PDA

View Full Version : Why is there not a Firewire 800 port on iMac isight?


smwatson
Oct 29, 2005, 02:08 PM
I have just flicked through the latest macworld magazine and was rather drawn towards a Lacie Firewire 800 external HD. However, whilst browsing the iMac specs, i found there are no Firewire 800 ports on it. Why is this??? Isnt Firewire 800 Apple's big USB basher???

Josh396
Oct 29, 2005, 02:18 PM
I have just flicked through the latest macworld magazine and was rather drawn towards a Lacie Firewire 800 external HD. However, whilst browsing the iMac specs, i found there are no Firewire 800 ports on it. Why is this??? Isnt Firewire 800 Apple's big USB basher???
Just another way for Apple to separate the Power Mac from the iMac. Also Firewire 800 isn't that common yet so why throw it into a consumer machine.

iGary
Oct 29, 2005, 02:21 PM
Just another way for Apple to separate the Power Mac from the iMac. Also Firewire 800 isn't that common yet so why throw it into a consumer machine.

What he said.

grapes911
Oct 29, 2005, 02:27 PM
Isnt Firewire 800 Apple's big USB basher???
While FireWire blows USB out of the water in streaming speed, USB destoys it in price. It is very costly to put FireWire into computers. It is also very costly to put it into harddrives, cameras, etc. Moeny makes the world go 'round.

smwatson
Oct 29, 2005, 02:34 PM
okey dokey thanks. I just find firewire excellent in my 3G (or at least the one with the four buttons above the scroll wheel, a superior arrangement to the click wheel i feel) iPod as its much faster than my friends ***** USB iriver. But im guessing USB 2.0 is alot faster than 1.1. Thanks again

grapes911
Oct 29, 2005, 02:37 PM
But im guessing USB 2.0 is alot faster than 1.1. Thanks again
Theoretically speaking, USB 2.0 is about 40 times faster than USB 1.1. It's probably not that extreme in real world usage, but you get the point.

carpe diem
Oct 29, 2005, 02:39 PM
I think fire wire is dying

grapes911
Oct 29, 2005, 02:41 PM
I think fire wire is dying
I think you are smoking too much crack. Every year it is becoming more and more popular. Many PCs are even being manufactured stock with 1394. I doubt Apple, of all companies, will give up on it any time soon. The iPod think is just to save space. It was FW or USB. The choise is easy. USB allows for more compitibility.

homerjward
Oct 29, 2005, 02:45 PM
it bothers me when people say firewire's dying just because it's not on the ipod anymore. when the ipod had firewire was it the only device that did? of course not!

BGil
Oct 29, 2005, 02:48 PM
I think fire wire is dying

It will still live on in professional video and audio equipment but USB 2 is, for most other purposes, just as fast (on PC) as Firewire 400 while being a lot cheaper because of the cap on licensing fees and the lack of having to pay out of pocket to Apple. IIRC it costs 25 cent per usb port or device with no cap. USB 2 has a license that is like $2500 for a lifetime unlimited license. Those probably aren't the exact numbers but it's something like that from what I've read.

SATA and external SATA is actually far superior for storage because the chips designed to handle the signals are already standard on most computers (don't need to pay for an extra chip), the bandwidth is much higher, and SATA (I and II) have many more performance features like NCQ and hardware accelerated RAID.

grapes911
Oct 29, 2005, 02:56 PM
...as Firewire 400 while being a lot cheaper because of the cap on licensing fees and the lack of having to pay out of pocket to Apple. IIRC it costs 25 cent per usb port or device with no cap.
Actually, it is 25 cents per end user system. And I'm pretty sure Apple pays that 25 cents too. Anyone purchasing the licensing for 1394, may use the FireWire name as long as they sign a trademark agreement.

BGil
Oct 29, 2005, 03:21 PM
Actually, it is 25 cents per end user system. And I'm pretty sure Apple pays that 25 cents too. Anyone purchasing the licensing for 1394, may use the FireWire name as long as they sign a trademark agreement.

Who is Apple paying that money to? Themseleves?

grapes911
Oct 29, 2005, 03:32 PM
Who is Apple paying that money to? Themseleves?
Apple lead the developement of 1394, but there were many companies involved: Apple, Sony, Canon, ST Microelectronics, Matsushita, National Semiconductor, RF Microdevices, and a bunch more. All these companes own patents that are used in 1394. They only charged other companies to use the technology. Apple wanted to raise the fee from $.25 per system to $1 per port. The other companies disagreed and said if Apple was going to get $1 per port, so were they. Basically, Apple was going to have to pay $15 per port. To solve the dispute, together they formed the 1394 Licensing Authority. This Authority charges 25 cents per system to everyone and distrubutes the profits amoung the patent holders.

carpe diem
Oct 29, 2005, 03:39 PM
can you get a FW camera?
Can you get a FW phone?
Can you get a FW mouse?
Can you get a FW tuner?

grapes911
Oct 29, 2005, 03:41 PM
can you get a FW camera?yes
Can you get a FW phone?I dont' think so
Can you get a FW mouse?No. It would be very slow and laggy. USB is much better at sending small bursts.
Can you get a FW tuner? Yes.

PCheese
Oct 29, 2005, 03:44 PM
Why would you get a FireWire mouse or phone? FireWire and USB 2 are for high rates of data transfer. Is your USB mouse USB 2.0? I doubt it... Similarly, you don't need broadband to talk on phones; low data rate analog lines suffice.

maya
Oct 29, 2005, 03:52 PM
What about FireWire 1600 and FireWireless?


Even though those technologies exist I am just throwing in a little fun in this discussion. ;) :D



note: I know what both are. :)

Church
Oct 29, 2005, 04:27 PM
can you get a FW camera?
Can you get a FW phone?
Can you get a FW mouse?
Can you get a FW tuner?

Carrying on with this idea, sorta.... can you get a FW video camera with a hard drive? (i hate tapes :D)

Dagless
Oct 29, 2005, 04:41 PM
i've never understood where they get the speed figures from. Firewire is 400mbps right? So why does it run at about 512kbps?
at the possible risk of answering my own question is it the speed of the hard disk drives your copying to/from?

iEdd
Oct 29, 2005, 04:46 PM
FW Mouse:
It would be very slow and laggy. USB is much better at sending small bursts.
The way it works, a firewire mouse would be better, like fw is with everything, though it would be an unnecessary cost. Mice are fine running at USB 1.1, so no way firewire would lag.

grapes911
Oct 29, 2005, 04:53 PM
FW Mouse:

The way it works, a firewire mouse would be better, like fw is with everything, though it would be an unnecessary cost. Mice are fine running at USB 1.1, so no way firewire would lag.
To simplify it, USB sends information in small, but fast bursts of data. Sort of like a machine gun firing bullets. The bursts are very quick. Firewire streams its data. It takes some time to get up to speed. Much like a car. You have to go slow and build up some speed. Not enough data is transmitted when using a mouse or keyboard. The data transfer would end before the speed started to increace. It would be like driving a car stuck in 1st gear. A mouse for instance, would lag behind the user's movement. Another example is if you had to transfer 100s or 1000s of small 1k files. USB would be much faster than Firewire.