW comes close to ESata is because of.... speed
(to be precise bottlenecks in drives meaning increased interface speed is useless)
But an interface can never operate faster than drives can read or write data.
Most of the mainstream drives used in consumer PCs and consumer electronic
devices such as DVR-equipped set-top boxes use drives with a maximum data rate
of about 100-Mbytes/sec or about the same speed as S800 1394.
their 2nd reason mentioned is convenience...
but you will note that they spend most of the paper comparing FW and USB
(which are the most comparable techs for most consumers - even though there are huge differences)
oh and I'd love to read a white paper from Intel on USB3 if you have one
(seriously I think that'd interest everyone on this forum)
I found their comments about the increased silicon cost of USB3 to be very interesting
and the backwards compatibility probs forcing USB3 to remain host controlled telling...
but take from it what you will, I put it out there for info
errr duh !?
like i said this comes from a trade association - and i warned it would be biased.
I'm biased toward Apple and BMW. That's different than marketing.
telling for what?
Telling that HANA is not taken too seriously if none of the set top makers are involved and Microsoft has dumped a lot of money into the set top wars including a hefty amount of development of IPTV. These companies join pretty much everything relevant just so they have a say in things. Or at least an ear.
that it's a good thing for Apple to have left FW off a portable notebook?
It's telling that Apple dropped FW of their most common laptop and one of the potential providers of media content for aTV. Evidently they don't see FW getting traction in the home media network environment.
why are you bringing home networks into this?
Because HANA has been touted as the reason why FW has a future beyond a niche interface. The whole reason that FW is "better" than HDMI is because it isn't point to point but now available via coax.
Maybe so. Maybe not. But the required industry players are not at the table yet so at this point the technology is nothing but a white paper and a trade show demo. And amusingly the trade show demo that HANA talks about with "wireless" HANA is the Pulse-Link and Westinghouse is wireless HDMI using UWB demo. Not 1394 over UWB.
Freescale demo'd high data rate room to room IPTV over coax using Pulse-Link's chipset for ethernet over coax (same chipset doing firewire over coax). Same with HDMI over coax.
HDMI over UWB is far more likely to hit the market than FW over coax or FW over UWB. Belkin, Monster, Gefen and a host of other companies are moving toward wireless HDMI.
their first reason that FW comes close to ESata is because of.... speed
(to be precise bottlenecks in drives meaning increased interface speed is useless)
Except it's not useless for raid arrays and the same argument can be made for USB2. There have been several examples already posted where drives area no faster using their FW400 interface than their USB2 interface. This is even more likely with the slower notebook drives many notebook owners choose for their external drives.
I'm biased toward Apple and BMW. That's different than marketing.
yes you have your bias because of their marketing
(and to split hairs, you market something you want to sell - and they're not selling FW
just trying to justify why they use it in their products, hence the bias)
either way for other readers of the white paper
i'm not sure it's useful to say that it's marketing 'bullshit'
It's telling that Apple dropped FW of their most common laptop and one of the potential providers of media content for aTV. Evidently they don't see FW getting traction in the home media network environment.
ok, you can have an opinion on what the next connection tech is going to be.
i'm not sure that matters for the point of this thread
either way apple has just released a pretty looking, lemon of a notebook
with a very sturdy case, which is going to last forever
and have a very low resale value as soon as the next update comes out
because it's missing any / all of the future intelligent connections
it's like they had option paralysis and said
"arrrgh can't choose !!!! so let's just not put any decent interface on it !!"
I've read quite a few arguments here for why it made sense for Apple to eliminate FireWire on the MacBook. I'm not sure one of them applies to the MacBook but not the MacBook Pro. Why did Apple keep FW on the MacBook Pro?
Besides the MBP being a pro machine, Apple did remove the same FW400 port from both the MB and MBP. I think it came down to needing to remove a port due to new space constraints and FW400 being the weakest link, because it wasn't replaced by FW800 or another USB port, which would have been nice.
Yah I still don't get that. Can you plug a fw400 device into a fw800 port?
You can, but you'll need a new cable or a cable adapter that goes from FW400 to FW800. These are cheap because FW800 is backwards compatible to FW400 in every way... expect for the port interface design, or course.
Yah I still don't get that. Can you plug a fw400 device into a fw800 port? There are so few and far between fw800 devices. All my harddrives are fw400. /sigh.
Few? All 8 of my firewire drives have fw800. I even have a fw800 iPod cable. :-)
But all you need to do is get a 6 pin (fw400) to 9 pin (fw800) cable.
Besides the MBP being a pro machine, Apple did remove the same FW400 port from both the MB and MBP. I think it came down to needing to remove a port due to new space constraints and FW400 being the weakest link, because it wasn't replaced by FW800 or another USB port, which would have been nice.
I wasn't considering the distinction between FW400 and FW800 since they are compatible without any trouble at all. In other words, if Apple simply converted the FW400 port on the MacBook to FW800, no one would mind in the least. You mentioned the space constraint issue but I was referring to all of the reasons posted in this thread about why FW isn't needed on the MB. What are those reasons that apply to the MB but not the MBP? I don't recall one that's been mentioned.
Few? All 8 of my firewire drives have fw800.
They are a lot harder to find. I personally don't remember seeing one for sale locally, I had to order them online.
I even have a fw800 iPod cable. :-)
You riced your iPod?
They are a lot harder to find. I personally don't remember seeing one for sale locally, I had to order them online.
Were else would you buy reliable equipment?
Retail only carries the low end trash.
Other World Computing is the best source of all the good stuff. http://www.otherworldcomputing.com
What are those reasons that apply to the MB but not the MBP? I don't recall one that's been mentioned.
Pros are more likely to use FireWire while the vast majority of MacBook consumers have never used it or even heard of it. Apple did the same thing on both machines, it removed FW400. I don't think FW is dying, but I do think that FW400 is a dead-end port interface. It's too bad that Apple didn't make FW800 use the same port interface as FW400, like USB has down with all 3 iterations.
When a group of companies get together to consider a new technology they do not ask their marketing people to sit in on the meetings.
HANA chose firewire based on information from their tech committees. From that point on it would be usual for marketing to get in on the act.
The decision to run HANA products over firewire was most definitely not made by marketers.
For what HANA proposes HDMI is absolutely worthless.
For 100BaseT. Again, which part of the current spec is 10x faster than what HANA evaluated confuses you?
Again. None.
GigE is more than capable of streaming HD without drops.
I don't know how to put this without repeating myself. HANA needs guaranteed QoS.
Why don't you just say 'Gigabit ethernet guarantees real-time HD content delivery without drops'? Why hedge your words with 'more than capable'. If current ethernet standards and equipment can do what HANA needs, just say so.
The fact that you, your brother or your best friend has a full blown computer with ample resources outputting content to a HD TV panel over Gigabit ethernet does not make it the solution to the issues that have been put here.
I thought the white paper listed here was an interesting read. Everybody is free to make their own conclusions.
I brought up the subject of HANA as an example because somebody said that firewire was not good (or a good option - I can't remember now) for moving/streaming A/V content. It was only an example to support my post.
I'm not a proponent of HANA. I don't even know if it will get off the ground and I said so right from the start. However, from a technological viewpoint it does raise some issues for the people that say FW now has no reason to exist.
I still say FW has no single competitor out there that is better for a broad spectrum of uses. I haven't seen anything here to make me think otherwise.
That white paper raised an interesting point on the cost of silicon for USB3.0. If that proved to be correct Apple may be missing a good opportunity to really push newer FW versions. Not that it matters much now as I think Apple already considers FW as legacy.
And yet, for all that Mel, even you agree that Apple pulled FireWire off the MacBook too soon.
So, who are you trying to convince here? Us? Or you?
Y'know what would've been cool? Steve, about a year from now, unveiling USB 3.0 on new MacBooks... that still had FW ports on them. And Steve saying, very publicly, "Firewire's been great, but now we've got something even better. The torch has been passed... and I'd plan accordingly."
Then, next MB rev after that... FW goes bye-bye. And no one can say boo, because it got replaced with something (at least arguably) better, and Stevie gave everyone very fair warning.
But, y'know, I guess that course of action would be too sane and reasonable, or something.
...
There are two arguments here. And I certainly don't have to convince myself with a false argument as others are doing for the opposite reasons.
The truth is that Apple did move too soon for their current customer base that needs (wants) FW on the less expensive machines. That's pretty obvious, and I've stated it numerous times.
But, the bigger picture is that FW is going away. While it was a great choice, it's become less so.
Before too long, few will be interested in it at all. Apple's moving it off their more consumer orinted machines will push FW further to the background. It will disappear more quickly than it would have done had Apple continued its use. Apple knows that as well.
I'm in sympathy with that small percentage of Apple users that find FW to be useful. But make no mistake about it, FW s only used by a minority.
There are a lot of emotional reasons why some want FW to stay. One of the biggest is that some people really want to buy a new really cool aluminum MB machined from a block. It's a great bragging point. Of course, few will admit to that, but we all know that it's always a big reason to upgrade to new machinery.
Some really may need the power, but it also must be remembered that the new machines aren't more powerful than the older ones. Apple even moved back in cpu speeds. So the GPU is the main advantage here, and it's no advantage for audio, 2D graphics, or even video. It's an advantage for 3D work and some games.
If someone now has a FW based device that works well with their current machine, then I don't understand the fuss. Keep the machine until sometime when you really need to upgrade. The excuse that a MBP weighs a pound more, or is a bit larger isn't really a great argument. Not if you lug equipment around. If the extra $500 is too much, then buy the older model at discount, or a refurbished model. Either will be more powerful than any MB, and will include FW 800 as well, which no MB ever did.
The arguments being presented here by those few who are pissed by this are overblown. I'm not saying they're without any merit, but they can be worked around.
OK, continue on with the USB vs FireWire deathmatch! May the best eSATA win!
anyone wanting further info on FW compared to other techs should check out this whitepaper by the 1394 trade association
yes it'll be biased based on it's source... find me one that isn't
but it's no more biased than some posts here who keep insisting either
- FW is dead
- or that it can be easily replaced with existing technologies...
for those who think that the USB performance of the MBPs (note how the MB hasn't been tested) is up to that of firewire (and keep posting the barefeets test results) please have a look at 'compared to USB paragraph'
...pure speed has little to do with performance (and no one would really argue over single direction file transfer speed, as if that's the most critical for any of us...).
I hope you aren't referring to me here. I NEVER said that FW can be completely replaced by USB 2 in all circumstances. There are places where it can be, and those where it can't.
That's why I said it would have been better if Apple had waited.
I hope you aren't referring to me here. I NEVER said that FW can be completely replaced by USB 2 in all circumstances. There are places where it can be, and those where it can't.
That's why I said it would have been better if Apple had waited.
no I wasn't actually
i like reading your replies
generally well thought out and of balanced opinion.
(i'm serious btw)
although i do question your idea that "firewire is going away"
From the Apple/Users/Firewire perspective I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head.
Apple has goofed IMO and although it's unlikely they'll change their stance and put FW back on the MacBook, I won't be buying one without FW.
I had to take the MacBook off my Christmas list and if, when I finally need to upgrade, there is no portable mac in my price range, it will be a hackintosh for me. I sent feedback to Apple but I doubt anything will be done to change things.