Sure they did. Not being backwards compatible to FW400, it is effectively a little slower for the time being and/or doesn't work with your current equipment doesn't mean it's not Apple's "replacement" for FW400. It only means that that it's inconvenient for a small group of people.
The original MacBook Pro user didn't have any DL-DVD burner, despite this being a feature on the 15" PowerBook. And all that money in PCMCIA cards were wasted if you wanted to upgrade to a MacBook Pro because it used ExpressCard/34. Which, by the way, was shipped effectively useless as their was no cards available, yet now people can't imagine a MBP without it.
PS: Even if Apple added FW800 to the MacBook there would still be detractors claiming that now they now have to carry a FW800-to-FW400 adaptor with them.
Where? It sounds like you're about to go into a "The King Has No Clothes" type of fantasy. The preceding Macbooks has both USB and FW and now they have only USB. If can logically argue yourself out of this one you should be a member of SCOTUS. Your current explanation doesn't work.
Replacement defined
The act or process of replacing or of being replaced; substitution.
One that replaces, especially a person assigned to a vacant military position.
FW has not been substituted for anything as the preceding Macbooks had 2 USB Ports and 1 FW.
Anyone you look at it the fact remains that a superior connectivity method was jettisoned with no reliable way to bring that superior connectivity back.
Your correct most new ones have a USB interface however I, like many other here, do not. Having two videocameras with firewire and a couple of hard drives leaves me out in the cold. (something very easily avoidable). lets face it a laptop of this price that only provides you with USB interface and only two of them is frankly ridiculous nowadays.I RECENTLY BOUGHT an "Acer Aspire One" as a present, thats a 299 euro machine and that comes with 2 card reader 3 USB ports 1 Ethernet port 1 VGA out and a kensington lock all for 299 euros.
If Apple had provided some other type of connection possibility then OK but 2 USB ports is laughable. No Firewire no Expansion slot no USB3 no Sd card reader, nothing that could justify removing that firewire port.
Apple laptops used to be the perfect blend of performance and functionality wrapped in high style. These new laptops are gorgeous but they don't just don't excite me from a functionlity standpoint.
I can agree with result from the loss of Firewire. But statements like this is when I feel perspective has been lost of FW true importance.
In the larger scheme of things an I/O port is not all that important. 10 years is a pretty good run as I/O ports don't generally last past that.
Apple is a relative small player in the computer industry. With in that Apple is able to challenge Intel and Nvidia to invent specialized chips and chipsets to improve the Mac's performance beyond that of competitors. Apple is able to optimize the performance of OS X to these specialized components. In the larger picture that is what will impact the Mac user more than one I/O port.
When Apple dropped the modem port from the iMac (and subsequent computers) they provided anApple-branded solutions for those who still needed a modem port.
When Apple dropped the Ethernet port from the MacBook Air they provided an Apple-branded solution for those who still needed a Ethernet on the Macbook Air.
When Apple dropped the FireWire port from the MacBook (and probably subsequent future computers) they did NOTHING for its customers. Nothing, except drop the port.
I don't have a problem buying a FireWire to USB converter device. I think it sucks, but I would buy it if I had too. But I want the device to come from Apple. Not from a 3rd party manufacturer which tested their device on a whole total of 3 FireWire devices before they deemed it "Mac-compatible".
An Apple branded solution is needed here (especially if the iMac updates next month drop FireWire too).
This is very interesting, because most people here complain about Apple's solutions. They want third party solutions because they, in error, state that Apple's are too expensive, and they don't want to give the money to Apple because they are oh so mad at them.
The act or process of replacing or of being replaced; substitution. Anyone you look at it the fact remains that a superior connectivity method was jettisoned with no reliable way to bring that superior connectivity back.
A replacement doesn't have to equal or superior in every way to a previous option, it only has to be a substitution. As Jobs stated in an email to a concerned customer, Apple has clearly chosen USB2.0 to be the replacement for FW400, since all [sic] cameras released support USB2.0. With their TimeCapsule device (and other networked drives) they clearly expect Ethernet, WiFi and USB to replace external FW400 HDDs.
If FireWire is obsolete technology than why does every single external hard drive sold in Apple retail stores still have this obsolete port on them (just checked the Buffalo, NY store)? Its not a obsolete technology by any stretch...
Dave it isn't obsolete, but it is rapidly becoming obsolete. Apple knows that. Two years ago, that wasn't the case. More pros, with pro machines, use FW than do others. I'm sure Apple knows that as well.
The truth is that few Macbook owners are going to rush out and buy the new models. Most buyers will be those who have no computer as yet, or have a PC, laptop, or otherwise.
Apple also knows this quite well. We see the stats on who is buying Apple's machines all the time.
I think they look at that, and at the new drives, camcorders and such, that come with USB 2 (at slightly lower cost), and figured that as so many people don't use FW (likely the majority by far these days), removing it now wouldn't be a problem for the new customer at all, or for most old customers.
Also, most people will be replacing their older machines further down the road, once USB 3 will be here.
USB 3, by the way, has little in common with ver 1.1 and 2, other than the name, and that it's backwards compatible. It's much more like FW than not.
When it does come out, next year, we will see adapters that will give FW 400, and possibly even 800, pretty much full speed, and functionality.
The fewer types of ports I have, the better. With its improved ability to accommodate stringing devices together, and with its vastly higher speeds, only one of these ports will serve most people quite well.
While I do think it's early to discontinue it, I do see some good reasons why Apple did.
Sure they did. Not being backwards compatible to FW400, it is effectively a little slower for the time being and/or doesn't work with your current equipment doesn't mean it's not Apple's "replacement" for FW400. It only means that that it's inconvenient for a small group of people.
Hold on... did I miss something? Let me have another look...
No, just USB on the MacBook.
Aaaah! You mean USB is the replacement? How can USB be the replacement for FireWire when it has always been on the MacBook? You cannot 'replace' something with something else that co-exists. USB in any revision will never be a replacement technology for FireWire. Why continue to develop FW if that was the case? USB2 is also technologically inferior to FW400 on so many levels.. (realtime speed, functionality etc).
Quote:
PS: Even if Apple added FW800 to the MacBook there would still be detractors claiming that now they now have to carry a FW800-to-FW400 adaptor with them.
Are you serious?
That adaptor is shown beside a battery (AAA or equivalent). The FW cable needed to connect to this thing is much larger and I think I could live with 'lugging' that around in my pocket.
Is that the compromise that needed to be made though?
I would say what's more important FW800 or Gigabit ethernet? The answer IMO is FW800. Ethernet can be supported via a USB adaptor. By contrast you can't get the benefit of FW800 from an adaptor.
I don't agree.
Ethernet is far more important that FW to most people.
Also, the MB never had FW 800, so that dosn't matter at all. The comparison is FW 400 to Ethernet.
If you get network drives, as more people are doing, like Apple's Time Machine, and numerous models from just about everyone else, they will be Ethernet. A drive is better over Gb Ethernet than FW 400 any day. Not even close. I've done it here at home. Ethernet is almost twice as fast.
Hold on... did I miss something? Let me have another look...
No, just USB on the MacBook.
Aaaah! You mean USB is the replacement? How can USB be the replacement for FireWire when it has always been on the MacBook? You cannot 'replace' something with something else that co-exists. USB in any revision will never be a replacement technology for FireWire.
For example, people are replacing their current homes with smaller homes and their expensive cars with cheaper cars. The operative word is 'replacement', not advancement. There are many examples of technology where the most advanced never took hold or the less capable outdid the more capable. We see both of these examples with with the span of a few years. audio: SACD not catching on and ITS audio outselling optical media.
Quote:
Why continue to develop FW if that was the case?
FireWire is obsolescing for the many reasons that have been made over-and-over on these 18 pages, but the FW400 interface port is obsolescing even faster because it's not the same port as FW800, the way FW3200 shares the port with FW800, and all 3 USB standards share the same port interface, even though the technical specs within the port are different.
Quote:
USB2 is also technologically inferior to FW400 on so many levels.. (realtime speed, functionality etc).
It is, but FW400 is inferior to USB2.0 when it comes to adoption, usage and cost.
Quote:
Are you serious?
That adaptor is shown beside a battery (AAA or equivalent). The FW cable needed to connect to this thing is much larger and I think I could live with 'lugging' that around in my pocket.
I'm sure anyone could live with 'lugging' it around, but people always complain about having to buy an adapter and about having to worry about minding another adapter. There are plenty of posts about it with the switch to MiniDisplayPort, despite DP being clearly technologically more 'advanced' and futureforward than any previous video out option Apple has ever used.
Those were all upgrades. This dropping a feature of aesthetic design reasons. This is more akin to Apple dropping SCSI and requiring users to rely on the serial port.
Many of us thought that dropping SCSI support for the much slower, much more processor intensive, and much less reliable ATA drives, was a movement to the lowest level amateur PC.
When they later dropped much support for it in the OS (10.3) many of us were pissed, to say the least, because our VERY expensive equipment wouldn't work anymore, and we had to downgrade our computers to 10.2.8, or spend tens of thousands more on new printers, scanners, etc.
THAT's more important than complaining about a $300 external drive.
Most people here can easily manage with their current model for another 6 months, or even a year. The MBP's are not affected, so new purchases there don't matter.
Quite frankly, for those who have their own one person businesses, and where those businesses are their real source of income, rather than mainly a hobby that's pays a bit each year, if you incorporate it properly, you get many benefits that you don't have by accounting your income from the business as personal income, as I get the feeling that many are doing.
One of those benefits is that you can more easily account for a new machine with depreciation, as your accountant will tell you. When done that way, often a MBP will cost not much more than a MB over the time span it's depreciated.
If it's a camcorder that is in question, I doubt an existing tape camcorder will outlast a notebook bought today, if the camcorder gets enough regular use to justify angst over losing the port.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiMac
Are you serious?
That adaptor is shown beside a battery (AAA or equivalent). The FW cable needed to connect to this thing is much larger and I think I could live with 'lugging' that around in my pocket.
Personally, I would recommend getting a cord with both ends rather than a stiff adapter like that to convert one of the ends. The problem I have with adapters like that is that they "extend" leverage, it basically means that the rigid part of the cable sticks out 2x to 5x farther than just a regular cable. The computer is too valuable to increase the risk of ruining the jack.
With what? That USB2 dominated the market even 2 years ago? Done. That eSATA was the emerging new high speed external disk interface? Done.
ok mate - you can look at every second computer and find USB2 - agreed - but that doesn't define domination does it... any more than the fact that Microsoft is on nearly every machine. Ubiquitous doesn't prove anything - or why would you own a Mac and be on a mac forum in the first place?
the fact that people (including Jobs - although i don't think that was his point) are arguing that USB is a substitute for FW means they don't understand the fundamental differences...
and the fact that there is no eSATA interface on any Mac - does that say that it's emerging too well does it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
Already did. Vista...no support for FW800 despite promises to do so. Very few FW800 enclosures (RAID or otherwise) in comparison to eSATA enclosures.
FW800 today for most folks (even Pros) is not all that important. There are certainly SOME Pros with a significant use for it but I can see Apple dropping even FW800 in a couple three years and assuming that folks that need it will get an expresscard with it.
like i said i'm going to ignore your vista arguments
...but on FW800 - yes it has been slow to pic up.... but then it's on a number of Macs - and has been for a while (including the latest issue) it may surprise you but many 3rd party companies are sticking with FW400 because it works fine... but I guess the marketing departments of companies like MOTU, SONY, FOCUSRITE, ROLAND, DigiDesign and RME are completely off the planet. Maybe you should write to them and tell them that all their FW400 products released late 2008 are already worthless...
while you're at it, if you could be so kind as to offer an alternative...
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
Gee, I guess I must be imagining using my MBP with my Timecapsule on a daily basis. And TC is not blazing as a NAS. Here's a brilliant news flash for you:
Big assed files take a long assed time regardless of technology. When I back up everything to an external drive for offsite storage it goes overnight.
well you might be using it, but you certainly aren't noticing how fast it is because it takes so long you have to go to bed - that's not quite the performance I'm really after...
btw I'M JOKING - not trying to flame you
like i said (and regarding the reading you have a serious case of pot calling kettle) if you're just transferring files one way - then go for it with wifi or USB - like you point out overnight is fine in this case...
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
Which part of "most folks" confuse you? Do you believe that the pro-audio crowd is a significant number of folks?
Yes I do actually - of course it's a question of perspective... but then don't believe me - look it up, have a look at the very small petition which has already got around 10k signed up... and then think where it's all headed... how many home studios there are... how many budding video editors jumping on youtube - most of whom want to be mobile and dump hundreds of gigs of footage and audio onto their macs ON THE GO...
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
Besides, the number of crappy external drive implementations are far larger than you may think. Also the small external drives like the LaCie Little Disks are slower than heck. Wanna bet that the speed difference isn't all that much?
hang on - no you didn't - for MOBILE use what choice have you got ???
GigE and eSATA are not suited for mobile
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
Besides, who the hell hot swaps 1 TB RAID arrays? Yes, FW400 is faster than USB2. But who cares with large files sizes? Slow isn't much better than Dog Slow.
who said anything about hot swapping raid arrays - that would be a dumb idea - not to mention heavy to carry around ???
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
Again, since you seem to lack reading comprehension, MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT AUDIO PROS.
thanks for the flame there - I seem to recall that you said;
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
The biggest loss for FW400 for MOST folks is for connecting to FW based video cams.
but then maybe i just thought you misunderstood the issue - it's not just about video cams, it's about a WHOLE AUDIO VISUAL INDUSTRY (sorry for yelling, got a little worked up) - that's right the industry who put mac in front of the masses in the first place...
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
Probably not for very long as FW dies.
yes make that call to the marketing department of those companies i mentioned - because you obviously know something they missed... \
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
Still reading challenged I see. GigE is useless over a USB2 dongle because you're limted by the USB interface. GigE is VERY useful for notebooks because it's fast and wireless isn't always available/working. When I need to do a large transfer to TimeCapsule I'll plug in directly into the device. This is faster than my FW400 drive.
hmmm that's exactly the case I put forward (regarding ur 3rd sentence - keep GigE for established networks like your TC)
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
I have FW800 on my MBP. I use FW400 for my tiny little drive and for my video camera. I use eSATA in my lab. I use 802.11N and gigE to my TC and at work. Which technology do I NOT use?
you don't use eSata on the go...
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
No, I'm comparing technology that's used every day vs ones that only exist on paper.
Yeah, because 90% market share makes Microsoft irrelevant.
90% market share doesn't make Microsoft relevant either...
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
How odd...I use my TC every day, sometimes over GigE. I VPN back to my work shares while at starbucks to get at files I might have forgotten. If I need a multi GB fiile, yes, then I'll bother to plug in my external drive. USB2 or FW400 makes little difference at that point.
which was my point too - we're on the same side on this one - small docs are fine for any current tech... phew we're getting there...
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
For working for real...I'd rather have a eSATA drive sitting in my bag than FW400.
no you wouldn't since you'd have to lug around a power connector as well - unless you wanted to get one that plugged into your USB just to power itself...
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
And yes, you CAN hotplug eSATA given that it's in the SATA II spec if you have AHCI and 10.5.x. Depends on the implementation for the expresscard eSATA how well that really works though...
some points :
- proving anything based on the fact that Microsoft does it won't help your argument on an apple forum (in case u hadn't seen the rather sarcastic ads...)
- feel free to take your eSata drive to anywhere without a power outlet and see how far you get...
- you sound like the type of user who the Macbook is perfect for (not into audio or video at pro speeds, only a few files, willing to transfer files overnight, moving from home network to lab network)
so you can happily purchase the new FW free Macbook
FW on the other hand has benefits due to the architecture that can't be replicated with an adaptor.
On the principle of negatively affecting the least amount of users and given that laptop users are more likely to use wifi and given that there are adaptors for ethernet, I still think the best choice would have been to use firewire instead.
There is a misunderstanding about FW's performance when compared to that of USB 2 for camcorders.
It doesn't matter when there is just one device on he line (port). Once there is more than one device, in theory, FW works much better.
Sadly enough, even that is not true. For all practical purposes, you must only use one device per port on FW. If you put a HDD AND a camcorder on the same port, strung together the way you are supposed to, it doesn't work. I've tried this over the years, and it's never worked.
As FW 100 was originally proposed for the computer interface, as camcorders use FW 100, obviously FW 400 isn't even needed. As there is only one device on the line, the advantages of FW are unclear, as the entire purpose was to give priority to streaming video and audio over data.
As we can't run data over the FW connection when streaming audio and video is running, there is little, or no advantage.
As to some USB cameras not working well with Macs, well, that's drivers, and most, if not all of those cameras are HD, and the video signal itself, as some camcorder manufacturers don't use standard HD formats, but "roll their own" so to speak.
As far as the driver problem goes though, I remember quite well that JVC and Panasonic Mini Dv cameras didn't work with Macs the first few years either.
He is clearly not living in reality or in the loop of video happenings. The cameras he refers to are sd or hard drive based cameras which still at present make up the minority in cameras. The MAJORITY of cameras still use Firewire and are tape based. JOB's your Liar and uninformed. Get a grip and talk with people who are actually in the know, cause with your statement it is clear you are not
He is clearly not living in reality or in the loop of video happenings. The cameras he refers to are sd or hard drive based cameras which still at present make up the minority in cameras. The MAJORITY of cameras still use Firewire and are tape based. JOB's your Liar and uninformed. Get a grip and talk with people who are actually in the know, cause with your statement it is clear you are not
While I'm sure Jobs is a liar (Woz even writes about it in his book), since the MacBook is a consumer-grade computer one could argue that Jobs is talking about consumer-grade cameras. Do the majority of consumer-grade cameras offer USB2.0 alongside or instead of FW400 or is that still a minority of the ones being sold to non-professionals?
Personally, I would recommend getting a cord with both ends rather than a stiff adapter like that to convert one of the ends. The problem I have with adapters like that is that they "extend" leverage, it basically means that the rigid part of the cable sticks out 2x to 5x farther than just a regular cable. The computer is too valuable to increase the risk of ruining the jack.
He is clearly not living in reality or in the loop of video happenings. The cameras he refers to are sd or hard drive based cameras which still at present make up the minority in cameras. The MAJORITY of cameras still use Firewire and are tape based. JOB's your Liar and uninformed. Get a grip and talk with people who are actually in the know, cause with your statement it is clear you are not
Since you love to say to Jobs that "your a liar", rather than to say that he might be mistaken, I guess I'll have to call you a liar as well, since you are mistaken.
This is interesting, and supports, at least for those top 20 sellers (except for one) the point Jobs is making.
Read the article. Perhaps you would care to do the work and extend it down to the top 50 sellers.
I can agree with result from the loss of Firewire. But statements like this is when I feel perspective has been lost of FW true importance.
In the larger scheme of things an I/O port is not all that important. 10 years is a pretty good run as I/O ports don't generally last past that.
Apple is a relative small player in the computer industry. With in that Apple is able to challenge Intel and Nvidia to invent specialized chips and chipsets to improve the Mac's performance beyond that of competitors. Apple is able to optimize the performance of OS X to these specialized components. In the larger picture that is what will impact the Mac user more than one I/O port.
An I/O port or two can be the difference between a sale and and losing out to a competitor. The Macbook is already down on expansion option compared to others in its class. The is no esata, no card reader, and no express card slot. Now there is no firewire. USB 2.0 is inferior to FW400 in drive speed and USB audio equipment is much less capable. In other words, while they might look really cool, in many ways, the new Macbook is an inferior product to the white Macbooks and iBooks that preceded it. You gotta wonder what is the breaking point here. How much can we lose in functionality before the benefit of Mac OS X is no longer worth it?
Comments
Sure they did. Not being backwards compatible to FW400, it is effectively a little slower for the time being and/or doesn't work with your current equipment doesn't mean it's not Apple's "replacement" for FW400. It only means that that it's inconvenient for a small group of people.
The original MacBook Pro user didn't have any DL-DVD burner, despite this being a feature on the 15" PowerBook. And all that money in PCMCIA cards were wasted if you wanted to upgrade to a MacBook Pro because it used ExpressCard/34. Which, by the way, was shipped effectively useless as their was no cards available, yet now people can't imagine a MBP without it.
PS: Even if Apple added FW800 to the MacBook there would still be detractors claiming that now they now have to carry a FW800-to-FW400 adaptor with them.
Where? It sounds like you're about to go into a "The King Has No Clothes" type of fantasy. The preceding Macbooks has both USB and FW and now they have only USB. If can logically argue yourself out of this one you should be a member of SCOTUS. Your current explanation doesn't work.
Replacement defined
The act or process of replacing or of being replaced; substitution.
One that replaces, especially a person assigned to a vacant military position.
FW has not been substituted for anything as the preceding Macbooks had 2 USB Ports and 1 FW.
Anyone you look at it the fact remains that a superior connectivity method was jettisoned with no reliable way to bring that superior connectivity back.
Your correct most new ones have a USB interface however I, like many other here, do not. Having two videocameras with firewire and a couple of hard drives leaves me out in the cold. (something very easily avoidable). lets face it a laptop of this price that only provides you with USB interface and only two of them is frankly ridiculous nowadays.I RECENTLY BOUGHT an "Acer Aspire One" as a present, thats a 299 euro machine and that comes with 2 card reader 3 USB ports 1 Ethernet port 1 VGA out and a kensington lock all for 299 euros.
If Apple had provided some other type of connection possibility then OK but 2 USB ports is laughable. No Firewire no Expansion slot no USB3 no Sd card reader, nothing that could justify removing that firewire port.
USB 3 isn't out yet. Wait until next year then.
Apple laptops used to be the perfect blend of performance and functionality wrapped in high style. These new laptops are gorgeous but they don't just don't excite me from a functionlity standpoint.
I can agree with result from the loss of Firewire. But statements like this is when I feel perspective has been lost of FW true importance.
In the larger scheme of things an I/O port is not all that important. 10 years is a pretty good run as I/O ports don't generally last past that.
Apple is a relative small player in the computer industry. With in that Apple is able to challenge Intel and Nvidia to invent specialized chips and chipsets to improve the Mac's performance beyond that of competitors. Apple is able to optimize the performance of OS X to these specialized components. In the larger picture that is what will impact the Mac user more than one I/O port.
When Apple dropped the modem port from the iMac (and subsequent computers) they provided anApple-branded solutions for those who still needed a modem port.
When Apple dropped the Ethernet port from the MacBook Air they provided an Apple-branded solution for those who still needed a Ethernet on the Macbook Air.
When Apple dropped the FireWire port from the MacBook (and probably subsequent future computers) they did NOTHING for its customers. Nothing, except drop the port.
I don't have a problem buying a FireWire to USB converter device. I think it sucks, but I would buy it if I had too. But I want the device to come from Apple. Not from a 3rd party manufacturer which tested their device on a whole total of 3 FireWire devices before they deemed it "Mac-compatible".
An Apple branded solution is needed here (especially if the iMac updates next month drop FireWire too).
This is very interesting, because most people here complain about Apple's solutions. They want third party solutions because they, in error, state that Apple's are too expensive, and they don't want to give the money to Apple because they are oh so mad at them.
The act or process of replacing or of being replaced; substitution. Anyone you look at it the fact remains that a superior connectivity method was jettisoned with no reliable way to bring that superior connectivity back.
A replacement doesn't have to equal or superior in every way to a previous option, it only has to be a substitution. As Jobs stated in an email to a concerned customer, Apple has clearly chosen USB2.0 to be the replacement for FW400, since all [sic] cameras released support USB2.0. With their TimeCapsule device (and other networked drives) they clearly expect Ethernet, WiFi and USB to replace external FW400 HDDs.
Better Question:
They're all out gaming.
Well said. To add to your comments.
If FireWire is obsolete technology than why does every single external hard drive sold in Apple retail stores still have this obsolete port on them (just checked the Buffalo, NY store)? Its not a obsolete technology by any stretch...
Dave it isn't obsolete, but it is rapidly becoming obsolete. Apple knows that. Two years ago, that wasn't the case. More pros, with pro machines, use FW than do others. I'm sure Apple knows that as well.
The truth is that few Macbook owners are going to rush out and buy the new models. Most buyers will be those who have no computer as yet, or have a PC, laptop, or otherwise.
Apple also knows this quite well. We see the stats on who is buying Apple's machines all the time.
I think they look at that, and at the new drives, camcorders and such, that come with USB 2 (at slightly lower cost), and figured that as so many people don't use FW (likely the majority by far these days), removing it now wouldn't be a problem for the new customer at all, or for most old customers.
Also, most people will be replacing their older machines further down the road, once USB 3 will be here.
USB 3, by the way, has little in common with ver 1.1 and 2, other than the name, and that it's backwards compatible. It's much more like FW than not.
When it does come out, next year, we will see adapters that will give FW 400, and possibly even 800, pretty much full speed, and functionality.
The fewer types of ports I have, the better. With its improved ability to accommodate stringing devices together, and with its vastly higher speeds, only one of these ports will serve most people quite well.
While I do think it's early to discontinue it, I do see some good reasons why Apple did.
Sure they did. Not being backwards compatible to FW400, it is effectively a little slower for the time being and/or doesn't work with your current equipment doesn't mean it's not Apple's "replacement" for FW400. It only means that that it's inconvenient for a small group of people.
Hold on... did I miss something? Let me have another look...
No, just USB on the MacBook.
Aaaah! You mean USB is the replacement? How can USB be the replacement for FireWire when it has always been on the MacBook? You cannot 'replace' something with something else that co-exists. USB in any revision will never be a replacement technology for FireWire. Why continue to develop FW if that was the case? USB2 is also technologically inferior to FW400 on so many levels.. (realtime speed, functionality etc).
PS: Even if Apple added FW800 to the MacBook there would still be detractors claiming that now they now have to carry a FW800-to-FW400 adaptor with them.
Are you serious?
That adaptor is shown beside a battery (AAA or equivalent). The FW cable needed to connect to this thing is much larger and I think I could live with 'lugging' that around in my pocket.
Is that the compromise that needed to be made though?
I would say what's more important FW800 or Gigabit ethernet? The answer IMO is FW800. Ethernet can be supported via a USB adaptor. By contrast you can't get the benefit of FW800 from an adaptor.
I don't agree.
Ethernet is far more important that FW to most people.
Also, the MB never had FW 800, so that dosn't matter at all. The comparison is FW 400 to Ethernet.
If you get network drives, as more people are doing, like Apple's Time Machine, and numerous models from just about everyone else, they will be Ethernet. A drive is better over Gb Ethernet than FW 400 any day. Not even close. I've done it here at home. Ethernet is almost twice as fast.
Hold on... did I miss something? Let me have another look...
No, just USB on the MacBook.
Aaaah! You mean USB is the replacement? How can USB be the replacement for FireWire when it has always been on the MacBook? You cannot 'replace' something with something else that co-exists. USB in any revision will never be a replacement technology for FireWire.
For example, people are replacing their current homes with smaller homes and their expensive cars with cheaper cars. The operative word is 'replacement', not advancement. There are many examples of technology where the most advanced never took hold or the less capable outdid the more capable. We see both of these examples with with the span of a few years. audio: SACD not catching on and ITS audio outselling optical media.
Why continue to develop FW if that was the case?
FireWire is obsolescing for the many reasons that have been made over-and-over on these 18 pages, but the FW400 interface port is obsolescing even faster because it's not the same port as FW800, the way FW3200 shares the port with FW800, and all 3 USB standards share the same port interface, even though the technical specs within the port are different.
USB2 is also technologically inferior to FW400 on so many levels.. (realtime speed, functionality etc).
It is, but FW400 is inferior to USB2.0 when it comes to adoption, usage and cost.
Are you serious?
That adaptor is shown beside a battery (AAA or equivalent). The FW cable needed to connect to this thing is much larger and I think I could live with 'lugging' that around in my pocket.
I'm sure anyone could live with 'lugging' it around, but people always complain about having to buy an adapter and about having to worry about minding another adapter. There are plenty of posts about it with the switch to MiniDisplayPort, despite DP being clearly technologically more 'advanced' and futureforward than any previous video out option Apple has ever used.
It has been time to move the entire line to 800 for more than a year.
The reason Apple kept both FW400 and the combo drive around eludes me.
Those were all upgrades. This dropping a feature of aesthetic design reasons. This is more akin to Apple dropping SCSI and requiring users to rely on the serial port.
Many of us thought that dropping SCSI support for the much slower, much more processor intensive, and much less reliable ATA drives, was a movement to the lowest level amateur PC.
When they later dropped much support for it in the OS (10.3) many of us were pissed, to say the least, because our VERY expensive equipment wouldn't work anymore, and we had to downgrade our computers to 10.2.8, or spend tens of thousands more on new printers, scanners, etc.
THAT's more important than complaining about a $300 external drive.
Most people here can easily manage with their current model for another 6 months, or even a year. The MBP's are not affected, so new purchases there don't matter.
Quite frankly, for those who have their own one person businesses, and where those businesses are their real source of income, rather than mainly a hobby that's pays a bit each year, if you incorporate it properly, you get many benefits that you don't have by accounting your income from the business as personal income, as I get the feeling that many are doing.
One of those benefits is that you can more easily account for a new machine with depreciation, as your accountant will tell you. When done that way, often a MBP will cost not much more than a MB over the time span it's depreciated.
-Until that dies.
-Until that is no longer available
If it's a camcorder that is in question, I doubt an existing tape camcorder will outlast a notebook bought today, if the camcorder gets enough regular use to justify angst over losing the port.
Are you serious?
That adaptor is shown beside a battery (AAA or equivalent). The FW cable needed to connect to this thing is much larger and I think I could live with 'lugging' that around in my pocket.
Personally, I would recommend getting a cord with both ends rather than a stiff adapter like that to convert one of the ends. The problem I have with adapters like that is that they "extend" leverage, it basically means that the rigid part of the cable sticks out 2x to 5x farther than just a regular cable. The computer is too valuable to increase the risk of ruining the jack.
With what? That USB2 dominated the market even 2 years ago? Done. That eSATA was the emerging new high speed external disk interface? Done.
ok mate - you can look at every second computer and find USB2 - agreed - but that doesn't define domination does it... any more than the fact that Microsoft is on nearly every machine. Ubiquitous doesn't prove anything - or why would you own a Mac and be on a mac forum in the first place?
the fact that people (including Jobs - although i don't think that was his point) are arguing that USB is a substitute for FW means they don't understand the fundamental differences...
and the fact that there is no eSATA interface on any Mac - does that say that it's emerging too well does it?
Already did. Vista...no support for FW800 despite promises to do so. Very few FW800 enclosures (RAID or otherwise) in comparison to eSATA enclosures.
FW800 today for most folks (even Pros) is not all that important. There are certainly SOME Pros with a significant use for it but I can see Apple dropping even FW800 in a couple three years and assuming that folks that need it will get an expresscard with it.
like i said i'm going to ignore your vista arguments
...but on FW800 - yes it has been slow to pic up.... but then it's on a number of Macs - and has been for a while (including the latest issue) it may surprise you but many 3rd party companies are sticking with FW400 because it works fine... but I guess the marketing departments of companies like MOTU, SONY, FOCUSRITE, ROLAND, DigiDesign and RME are completely off the planet. Maybe you should write to them and tell them that all their FW400 products released late 2008 are already worthless...
while you're at it, if you could be so kind as to offer an alternative...
Gee, I guess I must be imagining using my MBP with my Timecapsule on a daily basis. And TC is not blazing as a NAS. Here's a brilliant news flash for you:
Big assed files take a long assed time regardless of technology. When I back up everything to an external drive for offsite storage it goes overnight.
well you might be using it, but you certainly aren't noticing how fast it is because it takes so long you have to go to bed - that's not quite the performance I'm really after...
btw I'M JOKING - not trying to flame you
like i said (and regarding the reading you have a serious case of pot calling kettle
Which part of "most folks" confuse you? Do you believe that the pro-audio crowd is a significant number of folks?
Yes I do actually - of course it's a question of perspective... but then don't believe me - look it up, have a look at the very small petition which has already got around 10k signed up... and then think where it's all headed... how many home studios there are... how many budding video editors jumping on youtube - most of whom want to be mobile and dump hundreds of gigs of footage and audio onto their macs ON THE GO...
Besides, the number of crappy external drive implementations are far larger than you may think. Also the small external drives like the LaCie Little Disks are slower than heck. Wanna bet that the speed difference isn't all that much?
http://www.barefeats.com/note04.html
SATA sustained reads: 110
FW800 sustained reads: 71
SATA sustained writes: 67
FW800 sustained writes: 49
That's why.
Yeah - got me... again.... dammit
hang on - no you didn't - for MOBILE use what choice have you got ???
GigE and eSATA are not suited for mobile
Besides, who the hell hot swaps 1 TB RAID arrays? Yes, FW400 is faster than USB2. But who cares with large files sizes? Slow isn't much better than Dog Slow.
who said anything about hot swapping raid arrays - that would be a dumb idea - not to mention heavy to carry around ???
Again, since you seem to lack reading comprehension, MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT AUDIO PROS.
thanks for the flame there
The biggest loss for FW400 for MOST folks is for connecting to FW based video cams.
but then maybe i just thought you misunderstood the issue - it's not just about video cams, it's about a WHOLE AUDIO VISUAL INDUSTRY (sorry for yelling, got a little worked up) - that's right the industry who put mac in front of the masses in the first place...
Probably not for very long as FW dies.
yes make that call to the marketing department of those companies i mentioned - because you obviously know something they missed...
Still reading challenged I see. GigE is useless over a USB2 dongle because you're limted by the USB interface. GigE is VERY useful for notebooks because it's fast and wireless isn't always available/working. When I need to do a large transfer to TimeCapsule I'll plug in directly into the device. This is faster than my FW400 drive.
hmmm that's exactly the case I put forward (regarding ur 3rd sentence - keep GigE for established networks like your TC)
I have FW800 on my MBP. I use FW400 for my tiny little drive and for my video camera. I use eSATA in my lab. I use 802.11N and gigE to my TC and at work. Which technology do I NOT use?
you don't use eSata on the go...
No, I'm comparing technology that's used every day vs ones that only exist on paper.
Yeah, because 90% market share makes Microsoft irrelevant.
90% market share doesn't make Microsoft relevant either...
How odd...I use my TC every day, sometimes over GigE. I VPN back to my work shares while at starbucks to get at files I might have forgotten. If I need a multi GB fiile, yes, then I'll bother to plug in my external drive. USB2 or FW400 makes little difference at that point.
which was my point too - we're on the same side on this one - small docs are fine for any current tech... phew we're getting there...
For working for real...I'd rather have a eSATA drive sitting in my bag than FW400.
no you wouldn't since you'd have to lug around a power connector as well - unless you wanted to get one that plugged into your USB just to power itself...
And yes, you CAN hotplug eSATA given that it's in the SATA II spec if you have AHCI and 10.5.x. Depends on the implementation for the expresscard eSATA how well that really works though...
some points :
- proving anything based on the fact that Microsoft does it won't help your argument on an apple forum (in case u hadn't seen the rather sarcastic ads...)
- feel free to take your eSata drive to anywhere without a power outlet and see how far you get...
- you sound like the type of user who the Macbook is perfect for (not into audio or video at pro speeds, only a few files, willing to transfer files overnight, moving from home network to lab network)
so you can happily purchase the new FW free Macbook
congrats !
here's the link
FW on the other hand has benefits due to the architecture that can't be replicated with an adaptor.
On the principle of negatively affecting the least amount of users and given that laptop users are more likely to use wifi and given that there are adaptors for ethernet, I still think the best choice would have been to use firewire instead.
There is a misunderstanding about FW's performance when compared to that of USB 2 for camcorders.
It doesn't matter when there is just one device on he line (port). Once there is more than one device, in theory, FW works much better.
Sadly enough, even that is not true. For all practical purposes, you must only use one device per port on FW. If you put a HDD AND a camcorder on the same port, strung together the way you are supposed to, it doesn't work. I've tried this over the years, and it's never worked.
As FW 100 was originally proposed for the computer interface, as camcorders use FW 100, obviously FW 400 isn't even needed. As there is only one device on the line, the advantages of FW are unclear, as the entire purpose was to give priority to streaming video and audio over data.
As we can't run data over the FW connection when streaming audio and video is running, there is little, or no advantage.
As to some USB cameras not working well with Macs, well, that's drivers, and most, if not all of those cameras are HD, and the video signal itself, as some camcorder manufacturers don't use standard HD formats, but "roll their own" so to speak.
As far as the driver problem goes though, I remember quite well that JVC and Panasonic Mini Dv cameras didn't work with Macs the first few years either.
He is clearly not living in reality or in the loop of video happenings. The cameras he refers to are sd or hard drive based cameras which still at present make up the minority in cameras. The MAJORITY of cameras still use Firewire and are tape based. JOB's your Liar and uninformed. Get a grip and talk with people who are actually in the know, cause with your statement it is clear you are not
While I'm sure Jobs is a liar (Woz even writes about it in his book), since the MacBook is a consumer-grade computer one could argue that Jobs is talking about consumer-grade cameras. Do the majority of consumer-grade cameras offer USB2.0 alongside or instead of FW400 or is that still a minority of the ones being sold to non-professionals?
Personally, I would recommend getting a cord with both ends rather than a stiff adapter like that to convert one of the ends. The problem I have with adapters like that is that they "extend" leverage, it basically means that the rigid part of the cable sticks out 2x to 5x farther than just a regular cable. The computer is too valuable to increase the risk of ruining the jack.
Exactly!
He is clearly not living in reality or in the loop of video happenings. The cameras he refers to are sd or hard drive based cameras which still at present make up the minority in cameras. The MAJORITY of cameras still use Firewire and are tape based. JOB's your Liar and uninformed. Get a grip and talk with people who are actually in the know, cause with your statement it is clear you are not
Since you love to say to Jobs that "your a liar", rather than to say that he might be mistaken, I guess I'll have to call you a liar as well, since you are mistaken.
This is interesting, and supports, at least for those top 20 sellers (except for one) the point Jobs is making.
Read the article. Perhaps you would care to do the work and extend it down to the top 50 sellers.
http://theappleblog.com/2008/10/20/c...ve-jobs-right/
I can agree with result from the loss of Firewire. But statements like this is when I feel perspective has been lost of FW true importance.
In the larger scheme of things an I/O port is not all that important. 10 years is a pretty good run as I/O ports don't generally last past that.
Apple is a relative small player in the computer industry. With in that Apple is able to challenge Intel and Nvidia to invent specialized chips and chipsets to improve the Mac's performance beyond that of competitors. Apple is able to optimize the performance of OS X to these specialized components. In the larger picture that is what will impact the Mac user more than one I/O port.
An I/O port or two can be the difference between a sale and and losing out to a competitor. The Macbook is already down on expansion option compared to others in its class. The is no esata, no card reader, and no express card slot. Now there is no firewire. USB 2.0 is inferior to FW400 in drive speed and USB audio equipment is much less capable. In other words, while they might look really cool, in many ways, the new Macbook is an inferior product to the white Macbooks and iBooks that preceded it. You gotta wonder what is the breaking point here. How much can we lose in functionality before the benefit of Mac OS X is no longer worth it?