I HATE THE CURRENT LOOK- HATE IT- FUGLY TO THE MAX.
You still like the chin though and a massive Apple logo staring at you? These are two of my biggest problems with the iMac design as it is. The Cinema display has a uniform bezel (symmetry = attractive - this is a universal rule) and a very small discreet logo.
Every other machine they have is symmetric. Look at the Macbooks:
They tried to make the black bezel symmetric by separating it from the metallic body and it looks terrible. But they did a great job with the Cinema display:
I don't know how easy it will be for them to get rid of the chin as they'll have to have 20" displays on the low end for price but if they keep the chin on the bottom, it's still going to be pretty ugly IMO. Maybe if they reduce it a bit, it could help but no chin means that people really start to wonder where the computer actually is. Otherwise, they just point to the chin and assume it's in there.
If they can't fit stuff in, they should move the hard drive and optical drive into the stand at the bottom so you get an easily accessible hard drive and a front-facing optical drive.
I don't know how easy it will be for them to get rid of the chin as they'll have to have 20" displays on the low end for price but if they keep the chin on the bottom, it's still going to be pretty ugly IMO. Maybe if they reduce it a bit, it could help but no chin means that people really start to wonder where the computer actually is. Otherwise, they just point to the chin and assume it's in there.
If they can't fit stuff in, they should move the hard drive and optical drive into the stand at the bottom so you get an easily accessible hard drive and a front-facing optical drive.
I think they'd have to make it thicker. Curse Ive and his obsession with thin computers.
You've just made a bunch of unfounded assumptions.
Not at all
Quote:
Obviously, even in the flat PC market, PCs do get replaced by newer PCs. Big deal. Where are you getting 20% from and are we talking globally, in the US, what?
PCs (not Macs) used to be on a 3-year cycle. Last time I've read about it, it was up to 4. I'm assuming that with the bad economy it's going up to 5. Look around wherever you work. Do you see many more-than-5-year-old PCs?
Quote:
Who can say whether that made up percentage will remain constant over the next five years?
Although slowly, businesses are moving to Vista (and later Windows 7). Those don't run very well on 5- or even 3-year-old hardware. Another factor that will help push upgrades is the beginnings of adopting IPv6, which is going on in Japan, and beginning in other countries. IPv6 support in XP is almost non-existant.
Quote:
How long has it taken the PC manufacturers to move from USB1 to USB2, VGA to DVI, CRT to LCD, roller-ball mouse to optical, analog audio to digital audio (I can keep going and going and going)?
USB1 to USB2: a very short time. Apple was rather unique in taking years to introduce USB2.
VGA to DVI: Pretty slow. Might have had something to do with most monitors being VGA. USB3 is a plug-in replacement for USB2. old devices will work with new computers (at old speeds) without an adapter.
CRT to LCD: For years (up until around 2005) CRTs had a quality advantage over LCDs, as well as a cost advantage. It was cheaper & better versus thin.
As soon as practical, major manufacturers (logitech, microsoft) offered both types. Some still do offer roller-balls for the low power drain.
analog audio vs digital: again that has to do with available peripherals.
Quote:
Who knows if we'll even need wires 5-7 years from now for connecting our iPhones/iPods, digital cameras, printers, or what have you?
Yes, there's also WUSB coming at some point, but it won't be as fast as the wired USB of the same time. Just as wifi is nowhere near Ethernet speeds.
Quote:
This feels an awful lot like assuming Blu-ray will inevitably be adopted by everyone simply because it feels more "familiar" for people who are transitioning from DVDs than digital distribution.
As it is, it might, and it might not. If you could use Blu-ray disks with DVD drives and DVDs in Blu-ray drives, do you have any doubt that they would rather quickly replace DVDs?
PCs (not Macs) used to be on a 3-year cycle. Last time I've read about it, it was up to 4. I'm assuming that with the bad economy it's going up to 5. Look around wherever you work. Do you see many more-than-5-year-old PCs?
There is no official, set number of years people keep their computers. Nor if there was one would it guarantee those computers would be replaced by ones equipped with USB3.
Quote:
Originally Posted by synp
Although slowly, businesses are moving to Vista (and later Windows 7). Those don't run very well on 5- or even 3-year-old hardware. Another factor that will help push upgrades is the beginnings of adopting IPv6, which is going on in Japan, and beginning in other countries. IPv6 support in XP is almost non-existant.
Not only is Vista adoption slow, in many cases, it's moving backwards as businesses downgrade their new Vista PCs back to XP. You're also not factoring in the consumer market, which is far larger than the enterprise and less stubborn about going with an alternative like a Mac. Many businesses have simply said they'll wait for Windows 7, which is unlikely to make it out in 2009 unless its half backed like Vista was.
Quote:
Originally Posted by synp
USB1 to USB2: a very short time. Apple was rather unique in taking years to introduce USB2.
VGA to DVI: Pretty slow. Might have had something to do with most monitors being VGA. USB3 is a plug-in replacement for USB2. old devices will work with new computers (at old speeds) without an adapter.
CRT to LCD: For years (up until around 2005) CRTs had a quality advantage over LCDs, as well as a cost advantage. It was cheaper & better versus thin.
As soon as practical, major manufacturers (logitech, microsoft) offered both types. Some still do offer roller-balls for the low power drain.
analog audio vs digital: again that has to do with available peripherals.
Hmm, well I'm typing this on my nearly four year old PowerBook G4 that has nothing but USB2 while the two year old Dell in the office has USB ports in the front that tell me "this device will work faster on high-speed ports." Also has a roller mouse, PS/2 ports, VGA, and shipped with a CRT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by synp
Yes, there's also WUSB coming at some point, but it won't be as fast as the wired USB of the same time. Just as wifi is nowhere near Ethernet speeds.
There are already better alternatives that exist today. The iPhone/iPod touch have WiFi, many new printers have WiFi, and digital cameras have WiFi-enabled flash cards (though they are likely not as fast as WiFi printers and iPhones/iPods).
Quote:
Originally Posted by synp
As it is, it might, and it might not. If you could use Blu-ray disks with DVD drives and DVDs in Blu-ray drives, do you have any doubt that they would rather quickly replace DVDs?
Yeah, I do question whether people would be willing to pay $15-$20 more for BDs when they don't have an HDTV or sound system good enough to appreciate the advantage. Digital distribution is already less expensive on the hardware side, the content side, etc. USB3 doesn't even have the obvious, easily marketable draw Blu-ray does. When will we see USB3 equipped printers, digital cameras, iPhones and iPods and who will care? I might be wrong, but I don't think we're going to hear so much as a peep about USB3 in 2009.
Hmm, well I'm typing this on my nearly four year old PowerBook G4 that has nothing but USB2 while the two year old Dell in the office has USB ports in the front that tell me "this device will work faster on high-speed ports." Also has a roller mouse, PS/2 ports, VGA, and shipped with a CRT.
Wow, do you also drive a Model A Ford?
I think USB 3 will arrive and be adopted fast and furious. It will be a major selling point for new PCs and peripherals. Only the cheapest hardware will go without for a short while.
I think USB 3 will arrive and be adopted fast and furious. It will be a major selling point for new PCs and peripherals. Only the cheapest hardware will go without for a short while.
Your last sentence was incomplete. It should have read:
Only the cheapest hardware along with the majority of Apple's lineup will go without for a short while.
I think USB 3 will arrive and be adopted fast and furious. It will be a major selling point for new PCs and peripherals. Only the cheapest hardware will go without for a short while.
Hey no fair, it was given to me by a relative (who was given it by mistake when she returned her Dell laptop and was shipped back both a new laptop and that desktop PC by mistake). She has no knowledge of computers nor how much I hate Dells.
Hah, oh yeah, the last PC in this house (well other than the gift Dell, if you can really call a Dell such a thing) was a 2000 Compaq Pissario running Win95 (and not by my choice either).
I think USB 3 will arrive and be adopted fast and furious. It will be a major selling point for new PCs and peripherals. Only the cheapest hardware will go without for a short while.
What made USB popular in the first place was intels support for it in the chipsets it offered up. In effect USB gets added to a motherboard for the cost of a connector and a few control transistors. USB3 will be the same way, it will for the most part cost nothing on a new motherboard.
FireWire never had this advantage and likely never will unless Apple builds the controller into a chipset. Now that is not impossible but I've yet to see an indication that Apple is taking this route. Currently they have tied up with nvidia so I'm not sure we can expect much in the way of chipsets from Apple.
Your last sentence was incomplete. It should have read:
Only the cheapest hardware along with the majority of Apple's lineup will go without for a short while.
No kidding. I have an iBook with USB1.1, made well after USB2 was adopted by the rest of the computer industry. The first Macs with USB3 will be Mac Pros whose owners spring for PCIe cards.
No kidding. I have an iBook with USB1.1, made well after USB2 was adopted by the rest of the computer industry.
Keep in mind, that was the days when Apple was still trying to promote Firewire as a standard, so they resisted moving to a faster USB on Macs. In hindsight, it was a mistake. Now that Apple is apparently giving up on Firewire, I think the company will be among the first to embrace USB 3.
What made USB popular in the first place was intels support for it...
Yes. And I believe part of Apple's error with FireWire was, as I recall, charging a licensing fee to install a FireWire port, which manufacturers did not wish to pay (since the USB port was lower/no cost).
(I used to have some notes about that... not sure where now though... probably on one of my several FireWire drives... ahh here it is... )
Initially $1 fee per port, then lowered to $.25 per computer that used FW, then later (somewhen) reduced to free. But by then momentum was already over in the USB camp. (had they licensed FW for free from the start, rather than trying to make it a profit center - well history would be different ... )
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow
I think they'd have to make it thicker. Curse Ive and his obsession with thin computers.
I agree - the obsession at Apple (whomever's it is) with their computers having to be thin, thinner, thinnest has resulted in a lot of compromises (IMO). Hotter devices because of less air flow, that long stretch of limited optical drive options, fewer ports (though that may also be the 'they don't need to connect anything' mentality). I guess my issue with many of their design decisions is that it seems they are not making computers for "the rest of us" (as they used to advertise) but mostly for their own aesthetics and minimalist ideas. Thus the Macs frequently have less ports, less connectability options. I know this is just my opinion and others may disagree.
Only reason I mention this is that these trends seem to me to be some of the reasons that Apple Macs have not had as strong a market growth over the decades as i have wished (since the Mac is, after all, my more preferred computer...).
So I look forward to a time when maybe Apple does start designing 'for the rest of us', and starts to make them easier to connect with the many peripheral devices (HDs, cameras, video/audio, etc) that many of us have and use.
Thus bringing my comments full circle to hoping that the new Mac Mini and iMac have FireWire built-in, full speed HD, good optical drive built-in, lots of connectability options built-in (not by using some after market dongle adapter). One can always hope.
Keep in mind, that was the days when Apple was still trying to promote Firewire as a standard, so they resisted moving to a faster USB on Macs. In hindsight, it was a mistake. Now that Apple is apparently giving up on Firewire, I think the company will be among the first to embrace USB 3.
In hindsight it looks like a mistake but I'm not to sure the promotion of Firewire was a big factor. Remember back then Apple was having all sorts of issues with operating system development. In my mind things really didn't start to improve with USB until the advent of OS/X and it's slow advance to the stable platform we have today. FireWire was certainly a factor but there was a long dark period there with OS development.
The other problem from my standpoint is that Apple didn't market Firewire very well. Everything from the high buy in costs and fees to the products they offered up. That would have included cross platform hardware and software. Apple really should have Bern supporting Firewire I/O cards and drivers on PCs. Apple branded products where also lacking so it is no wonder that Firewire got a poor reception, Apple itself never embraced it in a positive way.
As to embracing USB3, yeah I exspect Apple to go all in. That has a lot to do with the standardization on intel hardware though. I'm just not sure that Apple is ready to give up on Firewire yet. Let's face it there was enough interest to see Firewire 3200 through. There is really nothing to keep Apple from implementing both interfaces for a very long time.
As to AIR and the MacBooks well there are a bunch of perspectives here worth considering. One consideration is power management. Each port be it USB or Firewire has a significant power budget, on devices like AIR even a modest amount of connected devices will kill the battery fast, not to mention that the power circuits need to support each port and this increase in size. AIR simply didn't have the budget for FireWire.
MacBook fares a little better power budget wise but still a milliamp is a milliamp and they add up. So one can argue that MacBook could easily support Firewire, can't argue that. The problem is if you want a streamedlined machine with a minimal of parts a MacBook has to go on diet. That means shedding chips which was accomplished in part be going 9400M and dropping Firewire. A motherboard with minimal parts is cheaper to produce and frankly most likely allows Apple the luxury of that expensive Aluminum case. I see the lost of Firewire on MacBook as more an issue of economics than anything.
Maybe the future device releases will highlight things in a different manner and change my opinion but you can't look at AIR & MacBooks as trends. Especially AIR which is a bit of a joke. By the end of Janurary we should know where Apple stands.
As to AIR and the MacBooks well there are a bunch of perspectives here worth considering. One consideration is power management. Each port be it USB or Firewire has a significant power budget, on devices like AIR even a modest amount of connected devices will kill the battery fast, not to mention that the power circuits need to support each port and this increase in size. AIR simply didn't have the budget for FireWire.
I can see that being a factor for hanging multiple devices in a daisy chain. On the other hand, a portable HDD with dual inputs isn't going to draw more power from the host computer just because it's connected via Firewire instead of USB.
Is the chipset more expensive for a Firewire device? I seem to recall it is as it needs to "do more" being peer-to-peer capable. Apart from the licensing issue, did simple economics drive Firewire to the back seat opposite USB?
Yes. And I believe part of Apple's error with FireWire was, as I recall, charging a licensing fee to install a FireWire port, which manufacturers did not wish to pay (since the USB port was lower/no cost).
Yes that was a huge mistake especially when compounded with the fact that you had to buy Fitewire interface chips. Even now it is impossible, to the best of my knowledge, to buy a microprocessor / microcomputer / SoC with Firewire built in. With USB I can find dozens of microprocessors with free built in USB ports. The point is the buy in is easy no matter if you are building a computer or a device to hook up to it.
It certainly wouldn't of hurt Apple to sponser a few micro processor development projects so that cheap chips with Firewire built in would become available. I'm actually surprised they didn't work out something with TI as the have the Firewire chip and a reasonable embedded business.
Quote:
(I used to have some notes about that... not sure where now though... probably on one of my several FireWire drives... ahh here it is... )
Initially $1 fee per port, then lowered to $.25 per computer that used FW, then later (somewhen) reduced to free. But by then momentum was already over in the USB camp.
Exactly! Even more important than the cheap ports on the PC is that USB became widely available for embedded ICs. Thus within a few months the market had all sorts of USB devices. Everything from a mouse to a weather station. Sure these where not high performance devices but that is part of the point, Firewire was and is expensive to implement relative to USB. Especially for low end hardware.
Quote:
(had they licensed FW for free from the start, rather than trying to make it a profit center - well history would be different ... )
Somewhat different! They still would have had a hard time overcoming USBs low cost advantage. There is a huge advatage for devices that sell in the hundreds of millions and cost little to produce. FireWire would have needed integration into a number of microprocessors to even come close to what we get from USB right now. Even today Firewire really only stands a chance on the more expensive pheripherials.
Quote:
I agree - the obsession at Apple (whomever's it is) with their computers having to be thin, thinner, thinnest has resulted in a lot of compromises (IMO). Hotter devices because of less air flow, that long stretch of limited optical drive options, fewer ports (though that may also be the 'they don't need to connect anything' mentality). I guess my issue with many of their design decisions is that it seems they are not making computers for "the rest of us" (as they used to advertise) but mostly for their own aesthetics and minimalist ideas.
Not to make excuses here but part of the problem is that they compressed the model line up some time ago when they had no choice. Frankly Steve saved the company and dramatically turned it around by doing so. That was some time ago and things are indeed ripe for a change. Even though the economy is supposedly in a tough situation right now they really need to think about the rest of us and our varied needs. That means a midrange Mac and a reworked Mini.
While long in the tooth I don't see the Mini as a bad machine or concept but it does need a little rethinking for some of the more current usage patterns. That means use a real disk drive in the thing so that reasonable capacity can be had cheaply. Sure that means a slightly larger housing but that could then make room for desktop RAM. We aren't talking blowing out the devices size but rather making it just big enough for that 3.5" drive. Going nVidia ought to make room for common RAM.
Where Apple is really hurting is with the midrange hardware. Well actually it doestnt have anything headless. Ideally this would be a machine for those that need a bit more than a Mini on the desktop. This Guy should be no more than $1100 and include slots and disk drive slots.
Quote:
Thus the Macs frequently have less ports, less connectability options. I know this is just my opinion and others may disagree.
One can't disagree with the facts of port allotments. Sometimes I'm not sure if it is thinness or power allotment. For example each USB port requires budgetting for at least 500 milliamps of current. This impacts power supply and motherboard design. I don't want to call Apple cheap but other than trying to be green I don't see the rational.
Quote:
Only reason I mention this is that these trends seem to me to be some of the reasons that Apple Macs have not had as strong a market growth over the decades as i have wished (since the Mac is, after all, my more preferred computer...).
Part of Apples problem is that they have only recently gain respect in the larger community which is important to sales. For a long time their very survival was questioned. It is certainly a recurring theme at Apple though. The first Mac Mini was way to short on USB ports, the laptops for the most part could use one more with the exception of AIR which was and is a huge joke. The problem with Apple is where do you go for alternatives.
Quote:
So I look forward to a time when maybe Apple does start designing 'for the rest of us', and starts to make them easier to connect with the many peripheral devices (HDs, cameras, video/audio, etc) that many of us have and use.
Hey you can connect any device you want one at a time!
Seriously though I've been a long time promoter of more USB ports on Apples hardware. For many of us it is the right solution. Only recently though have I come to realize that Apple apparently does not see it that way. I really believe that Apple wants to become more network centric and wants us to graze with the rest of the flock. It will be interesting to see how it works out over the years.
[qoute]
Thus bringing my comments full circle to hoping that the new Mac Mini and iMac have FireWire built-in, full speed HD, good optical drive built-in, lots of connectability options built-in (not by using some after market dongle adapter). One can always hope.[/QUOTE]
Well one can also make their desires known at Apple. They need to know that for most people AIR was and still is a mistake. There is no good excuse for that machine. They need to know that doing to the desktops what was done to MacBook is not acceptable! Further they need to know that we want them to go forward with the newest release of ports like Firewire. So speak up.
Now don't think that that will do any good for machines coming next month as those have already been validated for production. Rev B might be impacted though. In any event I'm not willing to say that MacBooks lack of Firewire is a trend. I still think it was just a way to pay forban expensive case. We will know shortly.
Comments
Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you, the new Aluminum Unibody & Glass
iMac 20" with LED display and Nvidia 9600 GT 256MB~512MB VRAM.
LOOKS AMAZING!. I hope this is the new look.
I HATE THE CURRENT LOOK- HATE IT- FUGLY TO THE MAX.
Apple sold a ton of them I know - but W was elected twice so what does that mean? Paris Hilton is considered a celebrity and on and on.
Apple was much better before it appealed to the masses. "Think Different" - remember?
Regurgitating the WHite iMac to the current bastardization was a financial success but a sell out on integrity.
It was like new formula Coke . Bring back the innovative Imac- please.
Exactly how many technical limitations are there? I've not really had a problem with it.
As it is right now, I have one computer sharing centralized data with several others.
The only limitations of eSATA that I'm aware of are:
1) No power over the cable
2) Relatively short cable length- 2M
3) Hot-swap is iffy on old (1.5Gbps) SATA drives
LOOKS AMAZING!. I hope this is the new look.
I HATE THE CURRENT LOOK- HATE IT- FUGLY TO THE MAX.
You still like the chin though and a massive Apple logo staring at you? These are two of my biggest problems with the iMac design as it is. The Cinema display has a uniform bezel (symmetry = attractive - this is a universal rule) and a very small discreet logo.
Every other machine they have is symmetric. Look at the Macbooks:
http://www.apple.com/uk/macbook/
the iphone:
http://www.apple.com/uk/iphone/
All exactly symmetric bezels.
Now look at the iMac:
http://www.apple.com/uk/imac/
They tried to make the black bezel symmetric by separating it from the metallic body and it looks terrible. But they did a great job with the Cinema display:
http://www.apple.com/uk/displays/
I don't know how easy it will be for them to get rid of the chin as they'll have to have 20" displays on the low end for price but if they keep the chin on the bottom, it's still going to be pretty ugly IMO. Maybe if they reduce it a bit, it could help but no chin means that people really start to wonder where the computer actually is. Otherwise, they just point to the chin and assume it's in there.
If they can't fit stuff in, they should move the hard drive and optical drive into the stand at the bottom so you get an easily accessible hard drive and a front-facing optical drive.
I don't know how easy it will be for them to get rid of the chin as they'll have to have 20" displays on the low end for price but if they keep the chin on the bottom, it's still going to be pretty ugly IMO. Maybe if they reduce it a bit, it could help but no chin means that people really start to wonder where the computer actually is. Otherwise, they just point to the chin and assume it's in there.
If they can't fit stuff in, they should move the hard drive and optical drive into the stand at the bottom so you get an easily accessible hard drive and a front-facing optical drive.
I think they'd have to make it thicker. Curse Ive and his obsession with thin computers.
You've just made a bunch of unfounded assumptions.
Not at all
Obviously, even in the flat PC market, PCs do get replaced by newer PCs. Big deal. Where are you getting 20% from and are we talking globally, in the US, what?
PCs (not Macs) used to be on a 3-year cycle. Last time I've read about it, it was up to 4. I'm assuming that with the bad economy it's going up to 5. Look around wherever you work. Do you see many more-than-5-year-old PCs?
Who can say whether that made up percentage will remain constant over the next five years?
Although slowly, businesses are moving to Vista (and later Windows 7). Those don't run very well on 5- or even 3-year-old hardware. Another factor that will help push upgrades is the beginnings of adopting IPv6, which is going on in Japan, and beginning in other countries. IPv6 support in XP is almost non-existant.
How long has it taken the PC manufacturers to move from USB1 to USB2, VGA to DVI, CRT to LCD, roller-ball mouse to optical, analog audio to digital audio (I can keep going and going and going)?
Who knows if we'll even need wires 5-7 years from now for connecting our iPhones/iPods, digital cameras, printers, or what have you?
Yes, there's also WUSB coming at some point, but it won't be as fast as the wired USB of the same time. Just as wifi is nowhere near Ethernet speeds.
This feels an awful lot like assuming Blu-ray will inevitably be adopted by everyone simply because it feels more "familiar" for people who are transitioning from DVDs than digital distribution.
As it is, it might, and it might not. If you could use Blu-ray disks with DVD drives and DVDs in Blu-ray drives, do you have any doubt that they would rather quickly replace DVDs?
PCs (not Macs) used to be on a 3-year cycle. Last time I've read about it, it was up to 4. I'm assuming that with the bad economy it's going up to 5. Look around wherever you work. Do you see many more-than-5-year-old PCs?
There is no official, set number of years people keep their computers. Nor if there was one would it guarantee those computers would be replaced by ones equipped with USB3.
Although slowly, businesses are moving to Vista (and later Windows 7). Those don't run very well on 5- or even 3-year-old hardware. Another factor that will help push upgrades is the beginnings of adopting IPv6, which is going on in Japan, and beginning in other countries. IPv6 support in XP is almost non-existant.
Not only is Vista adoption slow, in many cases, it's moving backwards as businesses downgrade their new Vista PCs back to XP. You're also not factoring in the consumer market, which is far larger than the enterprise and less stubborn about going with an alternative like a Mac. Many businesses have simply said they'll wait for Windows 7, which is unlikely to make it out in 2009 unless its half backed like Vista was.
Hmm, well I'm typing this on my nearly four year old PowerBook G4 that has nothing but USB2 while the two year old Dell in the office has USB ports in the front that tell me "this device will work faster on high-speed ports." Also has a roller mouse, PS/2 ports, VGA, and shipped with a CRT.
Yes, there's also WUSB coming at some point, but it won't be as fast as the wired USB of the same time. Just as wifi is nowhere near Ethernet speeds.
There are already better alternatives that exist today. The iPhone/iPod touch have WiFi, many new printers have WiFi, and digital cameras have WiFi-enabled flash cards (though they are likely not as fast as WiFi printers and iPhones/iPods).
As it is, it might, and it might not. If you could use Blu-ray disks with DVD drives and DVDs in Blu-ray drives, do you have any doubt that they would rather quickly replace DVDs?
Yeah, I do question whether people would be willing to pay $15-$20 more for BDs when they don't have an HDTV or sound system good enough to appreciate the advantage. Digital distribution is already less expensive on the hardware side, the content side, etc. USB3 doesn't even have the obvious, easily marketable draw Blu-ray does. When will we see USB3 equipped printers, digital cameras, iPhones and iPods and who will care? I might be wrong, but I don't think we're going to hear so much as a peep about USB3 in 2009.
Hmm, well I'm typing this on my nearly four year old PowerBook G4 that has nothing but USB2 while the two year old Dell in the office has USB ports in the front that tell me "this device will work faster on high-speed ports." Also has a roller mouse, PS/2 ports, VGA, and shipped with a CRT.
Wow, do you also drive a Model A Ford?
I think USB 3 will arrive and be adopted fast and furious. It will be a major selling point for new PCs and peripherals. Only the cheapest hardware will go without for a short while.
I think USB 3 will arrive and be adopted fast and furious. It will be a major selling point for new PCs and peripherals. Only the cheapest hardware will go without for a short while.
Your last sentence was incomplete. It should have read:
Only the cheapest hardware along with the majority of Apple's lineup will go without for a short while.
Wow, do you also drive a Model A Ford?
I think USB 3 will arrive and be adopted fast and furious. It will be a major selling point for new PCs and peripherals. Only the cheapest hardware will go without for a short while.
Hey no fair, it was given to me by a relative (who was given it by mistake when she returned her Dell laptop and was shipped back both a new laptop and that desktop PC by mistake). She has no knowledge of computers nor how much I hate Dells.
Hey no fair, it was given to me by a relative...
Alright, as long as it was free.
Alright, as long as it was free.
Hah, oh yeah, the last PC in this house (well other than the gift Dell, if you can really call a Dell such a thing) was a 2000 Compaq Pissario running Win95 (and not by my choice either).
Wow, do you also drive a Model A Ford?
I think USB 3 will arrive and be adopted fast and furious. It will be a major selling point for new PCs and peripherals. Only the cheapest hardware will go without for a short while.
What made USB popular in the first place was intels support for it in the chipsets it offered up. In effect USB gets added to a motherboard for the cost of a connector and a few control transistors. USB3 will be the same way, it will for the most part cost nothing on a new motherboard.
FireWire never had this advantage and likely never will unless Apple builds the controller into a chipset. Now that is not impossible but I've yet to see an indication that Apple is taking this route. Currently they have tied up with nvidia so I'm not sure we can expect much in the way of chipsets from Apple.
Dave
Your last sentence was incomplete. It should have read:
Only the cheapest hardware along with the majority of Apple's lineup will go without for a short while.
No kidding. I have an iBook with USB1.1, made well after USB2 was adopted by the rest of the computer industry. The first Macs with USB3 will be Mac Pros whose owners spring for PCIe cards.
No kidding. I have an iBook with USB1.1, made well after USB2 was adopted by the rest of the computer industry.
Keep in mind, that was the days when Apple was still trying to promote Firewire as a standard, so they resisted moving to a faster USB on Macs. In hindsight, it was a mistake. Now that Apple is apparently giving up on Firewire, I think the company will be among the first to embrace USB 3.
What made USB popular in the first place was intels support for it...
Yes. And I believe part of Apple's error with FireWire was, as I recall, charging a licensing fee to install a FireWire port, which manufacturers did not wish to pay (since the USB port was lower/no cost).
(I used to have some notes about that... not sure where now though... probably on one of my several FireWire drives... ahh here it is... )
Initially $1 fee per port, then lowered to $.25 per computer that used FW, then later (somewhen) reduced to free. But by then momentum was already over in the USB camp. (had they licensed FW for free from the start, rather than trying to make it a profit center - well history would be different ... )
I think they'd have to make it thicker. Curse Ive and his obsession with thin computers.
I agree - the obsession at Apple (whomever's it is) with their computers having to be thin, thinner, thinnest has resulted in a lot of compromises (IMO). Hotter devices because of less air flow, that long stretch of limited optical drive options, fewer ports (though that may also be the 'they don't need to connect anything' mentality). I guess my issue with many of their design decisions is that it seems they are not making computers for "the rest of us" (as they used to advertise) but mostly for their own aesthetics and minimalist ideas. Thus the Macs frequently have less ports, less connectability options. I know this is just my opinion and others may disagree.
Only reason I mention this is that these trends seem to me to be some of the reasons that Apple Macs have not had as strong a market growth over the decades as i have wished (since the Mac is, after all, my more preferred computer...).
So I look forward to a time when maybe Apple does start designing 'for the rest of us', and starts to make them easier to connect with the many peripheral devices (HDs, cameras, video/audio, etc) that many of us have and use.
Thus bringing my comments full circle to hoping that the new Mac Mini and iMac have FireWire built-in, full speed HD, good optical drive built-in, lots of connectability options built-in (not by using some after market dongle adapter). One can always hope.
Keep in mind, that was the days when Apple was still trying to promote Firewire as a standard, so they resisted moving to a faster USB on Macs. In hindsight, it was a mistake. Now that Apple is apparently giving up on Firewire, I think the company will be among the first to embrace USB 3.
In hindsight it looks like a mistake but I'm not to sure the promotion of Firewire was a big factor. Remember back then Apple was having all sorts of issues with operating system development. In my mind things really didn't start to improve with USB until the advent of OS/X and it's slow advance to the stable platform we have today. FireWire was certainly a factor but there was a long dark period there with OS development.
The other problem from my standpoint is that Apple didn't market Firewire very well. Everything from the high buy in costs and fees to the products they offered up. That would have included cross platform hardware and software. Apple really should have Bern supporting Firewire I/O cards and drivers on PCs. Apple branded products where also lacking so it is no wonder that Firewire got a poor reception, Apple itself never embraced it in a positive way.
As to embracing USB3, yeah I exspect Apple to go all in. That has a lot to do with the standardization on intel hardware though. I'm just not sure that Apple is ready to give up on Firewire yet. Let's face it there was enough interest to see Firewire 3200 through. There is really nothing to keep Apple from implementing both interfaces for a very long time.
As to AIR and the MacBooks well there are a bunch of perspectives here worth considering. One consideration is power management. Each port be it USB or Firewire has a significant power budget, on devices like AIR even a modest amount of connected devices will kill the battery fast, not to mention that the power circuits need to support each port and this increase in size. AIR simply didn't have the budget for FireWire.
MacBook fares a little better power budget wise but still a milliamp is a milliamp and they add up. So one can argue that MacBook could easily support Firewire, can't argue that. The problem is if you want a streamedlined machine with a minimal of parts a MacBook has to go on diet. That means shedding chips which was accomplished in part be going 9400M and dropping Firewire. A motherboard with minimal parts is cheaper to produce and frankly most likely allows Apple the luxury of that expensive Aluminum case. I see the lost of Firewire on MacBook as more an issue of economics than anything.
Maybe the future device releases will highlight things in a different manner and change my opinion but you can't look at AIR & MacBooks as trends. Especially AIR which is a bit of a joke. By the end of Janurary we should know where Apple stands.
Dave
It's a computer people. The circuitry has to go somewhere. The problem is the lack of access to the hard drive.
There is no problem with the aesthetics.
As to AIR and the MacBooks well there are a bunch of perspectives here worth considering. One consideration is power management. Each port be it USB or Firewire has a significant power budget, on devices like AIR even a modest amount of connected devices will kill the battery fast, not to mention that the power circuits need to support each port and this increase in size. AIR simply didn't have the budget for FireWire.
I can see that being a factor for hanging multiple devices in a daisy chain. On the other hand, a portable HDD with dual inputs isn't going to draw more power from the host computer just because it's connected via Firewire instead of USB.
Is the chipset more expensive for a Firewire device? I seem to recall it is as it needs to "do more" being peer-to-peer capable. Apart from the licensing issue, did simple economics drive Firewire to the back seat opposite USB?
Yes. And I believe part of Apple's error with FireWire was, as I recall, charging a licensing fee to install a FireWire port, which manufacturers did not wish to pay (since the USB port was lower/no cost).
Yes that was a huge mistake especially when compounded with the fact that you had to buy Fitewire interface chips. Even now it is impossible, to the best of my knowledge, to buy a microprocessor / microcomputer / SoC with Firewire built in. With USB I can find dozens of microprocessors with free built in USB ports. The point is the buy in is easy no matter if you are building a computer or a device to hook up to it.
It certainly wouldn't of hurt Apple to sponser a few micro processor development projects so that cheap chips with Firewire built in would become available. I'm actually surprised they didn't work out something with TI as the have the Firewire chip and a reasonable embedded business.
(I used to have some notes about that... not sure where now though... probably on one of my several FireWire drives... ahh here it is... )
Initially $1 fee per port, then lowered to $.25 per computer that used FW, then later (somewhen) reduced to free. But by then momentum was already over in the USB camp.
Exactly! Even more important than the cheap ports on the PC is that USB became widely available for embedded ICs. Thus within a few months the market had all sorts of USB devices. Everything from a mouse to a weather station. Sure these where not high performance devices but that is part of the point, Firewire was and is expensive to implement relative to USB. Especially for low end hardware.
(had they licensed FW for free from the start, rather than trying to make it a profit center - well history would be different ... )
Somewhat different! They still would have had a hard time overcoming USBs low cost advantage. There is a huge advatage for devices that sell in the hundreds of millions and cost little to produce. FireWire would have needed integration into a number of microprocessors to even come close to what we get from USB right now. Even today Firewire really only stands a chance on the more expensive pheripherials.
I agree - the obsession at Apple (whomever's it is) with their computers having to be thin, thinner, thinnest has resulted in a lot of compromises (IMO). Hotter devices because of less air flow, that long stretch of limited optical drive options, fewer ports (though that may also be the 'they don't need to connect anything' mentality). I guess my issue with many of their design decisions is that it seems they are not making computers for "the rest of us" (as they used to advertise) but mostly for their own aesthetics and minimalist ideas.
Not to make excuses here but part of the problem is that they compressed the model line up some time ago when they had no choice. Frankly Steve saved the company and dramatically turned it around by doing so. That was some time ago and things are indeed ripe for a change. Even though the economy is supposedly in a tough situation right now they really need to think about the rest of us and our varied needs. That means a midrange Mac and a reworked Mini.
While long in the tooth I don't see the Mini as a bad machine or concept but it does need a little rethinking for some of the more current usage patterns. That means use a real disk drive in the thing so that reasonable capacity can be had cheaply. Sure that means a slightly larger housing but that could then make room for desktop RAM. We aren't talking blowing out the devices size but rather making it just big enough for that 3.5" drive. Going nVidia ought to make room for common RAM.
Where Apple is really hurting is with the midrange hardware. Well actually it doestnt have anything headless. Ideally this would be a machine for those that need a bit more than a Mini on the desktop. This Guy should be no more than $1100 and include slots and disk drive slots.
Thus the Macs frequently have less ports, less connectability options. I know this is just my opinion and others may disagree.
One can't disagree with the facts of port allotments. Sometimes I'm not sure if it is thinness or power allotment. For example each USB port requires budgetting for at least 500 milliamps of current. This impacts power supply and motherboard design. I don't want to call Apple cheap but other than trying to be green I don't see the rational.
Only reason I mention this is that these trends seem to me to be some of the reasons that Apple Macs have not had as strong a market growth over the decades as i have wished (since the Mac is, after all, my more preferred computer...).
Part of Apples problem is that they have only recently gain respect in the larger community which is important to sales. For a long time their very survival was questioned. It is certainly a recurring theme at Apple though. The first Mac Mini was way to short on USB ports, the laptops for the most part could use one more with the exception of AIR which was and is a huge joke. The problem with Apple is where do you go for alternatives.
So I look forward to a time when maybe Apple does start designing 'for the rest of us', and starts to make them easier to connect with the many peripheral devices (HDs, cameras, video/audio, etc) that many of us have and use.
Hey you can connect any device you want one at a time!
Seriously though I've been a long time promoter of more USB ports on Apples hardware. For many of us it is the right solution. Only recently though have I come to realize that Apple apparently does not see it that way. I really believe that Apple wants to become more network centric and wants us to graze with the rest of the flock. It will be interesting to see how it works out over the years.
[qoute]
Thus bringing my comments full circle to hoping that the new Mac Mini and iMac have FireWire built-in, full speed HD, good optical drive built-in, lots of connectability options built-in (not by using some after market dongle adapter). One can always hope.[/QUOTE]
Well one can also make their desires known at Apple. They need to know that for most people AIR was and still is a mistake. There is no good excuse for that machine. They need to know that doing to the desktops what was done to MacBook is not acceptable! Further they need to know that we want them to go forward with the newest release of ports like Firewire. So speak up.
Now don't think that that will do any good for machines coming next month as those have already been validated for production. Rev B might be impacted though. In any event I'm not willing to say that MacBooks lack of Firewire is a trend. I still think it was just a way to pay forban expensive case. We will know shortly.
Dave