...as in "half the speed"? Or were you missing a "faster" somewhere in that sentence?
Okay, that sounds pretty scary. I'm willing to accept "YMMV" style disclaimers (and I do hope that others made better experiences), but thanks for this glimpse at least!
Sorry, I meant Firewire 400 being roughly 50% than USB2 (I'm prone think faster than I type).
My TC experience was two nights (maybe 8PM till 8AM) for the first backup (during the day the computer, like me, was not at home).
I went to the store to check them out, the glass screen is horrible, it reflex everything. Add the lack of fire wire and you just have an over priced Sony with OSX slapped on it. My guess is Apple is going after the PC crowd which is why it looks so PC but with those prices why would a PC user buy something that looks like every other PC but cost $600 more?
If this is the direction Apple is going with it's portables then my trusty MBP will be the last one I ever buy. Once this one goes I'll have to decide on a Mac Pro, a Dell or nothing.
Sony Vaio TZ screen is not glass and it has firewire.
Please note that speeds for USB 2 have improved somewhat on Intel Macs compared to PPC Macs but are still noticeably slower than Firewire 400 (links are in chronological order). Firewire 800 is the fastest bus-powered, daisy-chainable interface. E-SATA, essentially the internal harddrive connection with a longer cable is faster for fast storage setups like RAID.
Please note that speeds for USB 2 have improved somewhat on Intel Macs compared to PPC Macs but are still noticeably slower than Firewire 400 (links are in chronological order). Firewire 800 is the fastest bus-powered, daisy-chainable interface. E-SATA, essentially the internal harddrive connection with a longer cable is faster for fast storage setups like RAID.
Ahhhhh, thanks a bunch, that clears up a lot! Review sites like that are usually not my thing (because I rarely feel the need to compare performance specs), but I think I might/should check them out a bit more in-depth later on.
Careful, yet another newbie coming through! *stumbles through the crowd*
This sounds like a good point to ask a question that has been nagging me since the "No FireWire" revelation this week.
I currently got a Mac Mini (first-gen) with an external FW drive (M9-DX with FW-400 and USB 2.0), and I'm considering to switch to a Macbook. My lesser question is how USB 2.0 performance is in real life, compared to FW-400 (Yes, I could just check that myself, but I'm lazy right now, and since I'm posting here anyway... ).
My much bigger question pokes the quote there: How is Gigabit Ethernet doing against FireWire 400 in real life (as opposed to "nominally, but there is some unspecified overhead"), and would I really notice a difference? I'm considering to pick up a Time Capsule after getting the laptop, or I might keep the Mini+M9 setup around as a sort of at-home base station (or hey, maybe both - more storage space is always welcome, especially once Time Machine goes wild, I figure).
Background: I mostly use the FW drive for storing larger files (for example the odd movie file) and files I don't need on a daily basis. I would like to watch said (non-HD) movies directly from that disk, and I'd like not to wait ten hours just to copy a GB to it. No heavy-duty real-time movie editing/recording, no 10GB Photoshop files, nothing fancy-intensive. I'm also not the kind of guy who sits next to the computer with a stopwatch while a file is being copied, so I wouldn't really care if one of them copied File X in 10 minutes while the other one needed 11 minutes. As long as we're not talking about factors, I'd be cool.
So: Could I switch to a non-FW Macbook without worrying about the lack of FW?
Apple has made improvements to their USB implementation over recent years. A couple of years ago you were lucky to get 1/2 of FW400 speed. On current gen Macs it's almost caught up. But remember it's also more CPU dependent than FW, so if your CPU is already loaded with tasks, data transfer will be even slower. FW's advantage increases with larger file sizes.
My set-up includes a PPC mini acting as a music/video/file server. It's connected via Ethernet to an Airport Extreme (Gigabit). However, keep in mind that your mini, like mine, only has Fast Ethernet (100 Mbps). The mini has 4 FW400 hard drives daisy chained for storage. I also have a PowerBook G4 and a MBP, both with Gigabit Ethernet and FW 400/800. When I first got theh MBP in March I did a bunch of stopwatch-based speed tests. I don't have the results in front of me, but in general I found:
- USB on the MBP is much faster than USB on the PB
- FW400 on the MBP was still faster than USB
- Gigabit Ethernet was about as fast at FW400. However, Ethernet performance lags FW400 when transferring a large number of small files.
- Wireless N is about as fast as Fast Ethernet. Note, wireless is even less efficient than Ethernet when transferring a large number of small files.
In practical use, the MBP > N > Airport Extreme > Fast Ethernet > mini > FW400 drive chain can easily handle most Time Machine backups. Several times I've had 30-40+GB TM updates complete over that setup. The only hickup is rarely the "Preparing" stop of a TM backup takes forever. In those instances, replacing the N wireless link with an Ethernet cable for that one backup makes things go more quickly (I suspect if a large number of files need updating in the back up then the huge inefficiencies in the wireless protcol is killing me).
My usual set up can also handle wirelessly streaming a ripped DVD from a drive connected to the mini, playing the video_TS files in either FrontRow or DVDPlayer on my MBP with only an occassional dropped frame.
For bulk file transfers, my setup isn't as fast has directly connecting a FW drive to my MBP. However, I suspect if my mini could connect via Gigabit Ethernet then I'd have near FW400 speed whenever I plugged the MBP into the Extreme via Ethernet (N speeds still being the bottleneck over the wireless work).
While there are some workarounds to the MacBook's lack of FireWire Target Disk Mode, the missing port is also a problem for users with FireWire peripherals.
First time here - bear with me.
I've not seen mention of firewire external disks. We have a house full of firewire external drives, for various backups and and archives. Job's rationalization about camcorders not needing firewire hardly covers that. The lack of a Target drive is a big problem, but suddenly useless hard drive is a bigger problem.
Upgrading to a MacBookPro isn't a solution. We use MacBooks because of the 13-inch screen and extensive travelling, where the size and weight of a 15-inch "pro" is unacceptable.
Is there a solution to using the smaller/lighter MacBook and still having a fast and simple backup/archiving solution?
In your first diagram it states that the late 2008 MacBooks use DDR2 1067 RAM when in fact they use DDR3 1067
The previous MacBooks also used a 800MHz FSB coupled with DDR2-667 memory rather than a 533MHz FSB and DDR2-533. In fact, I'm pretty sure no Intel Mac laptop has shipped with a 533MHz FSB or DDR2-533 memory.
I should point out that the advantage of smaller footprint with the nVidia chispet could have been achieved just as easily by staying with Montevina, since the GS45 variant with a small form factor ICH9M southbridge has a 1415mm² total area compared to 3342mm² total area for a full size GM45/ICH9M combination. The small form factor GS45 also has the same feature set as the full GM45, including the ability to switch between the IGP and a discrete GPU just like nVidia chipsets.
It is so surprising that Jobs is unaware or unconcerned that the 15" MBP is the industry standard notebook for 1000's of high-end commercial photographers using medium format digital backs. Most of these backs have only one way to interface while shooting tethered and that is Firewire 400. Photographers will not be running out to replace their $25k digital back, they will be looking at other laptops and I guess it won't be an Apple.
It is so surprising that Jobs is unaware or unconcerned that the 15" MBP is the industry standard notebook for 1000's of high-end commercial photographers using medium format digital backs. Most of these backs have only one way to interface while shooting tethered and that is Firewire 400. Photographers will not be running out to replace their $25k digital back, they will be looking at other laptops and I guess it won't be an Apple.
Most of my gear from 2,5" harddiscs to cameras feature FW400. But even if I'd upgrade to the new MBP I would have to use an adapter, and would be stuck with this even-more-glossy-than-before screen. So I'll stick to my old MBP as long as possible and then...we'll see..
Seems that Apple only wants the machines used by students and for home entertainment.
It is so surprising that Jobs is unaware or unconcerned that the 15" MBP is the industry standard notebook for 1000's of high-end commercial photographers using medium format digital backs. Most of these backs have only one way to interface while shooting tethered and that is Firewire 400. Photographers will not be running out to replace their $25k digital back, they will be looking at other laptops and I guess it won't be an Apple.
Yeah, but doesn't the 15" MBP still come with FW800? Don't the folks dropping $25K on a digital back (and god knows how much on glass) have the extra $500 to pony up for the MBP anyway?
It is so surprising that Jobs is unaware or unconcerned that the 15" MBP is the industry standard notebook for 1000's of high-end commercial photographers using medium format digital backs. Most of these backs have only one way to interface while shooting tethered and that is Firewire 400. Photographers will not be running out to replace their $25k digital back, they will be looking at other laptops and I guess it won't be an Apple.
The MBP does have Firewire, it has a fw800 port. A fw800->fw400 cable will run you about $10. No need to replace the camera back. Hell, the most likely scenario for a photog is that they will attach a fw800 hard drive to the MBP's fw800 port and then connect the camera to the fw400 port on the hard drive (almost every fw800 drive enclosure also has a fw400 port). So you wouldn't even need the adapter cable.
Today morning I ask the fallowing question to nvidia knowledge base:
Regarding the Hybrid SLi limitation of the new MacBook Pro, that's an Hardware or a software limitation?
In case of software,is nvidia planning the release of a bootcamp Driver for windows Vista 32/64 bits?
And on last question.
Is the Chipset and Mobo, limited to 32Bits, then limiting the amount of RAM? Will 64bits OS take full advantage of this new Nvidia 9400 (Graphics / Chipset) ?
Thanks for you time
Nvidia Response:
Hello Jorge,
Thank you for contacting NVIDIA Customer Care.
This is Farzana and I will be assisting you with the query you have.
I understand from your email that you would like to know if the Hybrid SLI limitation on the new MacBook Pro is hardware or software limitation. Also, you would like to know if the GeForce 9400 Chipset is limited to Windows 32 Bit OS or if the GeForce 9400 Chipset can take full advantage of the Windows 64 bit OS.
Please be informed the new Macbook Pro?s feature both motherboard GPUs (GeForce 9400M) and a discrete GPUs (GeForce 9600M GT). Apple has chosen to design their own hybrid graphics technology. As a result, this feature will only work under Mac OS and not under Windows OS and this is Hardware Limitation. Motherboard chipsets have to meet certain requirements to support this feature.
Regarding the support for Windows Vista 64-bit OS, yes the new Macbook Pro supports the Windows Vista 64 bit OS. Apple supports Windows Vista x64 only on their Pro hardware. Apple has started supporting Windows Vista x64 with the introduction of the Mac Pro 3,1.
Please feel free to contact us for any further clarifications.
The MBP does have Firewire, it has a fw800 port. A fw800->fw400 cable will run you about $10. No need to replace the camera back. Hell, the most likely scenario for a photog is that they will attach a fw800 hard drive to the MBP's fw800 port and then connect the camera to the fw400 port on the hard drive (almost every fw800 drive enclosure also has a fw400 port). So you wouldn't even need the adapter cable.
Thanks for the feedback. I wasn't aware that there was such a thing as an 800 to 400 adapter. A simple solution! And @RC03 .. of course I have a MBP and always will, as long as I can continue to connect my gear to it.
My set-up includes a PPC mini acting as a music/video/file server. It's connected via Ethernet to an Airport Extreme (Gigabit). However, keep in mind that your mini, like mine, only has Fast Ethernet (100 Mbps). The mini has 4 FW400 hard drives daisy chained for storage. I also have a PowerBook G4 and a MBP, both with Gigabit Ethernet and FW 400/800.
[snip]
In practical use, the MBP > N > Airport Extreme > Fast Ethernet > mini > FW400 drive chain can easily handle most Time Machine backups. Several times I've had 30-40+GB TM updates complete over that setup.
[more snip]
My usual set up can also handle wirelessly streaming a ripped DVD from a drive connected to the mini, playing the video_TS files in either FrontRow or DVDPlayer on my MBP with only an occassional dropped frame.
For bulk file transfers, my setup isn't as fast has directly connecting a FW drive to my MBP. However, I suspect if my mini could connect via Gigabit Ethernet then I'd have near FW400 speed whenever I plugged the MBP into the Extreme via Ethernet (N speeds still being the bottleneck over the wireless work).
Thanks for the input! Very glad to hear that this is actually a working solution for backups and some streaming. I was afraid that my potential plans (which would ultimately look a lot like your setup) would have snail speed. Then I guess I'll keep the Mini as my base station and let it handle the attached drives while I get a regular MB. And some time later maybe a Time Capsule to spice things up a bit.
Am I the only one who thinks its a bit awkward to be talking down about Intel hardware, while using that as the example for switching to Nvidia, in the same week that Apple has mentioned Nvidia video cards have been a problem in the past?
Thanks for the input! Very glad to hear that this is actually a working solution for backups and some streaming. I was afraid that my potential plans (which would ultimately look a lot like your setup) would have snail speed. Then I guess I'll keep the Mini as my base station and let it handle the attached drives while I get a regular MB. And some time later maybe a Time Capsule to spice things up a bit.
Keep in mind that if you use your mini as your base station (I assume you mean as your wireless router) that unless you've upgraded your mini it will only have wireless G, which will be much slower than N. Also, last time I looked into it, a software base station like that does not have all of the security options you'd get with a hardware router.
Comments
...as in "half the speed"? Or were you missing a "faster" somewhere in that sentence?
Okay, that sounds pretty scary. I'm willing to accept "YMMV" style disclaimers (and I do hope that others made better experiences), but thanks for this glimpse at least!
Sorry, I meant Firewire 400 being roughly 50% than USB2 (I'm prone think faster than I type).
My TC experience was two nights (maybe 8PM till 8AM) for the first backup (during the day the computer, like me, was not at home).
I went to the store to check them out, the glass screen is horrible, it reflex everything. Add the lack of fire wire and you just have an over priced Sony with OSX slapped on it. My guess is Apple is going after the PC crowd which is why it looks so PC but with those prices why would a PC user buy something that looks like every other PC but cost $600 more?
If this is the direction Apple is going with it's portables then my trusty MBP will be the last one I ever buy. Once this one goes I'll have to decide on a Mac Pro, a Dell or nothing.
Sony Vaio TZ screen is not glass and it has firewire.
Sorry, I meant Firewire 400 being roughly 50% than USB2 (I'm prone think faster than I type).
Here are some links:
http://barefeats.com/hard55.html
http://barefeats.com/hard66.html
http://barefeats.com/note04.html
Please note that speeds for USB 2 have improved somewhat on Intel Macs compared to PPC Macs but are still noticeably slower than Firewire 400 (links are in chronological order). Firewire 800 is the fastest bus-powered, daisy-chainable interface. E-SATA, essentially the internal harddrive connection with a longer cable is faster for fast storage setups like RAID.
Here are some links:
http://barefeats.com/hard55.html
http://barefeats.com/hard66.html
http://barefeats.com/note04.html
Please note that speeds for USB 2 have improved somewhat on Intel Macs compared to PPC Macs but are still noticeably slower than Firewire 400 (links are in chronological order). Firewire 800 is the fastest bus-powered, daisy-chainable interface. E-SATA, essentially the internal harddrive connection with a longer cable is faster for fast storage setups like RAID.
Ahhhhh, thanks a bunch, that clears up a lot! Review sites like that are usually not my thing (because I rarely feel the need to compare performance specs), but I think I might/should check them out a bit more in-depth later on.
Since when?
"FireWire does not slow the entire bus down to the speed of the slowest device attached."
Since when?
Since Apple said so
_________________
Careful, yet another newbie coming through! *stumbles through the crowd*
This sounds like a good point to ask a question that has been nagging me since the "No FireWire" revelation this week.
I currently got a Mac Mini (first-gen) with an external FW drive (M9-DX with FW-400 and USB 2.0), and I'm considering to switch to a Macbook. My lesser question is how USB 2.0 performance is in real life, compared to FW-400 (Yes, I could just check that myself, but I'm lazy right now, and since I'm posting here anyway...
My much bigger question pokes the quote there: How is Gigabit Ethernet doing against FireWire 400 in real life (as opposed to "nominally, but there is some unspecified overhead"), and would I really notice a difference? I'm considering to pick up a Time Capsule after getting the laptop, or I might keep the Mini+M9 setup around as a sort of at-home base station (or hey, maybe both - more storage space is always welcome, especially once Time Machine goes wild, I figure).
Background: I mostly use the FW drive for storing larger files (for example the odd movie file) and files I don't need on a daily basis. I would like to watch said (non-HD) movies directly from that disk, and I'd like not to wait ten hours just to copy a GB to it. No heavy-duty real-time movie editing/recording, no 10GB Photoshop files, nothing fancy-intensive. I'm also not the kind of guy who sits next to the computer with a stopwatch while a file is being copied, so I wouldn't really care if one of them copied File X in 10 minutes while the other one needed 11 minutes. As long as we're not talking about factors, I'd be cool.
So: Could I switch to a non-FW Macbook without worrying about the lack of FW?
Apple has made improvements to their USB implementation over recent years. A couple of years ago you were lucky to get 1/2 of FW400 speed. On current gen Macs it's almost caught up. But remember it's also more CPU dependent than FW, so if your CPU is already loaded with tasks, data transfer will be even slower. FW's advantage increases with larger file sizes.
My set-up includes a PPC mini acting as a music/video/file server. It's connected via Ethernet to an Airport Extreme (Gigabit). However, keep in mind that your mini, like mine, only has Fast Ethernet (100 Mbps). The mini has 4 FW400 hard drives daisy chained for storage. I also have a PowerBook G4 and a MBP, both with Gigabit Ethernet and FW 400/800. When I first got theh MBP in March I did a bunch of stopwatch-based speed tests. I don't have the results in front of me, but in general I found:
- USB on the MBP is much faster than USB on the PB
- FW400 on the MBP was still faster than USB
- Gigabit Ethernet was about as fast at FW400. However, Ethernet performance lags FW400 when transferring a large number of small files.
- Wireless N is about as fast as Fast Ethernet. Note, wireless is even less efficient than Ethernet when transferring a large number of small files.
In practical use, the MBP > N > Airport Extreme > Fast Ethernet > mini > FW400 drive chain can easily handle most Time Machine backups. Several times I've had 30-40+GB TM updates complete over that setup. The only hickup is rarely the "Preparing" stop of a TM backup takes forever. In those instances, replacing the N wireless link with an Ethernet cable for that one backup makes things go more quickly (I suspect if a large number of files need updating in the back up then the huge inefficiencies in the wireless protcol is killing me).
My usual set up can also handle wirelessly streaming a ripped DVD from a drive connected to the mini, playing the video_TS files in either FrontRow or DVDPlayer on my MBP with only an occassional dropped frame.
For bulk file transfers, my setup isn't as fast has directly connecting a FW drive to my MBP. However, I suspect if my mini could connect via Gigabit Ethernet then I'd have near FW400 speed whenever I plugged the MBP into the Extreme via Ethernet (N speeds still being the bottleneck over the wireless work).
While there are some workarounds to the MacBook's lack of FireWire Target Disk Mode, the missing port is also a problem for users with FireWire peripherals.
First time here - bear with me.
I've not seen mention of firewire external disks. We have a house full of firewire external drives, for various backups and and archives. Job's rationalization about camcorders not needing firewire hardly covers that. The lack of a Target drive is a big problem, but suddenly useless hard drive is a bigger problem.
Upgrading to a MacBookPro isn't a solution. We use MacBooks because of the 13-inch screen and extensive travelling, where the size and weight of a 15-inch "pro" is unacceptable.
Is there a solution to using the smaller/lighter MacBook and still having a fast and simple backup/archiving solution?
Just a correction...
In your first diagram it states that the late 2008 MacBooks use DDR2 1067 RAM when in fact they use DDR3 1067
The previous MacBooks also used a 800MHz FSB coupled with DDR2-667 memory rather than a 533MHz FSB and DDR2-533. In fact, I'm pretty sure no Intel Mac laptop has shipped with a 533MHz FSB or DDR2-533 memory.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/...907170824.html
I should point out that the advantage of smaller footprint with the nVidia chispet could have been achieved just as easily by staying with Montevina, since the GS45 variant with a small form factor ICH9M southbridge has a 1415mm² total area compared to 3342mm² total area for a full size GM45/ICH9M combination. The small form factor GS45 also has the same feature set as the full GM45, including the ability to switch between the IGP and a discrete GPU just like nVidia chipsets.
It is so surprising that Jobs is unaware or unconcerned that the 15" MBP is the industry standard notebook for 1000's of high-end commercial photographers using medium format digital backs. Most of these backs have only one way to interface while shooting tethered and that is Firewire 400. Photographers will not be running out to replace their $25k digital back, they will be looking at other laptops and I guess it won't be an Apple.
Most of my gear from 2,5" harddiscs to cameras feature FW400. But even if I'd upgrade to the new MBP I would have to use an adapter, and would be stuck with this even-more-glossy-than-before screen. So I'll stick to my old MBP as long as possible and then...we'll see..
Seems that Apple only wants the machines used by students and for home entertainment.
It is so surprising that Jobs is unaware or unconcerned that the 15" MBP is the industry standard notebook for 1000's of high-end commercial photographers using medium format digital backs. Most of these backs have only one way to interface while shooting tethered and that is Firewire 400. Photographers will not be running out to replace their $25k digital back, they will be looking at other laptops and I guess it won't be an Apple.
Yeah, but doesn't the 15" MBP still come with FW800? Don't the folks dropping $25K on a digital back (and god knows how much on glass) have the extra $500 to pony up for the MBP anyway?
It is so surprising that Jobs is unaware or unconcerned that the 15" MBP is the industry standard notebook for 1000's of high-end commercial photographers using medium format digital backs. Most of these backs have only one way to interface while shooting tethered and that is Firewire 400. Photographers will not be running out to replace their $25k digital back, they will be looking at other laptops and I guess it won't be an Apple.
The MBP does have Firewire, it has a fw800 port. A fw800->fw400 cable will run you about $10. No need to replace the camera back. Hell, the most likely scenario for a photog is that they will attach a fw800 hard drive to the MBP's fw800 port and then connect the camera to the fw400 port on the hard drive (almost every fw800 drive enclosure also has a fw400 port). So you wouldn't even need the adapter cable.
Since Apple said so
Where did they say that?
Regarding the Hybrid SLi limitation of the new MacBook Pro, that's an Hardware or a software limitation?
In case of software,is nvidia planning the release of a bootcamp Driver for windows Vista 32/64 bits?
And on last question.
Is the Chipset and Mobo, limited to 32Bits, then limiting the amount of RAM? Will 64bits OS take full advantage of this new Nvidia 9400 (Graphics / Chipset) ?
Thanks for you time
Nvidia Response:
Hello Jorge,
Thank you for contacting NVIDIA Customer Care.
This is Farzana and I will be assisting you with the query you have.
I understand from your email that you would like to know if the Hybrid SLI limitation on the new MacBook Pro is hardware or software limitation. Also, you would like to know if the GeForce 9400 Chipset is limited to Windows 32 Bit OS or if the GeForce 9400 Chipset can take full advantage of the Windows 64 bit OS.
Please be informed the new Macbook Pro?s feature both motherboard GPUs (GeForce 9400M) and a discrete GPUs (GeForce 9600M GT). Apple has chosen to design their own hybrid graphics technology. As a result, this feature will only work under Mac OS and not under Windows OS and this is Hardware Limitation. Motherboard chipsets have to meet certain requirements to support this feature.
Regarding the support for Windows Vista 64-bit OS, yes the new Macbook Pro supports the Windows Vista 64 bit OS. Apple supports Windows Vista x64 only on their Pro hardware. Apple has started supporting Windows Vista x64 with the introduction of the Mac Pro 3,1.
Please feel free to contact us for any further clarifications.
Best regards,
Farzana,
NVIDIA Customer Care
As a result, this feature will only work under Mac OS and not under Windows OS and this is Hardware Limitation.
The MBP does have Firewire, it has a fw800 port. A fw800->fw400 cable will run you about $10. No need to replace the camera back. Hell, the most likely scenario for a photog is that they will attach a fw800 hard drive to the MBP's fw800 port and then connect the camera to the fw400 port on the hard drive (almost every fw800 drive enclosure also has a fw400 port). So you wouldn't even need the adapter cable.
Thanks for the feedback. I wasn't aware that there was such a thing as an 800 to 400 adapter. A simple solution! And @RC03 .. of course I have a MBP and always will, as long as I can continue to connect my gear to it.
My set-up includes a PPC mini acting as a music/video/file server. It's connected via Ethernet to an Airport Extreme (Gigabit). However, keep in mind that your mini, like mine, only has Fast Ethernet (100 Mbps). The mini has 4 FW400 hard drives daisy chained for storage. I also have a PowerBook G4 and a MBP, both with Gigabit Ethernet and FW 400/800.
[snip]
In practical use, the MBP > N > Airport Extreme > Fast Ethernet > mini > FW400 drive chain can easily handle most Time Machine backups. Several times I've had 30-40+GB TM updates complete over that setup.
[more snip]
My usual set up can also handle wirelessly streaming a ripped DVD from a drive connected to the mini, playing the video_TS files in either FrontRow or DVDPlayer on my MBP with only an occassional dropped frame.
For bulk file transfers, my setup isn't as fast has directly connecting a FW drive to my MBP. However, I suspect if my mini could connect via Gigabit Ethernet then I'd have near FW400 speed whenever I plugged the MBP into the Extreme via Ethernet (N speeds still being the bottleneck over the wireless work).
Thanks for the input! Very glad to hear that this is actually a working solution for backups and some streaming. I was afraid that my potential plans (which would ultimately look a lot like your setup) would have snail speed. Then I guess I'll keep the Mini as my base station and let it handle the attached drives while I get a regular MB. And some time later maybe a Time Capsule to spice things up a bit.
Thanks for the input! Very glad to hear that this is actually a working solution for backups and some streaming. I was afraid that my potential plans (which would ultimately look a lot like your setup) would have snail speed. Then I guess I'll keep the Mini as my base station and let it handle the attached drives while I get a regular MB. And some time later maybe a Time Capsule to spice things up a bit.
Keep in mind that if you use your mini as your base station (I assume you mean as your wireless router) that unless you've upgraded your mini it will only have wireless G, which will be much slower than N. Also, last time I looked into it, a software base station like that does not have all of the security options you'd get with a hardware router.