'Home on iPod' Patent Surfaces

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Several sites are reporting on a recently published patent application from Apple which details the ability to store user accounts on external devices (such as the iPod) and moved/used on another computer.

Hence, by coupling the external, portable data store to another multi-user computer, a user is able to login to any supporting multi-user computer and be presented with their user configuration and user directory.

This idea is not new and was first revealed by Apple in 2003 as they were preparing for the Mac OS X 10.3 (Panther) release. "Home on iPod" was a feature that was inadvertently posted (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/10/20031008183849.shtml) on their website with the following description:

Home away from home

Ever thought you could carry your home in the palm of your hands or in your pocket? You can. Panther's Home on iPod feature lets you store your home directory - files, folders, apps - on your iPod (or any FireWire hard drive) and take it with you wherever you go. When you find yourself near a Panther-equipped Mac, just plug in the iPod, log in, and you're "home," no matter where you happen to be. And when you return to your home computer, you can synchronize any changes you've made to your files by using File Sync, which automatically updates offline changes to your home directory.

The description was quickly removed by Apple, and there has been no further mention of the feature.

[Arcady]

Mac OS X 10.2 (Panther)

Panther was 10.3. Jaguar was 10.2. [corrected]

[gauchogolfer]

Looks like one more possibility for 'Top Secret Stuff' about Leopard to be revealed at MWSF 2007.

:)

[Eraserhead]

Looks like one more possibility for 'Top Secret Stuff' about Leopard to be revealed at MWSF 2007.

:)

MWSF should be pretty exciting, and no need to get excited about mythical iPhones!:D

[qtip919]

Ive been dreaming of this kind of thing ever since my 2nd gen ipod.
Please, please let this be true! (as if we need any further motivation to by Leopard)

[iJaz]

Makes more sense now with 80gb iPods than it did back then.
A nice feature I think, especially for someone who works on several different computers.

[Danksi]

Sounds a lot like Mojopac (http://www.mojopac.com), which is unfortunately only Windows XP compatible.

[iMeowbot]

Direct link (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?patentnumber=7,120,785) to the patent, or as PDF (http://www.pat2pdf.org/patents/pat7120785.pdf).

[mdntcallr]

this would be one hell of a feature.

If i can use my ipod to store work files. use on more than one computer and have it sync the computers, that would be terrific.

hell it would also be terrific to be able to have my macs just keep up to date and sync the files, or just have access to the same work files folder also.

they would be both complementary features.

[Macnoviz]

Is anyone else having trouble with the frontpage?

It's text only for me

EDIT: problem is over, sorry to hack your thread

[MacViolinist]

I've been wanting this for a while, too. It seems as though the timing is a bit off though, now that iPods don't use firewire anymore.

I remember a while back someone came up with the idea of having the docks built into the desktop models. Just pop the iPod in and you're ready to go.

Here's a question someone can answer though. How does the OS deal with a fluctuating table of user accounts? It seems to me that such a situation would drive netinfo crazy.

[Le Big Mac]

Makes more sense now with 80gb iPods than it did back then.
A nice feature I think, especially for someone who works on several different computers.

Too bad they've taken iPod in a direction away from using it as an external HD (e.g., no more firewire). And taken it towards being a standard unto itself, rather than part of a Mac system (would this work with a PC? I doubt it).

I don't think the patent really changes anything, though. Presumably they filed it a while back, adn it's just now becoming public.

I'd love the feature, but I'm guessing it's not a high priority at Apple.

[~Shard~]

I had almost forgot about this "non-feature", it's been so long ago! ;) It would definitely be nice to see in Leopard. So far, looks like I'll finally be upgrading my Panther machine next spring to 10.5 - I like what I'm seeing so far... :cool:

[sartinsauce]

You know, I never noticed this during the Leopard preview. What an outstanding feature.

Like someone else said, this would inspire me to keep my 20GB 3G. It might even inspire me to pick up a larger capacity 4G.

Still, too bad Apple switched to USB for iPod connectivity. Firewire would be soooooooooo mcuh more efficient for this Sync Home to iPod feature. I'd hate to have to start copying a week early, just because I have s-l-o-w USB speeds...

[amols]

Looks like one more possibility for 'Top Secret Stuff' about Leopard to be revealed at MWSF 2007.

:)

What's the big deal here? Or am I missing something?? I use Data Backup to make exact bootable copy of MBP HD at home on external 2.5" firewire disk and carry it around. I can boot from it on any Intel Mac, do my work, bring it home and update the changes. Data Backup takes just a couple of minutes to do it. The only trouble is that PPC don't see Intel drives and vice-versa. And oh yes...iPod doesn't work as music player if formated for Intel Macs (GPT) :mad:

[thejadedmonkey]

I've wanted this feature since I first heard about it eons ago.

[gauchogolfer]

What's the big deal here? Or am I missing something?? I use Data Backup to make exact bootable copy of MBP HD at home on external 2.5" firewire disk and carry it around. I can boot from it on any Intel Mac, do my work, bring it home and update the changes. Data Backup takes just a couple of minutes to do it. The only trouble is that PPC don't see Intel drives and vice-versa. And oh yes...iPod doesn't work as music player if formated for Intel Macs (GPT) :mad:

I guess the big deal is that you don't have to go through the hassle that you described. You wouldn't necessarily be rebooting each time either. I'd prefer to just check a box in iPod preferences, personally.

As you pointed out, for the power user there are probably already solutions that work fine. For the rest of us...

[~Shard~]

Like someone else said, this would inspire me to keep my 20GB 3G. It might even inspire me to pick up a larger capacity 4G.

Yeah, I could definitely see me using my 3G iPod for this purpose as well. :cool:

[johnmcboston]

Well, aside form being Mac rather than PC oriented, how is this different than what companies are trying to do with flash drives via softwre products like U3?

- J

[macgyver2]

Here's a question someone can answer though. How does the OS deal with a fluctuating table of user accounts? It seems to me that such a situation would drive netinfo crazy.
NetInfo is going away in Leopard, so no worries. :)

[iMeowbot]

In PAIR it's noted that a related application is in the system: application 11/512,848 filed on 08-29-2006. It will be a few months before we get to see that one.

[amols]

I guess the big deal is that you don't have to go through the hassle that you described. You wouldn't necessarily be rebooting each time either. I'd prefer to just check a box in iPod preferences, personally.

As you pointed out, for the power user there are probably already solutions that work fine. For the rest of us...

Yes...but you just can't carry around home folder like that. Thia isn't OS 9 anymore. What if you have iTunes library made by iTunes 7 in your home folder but the target computer has iTunes 6. Same goes for Aperture, FCP, and many more. What if the whole operating system is out of date. There will always be conflict between /Library and ~/Library.

[Bob Knob]

I wonder if the sync feature will make use of Time Machine's core, I seem to recall Steve making a big deal out of the fact that its core would be accessible to third party developers. OSX's current "supplied" syncing functions and apps don't seem to have the muscle to pull this off.

[Flowbee]

Like many, I've been waiting for this feature since the original rumor/slip-up by Apple. Wonder what's taken them so long to get this out the door.

[KingYaba]

Is it bad if you already do this with your iPod? :p

[bigandy]

Me likey. I really hope it does get included this time, it's something I've been waiting for too.

As with previous comments, USB2 bad for this. Tooooo sloooow. 40Gb 3G iPod? Perfect :D

[crees!]

And oh yes...iPod doesn't work as music player if formated for Intel Macs (GPT) :mad: Intel or PPC the file system is HFS+. What's the deal? and GPT?

[zv470]

1) wouldn't this open a huge security hole.
2) wouldn't the othe Mac have to have 10.5 or whatever on it as well? (or is that the idea? ;) )

[apb3]

Like many, I've been waiting for this feature since the original rumor/slip-up by Apple. Wonder what's taken them so long to get this out the door.


I'm guessing the above post hit the nail on the head as to why it took a bit longer to get out the door {edit(if they DO/CAN overcome the mentioned issues in a manner that makes it do what I would want in a way that is elegant)}:


Originally Posted by gauchogolfer
I guess the big deal is that you don't have to go through the hassle that you described. You wouldn't necessarily be rebooting each time either. I'd prefer to just check a box in iPod preferences, personally.

As you pointed out, for the power user there are probably already solutions that work fine. For the rest of us...

Yes...but you just can't carry around home folder like that. Thia isn't OS 9 anymore. What if you have iTunes library made by iTunes 7 in your home folder but the target computer has iTunes 6. Same goes for Aperture, FCP, and many more. What if the whole operating system is out of date. There will always be conflict between /Library and ~/Library.
__________________
-iMac G4 700Mhz 160GB HD
-MBP 2.16 Ghz 160GB HD
-iPod 3G 40GB, 4G 60GB, 5G 60GB, Mini 6GB, Nano white 4GB, Nano black 4GB
-Canon Powershot S3 IS

[apb3]

Intel or PPC the file system is HFS+. What's the deal? and GPT?


This??

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/storage/GPT-on-x64.mspx

or maybe I'm way off?

http://www.gpt.org/

:D

[Aztechian]

I'm wondering how they'll work out the authentication issues. Such as:

Where is the authentication stored? (iPod or local system)
What happens to computers that are set up with OS X server to be network/mobile accounts?
I'm pretty sure there's some admins that don't want random people with iPods logging on to their machines...

thats a whole can of worms that makes my head hurt :eek:

[amols]

Intel or PPC the file system is HFS+. What's the deal? and GPT?

Intel macs use new partition format called GUID Partition Table or GPT. PPC Macs use Apple Partition Map or APM. Open Disk utility and click on your startup disk. At the bottom, you'll see what partition scheme your mac has. The problem is that Intel Macs can see APM formated drives but can not boot from them. PPC Macs are even worse. They don't work properly with GPT formatted drives under Tiger and not even supported in Panther and below. Most guys don't know about this and Apple isn't generous enough

http://db.tidbits.com/article/08405

[pyramid6]

What would actually be nicer is if the iPod could view the files in my home directory, maybe even edit some of them.
Another option I would like to see is, the same thing mentioned, but with a MacBook (Pro). I could use the MacBook when I'm out, and then, dock it back with a Mac Pro. If all the software worked the same, and I could save my "sessions", then you get the best of both worlds. I'm too mobile not to use a MacBook, but I do a lot of heavy lifting.

P6

[parenthesis]

I can see this as being a nice selling point for Leopard and/or a way to convince people to upgrade their macs to the x86 architecture (e.g. say that this feature is only available to Intel-based macs).

[Clive At Five]

I said it on AI and I'm'a say it here:

This feature would be MUCH more useful if there were more "panther-equipped" (leopard, now, if anything) Macs lying around. Macintosh presence is spotty, even at the library and college campus and even if they are present, are rarely running the most up-to-date operating system. IT departments that run both PCs and Macs take a look at Jaguar, say, "still no virii!" and put off updating macs for another year.

The only widespread (if you even want to call it that) use for this technology is if you are lucky enough to have a Mac at work. So, not very widespread at all.

It's cool though. I'd use it... if I had a use for it, that is.

-Clive

[Superdrive]

The real question is: Is the user account on the iPod authorized to play purchased items on any computer?

[Clive At Five]

Oh, and I also want to add that a patent grant rarely means anything anymore... and I find it amusing that so many of you "otomatically" think this feature will now show up in Leopard. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. I'm just saying... Apple abandoned it for a reason. It didn't appear in Tiger, either. What makes you think it's going to appear in Leopard? A patent grant? Pfft!

As a note, the iPod scroll-wheel interface was being used LONG before a patent was attained. Also, if this Home on iPod technology HAD been adopted in Panther, it, too, would have been in use for a long time before earning the patent. That's why I think it would be a rash conclusion to assume that now, since there's a patent, there will be a product. Patent =/= product!

Pfft again! Pfft!

-Clive

[MrCrowbar]

You can already boot from an external HD if you have an image of your Macintosh HD on it (starting from the OSX installer disc and running disk utility). But this takes hours and has no incremental synching. I love the idea to connect my iPod to any Mac running Leopard, an BOOM, there's the login screen with my name and picture popping up and I can login as I would on my home computer.

The only big problem is iPods are not made to be used as a system drive. Those small hard drives don't like read/writing non-stop. And Flash memory (which is still kinda expensive for a reasonable amount of storage) has limited read/write cycles. But you could jus sync some folders the way you sync playlists in iTunes...

[milo]

Too bad they've taken iPod in a direction away from using it as an external HD (e.g., no more firewire).

USB is used for external HD's, same as firewire.

[MrCrowbar]

Actually this would be an alternative to syncing via .MAC
Apple earns money with .Mac, so it's not gonna happen. ;)

[Dunepilot]

Oh, and I also want to add that a patent grant rarely means anything anymore... and I find it amusing that so many of you "otomatically" think this feature will now show up in Leopard. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. I'm just saying... Apple abandoned it for a reason. It didn't appear in Tiger, either. What makes you think it's going to appear in Leopard? A patent grant? Pfft!

As a note, the iPod scroll-wheel interface was being used LONG before a patent was attained. Also, if this Home on iPod technology HAD been adopted in Panther, it, too, would have been in use for a long time before earning the patent. That's why I think it would be a rash conclusion to assume that now, since there's a patent, there will be a product. Patent =/= product!

Pfft again! Pfft!

-Clive

I agree. I think Apple started to think about the potential problems it would create, encouraging people to hammer iPod hard drives in a way that normal use (as an mp3 player, it's always throwing data into flash memory) wouldn't. Bear in mind it doesn't have the appropriate cooling to deal with constant access either. The iPod has been designed to be thin rather than cool.

I think this is a ditched feature. They'd rather not have to deal with the backlash if the hardware started to give up under the conditions that Home on iPod would create. And yes, I know you can do it already in one way or another, but that's very different from encouraging use of that capability. Ditto on ditching firewire (which would be much more suitable for sustained data transfer than USB2).

[ChrisA]

Didn't people copy files onto portable devices and "sneeker net" them around, in like the 1960's and 70's? Back then the devices we used were bigger (14 inch disk platters and reels of 1/2 inch tape) but the idea was the same -- I could take my whole environment with me. Later in the 1980's we had computer networks and could keep UNIX home directories on a file server and then there was no need to move the physical media - the file server wuild export your home directory to which ever computer you logged into

[amols]

Me likey. I really hope it does get included this time, it's something I've been waiting for too.

As with previous comments, USB2 bad for this. Tooooo sloooow. 40Gb 3G iPod? Perfect :D

Firewire is slower on current MBP 15" and MB than USB2.0 which is 480Mbps. Anyway, it won't matter unless the iPod has 10,000 RPM drives that can achieve 50 MB/s (400 Mbps) sustained speed.

[gugy]

wow, that would be an amazing feature and will help me avoid buyig a laptop.
sweet bring it on!
I wonder if the long rumored video ipod will take advantage of this capability.

[pyramid6]

Didn't people copy files onto portable devices and "sneeker net" them around, in like the 1960's and 70's? Back then the devices we used were bigger (14 inch disk platters and reels of 1/2 inch tape) but the idea was the same -- I could take my whole environment with me. Later in the 1980's we had computer networks and could keep UNIX home directories on a file server and then there was no need to move the physical media - the file server wuild export your home directory to which ever computer you logged into

Yes. Some companies were still doing this in the mid 90's. However, ask your Network Admin. if he minds if you store your DVD collection on the network drive. :D

[babyj]

That patent was filed nearly four years ago, so it is pretty meaningless now other than showing what Apple were working on back then. Just because its been made public now doesn't mean anything and definetly doesn't mean the products / technologies in the patent are going to be released.

Any recently filed patents won't of been made public yet, they're the interesting ones that would give some indication as to what Apple are currently working on.

[Doctor Q]

Are people misinterpreting the "home on iPod" idea? It was to let your home directory be on a portable device, not to let you use your home directory from the portable device (without your Mac). You would not log into your iPod and see the Finder or run your apps. The iPod would merely be the external device used to store your home directory when you log into your Mac.

At our school, we already have home folders stored on a server, so that students can sit at any Mac and log into their account. This is the same idea, but with a portable storage device.

[gugy]

The way I understand how this works is that you sync the ipod your directory with apps, files, etc from your let's say home desktop. bring it with you let's say, the office attach the ipod with a Mac and work out of that Mac using the apps, files, etc stored on your ipod. Then you get back home and sync it back to your original Mac.
That's why I said I would drop of buying a laptop in favor of such a thing, since I have a PowerMac at home.
I love the idea. I hope it's true.

[shecky]

i thought an issue with this would be writing to and from the ipod's drive for extended periods of time would be A Bad Thing™ becuase the ipod can not dissipate heat properly enough to make it a "working" drive.

?

EDIT. whoops. Dune beat me to it.

[Thanatoast]

Does this mean I get a 80-gig true-video home-on-iPhone next Tuesday?

[gugy]

that would be nice, but I do expect a special event for the true video ipod. so I hope before middle of November.

[crees!]

The way I understand how this works is that you sync the ipod your directory with apps, files, etc from your let's say home desktop. bring it with you let's say, the office attach the ipod with a Mac and work out of that Mac using the apps, files, etc stored on your ipod. Then you get back home and sync it back to your original Mac.
That's why I said I would drop of buying a laptop in favor of such a thing, since I have a PowerMac at home.
I love the idea. I hope it's true.
But couldn't that violate software licenses for some of those apps.

[gugy]

I guess, not sure how they would pull that of.
Plus how would the ipod behave if you use it in this mode for a long period of time. Heat issue?

[generik]

Does it make sense?

I can make myself a super user on an iPodded account, plug it into any mac I see in the store, and log on as an admin!

[crees!]

Does it make sense?

I can make myself a super user on an iPodded account, plug it into any mac I see in the store, and log on as an admin!
Good point. Yet another thing to work out.

[Clive At Five]

But couldn't that violate software licenses for some of those apps.

Uhh... if your home folder is named, "Applications" then yes.

I don't know many people who install applications to a destination in their user directory... and even if they did, they probably wouldn't work, due to requiring some other external file or resource of some sort.

...Then again I installed iTunes on my flash drive so I could listen to web radio at work without technically installing anything on my computer. teehee.

-Clive

[ekalb39]

Has anyone tried Folder Share for mac? I have been using it on my pc and love it. It syncs folders you specify over the internet. :D

Http://www.foldershare.com

[iMikeT]

I sure hope this happens in Leopard.

[mcorange]

I would just like to point out that Firewire is still supported on iPods. They just don't supply the cables anymore.

[twoodcc]

oh man, this is just what i want! please oh please let this be released soon

[iMeowbot]

I would just like to point out that Firewire is still supported on iPods. They just don't supply the cables anymore.
In the last few iterations, they followed up the cable change by yanking out the FireWire chips. Only the power leads remain.

[mcorange]

In the last few iterations, they followed up the cable change by yanking out the FireWire chips. Only the power leads remain.

Damn, that sucks...I wasn't aware of that.
But googling it, yes, I can see now..

Well, hmm...bad choice.

[Mgkwho]

I think it would be more practical for iPhone to have this feature than an iPod.

People (at least me) do not carry their iPods everywhere, all the time. I do carry my cellphone with me everywhere, all the time. I think it would be more practical to have this feature in a cellhpone (not to say that it wouldn't be usable in an iPod or even usb flash drive).

To be honest, I actually have had this 'vision of the future' personally that involves just this: using your phone as the computer, with displays present everywhere along with keyboards and mice. You just keep your cellphone in your pocket while you use a screen and peripherals to connect to it in a less-portable way.

And this idea I had was without anyone's influence...it's just kinda cool that Apple had come up with a patent that essentially is the precursor to this. It's a feeling of gratification that this teenager kinda likes :-D.

Anyway, I think it'd be a great feature for Leopard and iPhone rather than the iPod because of portability and the fact that everyone carries a cellphone now a days everywhere.

-=|Mgkwho

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

I wonder if the original plans were canned because of the iPods leaving Firewire in the cold.. USB really isnt up to speed as FireWire 800 (Or 400 for that matter) is.

Unfortunately, I would'nt want to read/write so much on my iPods harddrive.. *Yikes* -But it could convince me to get a 500 Gb harddrive.. (If Copenhagen University had any Mac's that is... Sigh..)

[SeaFox]

Too bad they've taken iPod in a direction away from using it as an external HD (e.g., no more firewire).

Cause ya know, you can't use USB to connect an external hard drive... :rolleyes:

[Clive At Five]

Cause ya know, you can't use USB to connect an external hard drive... :rolleyes:

Speed, my friend. Speed is the issue.

It was acknowledged that USB 2.0 could be used... but at speeds only comparable to Firewire 400... which is too slow for user files in the gigabytes.

-Clive

[Eraserhead]

Actually this would be an alternative to syncing via .MAC
Apple earns money with .Mac, so it's not gonna happen. ;)

Yeah but I'm never going to buy .mac, but I have got two Mac's it's such a bastard keeping them synced (this is after 2 day's of Macbook ownership) that I'm going to buy a new monitor and speakers for my Macbook and just use that, (which will cost £150 I'd rather not spend.) If I could keep the two Mac's synced I'd keep both, this also increases the possibility that I'd buy another desktop mac in the future (though in my case it's unlikely for a while as my iMac is only 1.5 years old.)

Apple makes a LOT more money from it's hardware than .Mac, (and if Leopard came with this it'd be reason enough to buy it on it's own even with no other features as that costs less than £150.)

You can currently sync for free via SSH/rsync, but SSH seems to be allergic to Page's files and it corrupts them removing all my LaTeX equations, so my Math's notes become *very* interesting ;).

[SeaFox]

Yes...but you just can't carry around home folder like that. Thia isn't OS 9 anymore. What if you have iTunes library made by iTunes 7 in your home folder but the target computer has iTunes 6. Same goes for Aperture, FCP, and many more. What if the whole operating system is out of date. There will always be conflict between /Library and ~/Library.

The feature will obviously require both machines be running 10.5, and I don't think 10.5 will include iTunes 6. Apple will just release updates for the ProApps that are required to run them under 10.5, this is how you gaurantee verision compatability.

[bretm]

Speed, my friend. Speed is the issue.

It was acknowledged that USB 2.0 could be used... but at speeds only comparable to Firewire 400... which is too slow for user files in the gigabytes.

-Clive

USB 2 is fast enough for video editing, albeit not perfect. It's plenty fast for transferring data in reasonable amts of time. As is FW400.

[funkychunkz]

I really hope the true video ipod has firewire (larger disks for higher res video, upsclable to a HD set too, :) . USB is ok, but doesn't cut it for a hard drive, and certainly not for real time editting of large files.

This idea is actually on my list of things to come in Leopard (before the OP, I mean), it's just plain useful to be able to bring your environnement with you. Just seemless intergration has kept people from doing themselves. Another implementaion for the user account setup that I'd like to see is a guest account with sessions. All guests would have limited acess to system files and a 'scratch space' when they go to log out, the system would promt th guest to record the worked on files and settings to a USB or FW drive, across a network, to .mac, or CD.

The system would then clean up, and rest setings as part of a logout hook, ready for the next guest. This would be useful for those who needed the computers resources (apps, hardware, database) , or didn't have a mac to do the portable home thing from.

Obviously any non-permanent user shouldn't dictate it's own user rights for that terminal... Instead, they would be free to work in their own space and read most files ('others' classification) from the disk. I don't think that entering another users credentials would be an option, ie for admin prcedures.

I think the timing would be right currently because of the availability of removable storage, even SD cards, and the OS that just does it all.. right apple? *wink*

[GodBless]

iChat in Leopard (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/ichat.html) will also allow us to more easily access, use and share files.

Here is a quote from Apple's Leopard iChat page (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/ichat.html) regarding this:


Share and share alike
Remote control takes on a whole new meaning with iChat in Leopard. Thanks to iChat Screen Sharing, you and your buddy can observe and control a single desktop via iChat, making it a cinch to collaborate with colleagues, browse the Web with a friend, or pick the perfect plane seats with your spouse. Share your own desktop or share your buddy’s — you both have complete control at all times. And when you start a Screen Sharing session, iChat automatically initiates an audio chat so you can talk things through while you’re at it.

Assuming that easy access to share/find/travel with/use files is a focus of Apple's for Leopard we might just see a new Finder in addition to iPod Home Directories, Time Machine, iChat Remote Control File Sharing, Spotlight enhancements and more that is coming within the next few months.

I hope this is just a verification that Apple's promise of "Top Secret" features was a sign that Apple's labor team is dutifully and confidentially setting out to surprise and serve us with great new features in what will soon be a great new OS. :)

[matticus008]

Too bad they've taken iPod in a direction away from using it as an external HD (e.g., no more firewire). And taken it towards being a standard unto itself, rather than part of a Mac system (would this work with a PC? I doubt it).
iPod has moved in a direction toward greater external HD use, if anything. Intel Macs, most PowerPC Macs (with the exception of boot capability), and PCs all work with current iPods. Like it or not, Firewire is being repositioned in the computer market as a whole. This technology is one developed for OS X and of course would not work with any other OS. Whether or not it will require an iPod is unknown (but doubtful)--it just happens that lots of people have iPods, which make for convenient "satellites" for this system.

1) wouldn't this open a huge security hole.
Not necessarily. There's no reason to assume that you will be able to take your local machine privileges to every computer in the world. In fact, it's more than likely that you'd have only guest privileges on "unfamiliar" computers--you'd have to have an admin on the destination computer set up your account beforehand or manually grant you admin access. There's absolutely no way that administrator rights would be fully and automatically portable.

This is an issue that's already been dealt with long ago--your network logon can have different credentials based on what machine you're sitting at. You might be an admin on your computer and on the two in the production lab, for example, but you're not necessarily an admin on the computer in the office next to yours. Likewise, I'm sure it will be optional to support this feature at all--disabling "gypsy users" will certainly be possible.

Any dream of creating a sudoer account and plugging it into some random computer you've never logged onto before and having total access is purely something for the realm of movies.

2) wouldn't the othe Mac have to have 10.5 or whatever on it as well? (or is that the idea? ;) )
If it's introduced as a feature of Leopard, then it will probably require Leopard. C'est la vie.

But couldn't that violate software licenses for some of those apps.
Not likely. If you install your application to your home folder, you only have access to your one copy, which is effectively moving with you from computer to computer. The only problem would be software titles that require activation, which wouldn't be candidates for portability.

[matticus008]

Speed, my friend. Speed is the issue.

It was acknowledged that USB 2.0 could be used... but at speeds only comparable to Firewire 400... which is too slow for user files in the gigabytes.

-Clive
FW400 and USB 2.0 are both faster than current iPod hard drives can saturate, so the issue is irrelevant. It's also less than likely that anyone would be working on an iPod for major projects in the gigabytes--that's why we have *real* external hard drives.

[bigwig]

I don't see why this patent should be granted. Apple's idea is no different in principle from a diskless workstation mounting a user's home directory from a remote server, which we were doing when I worked at Sun Microsystems in 1989. Most users got Sun 3/50 workstations with only enough disk to store a bootable operating system, your personal data was stored on a server and mounted locally via NFS. If you change the storage unit from a big server located in an air-conditioned room to a USB stick in your pocket, and the transport mechanism from NFS over TCP/IP to USB/Firewire, you have what Apple wants to patent. There is nothing new here.

[Doctor Q]

If you change the storage unit from a big server located in an air-conditioned room to a USB stick in your pocket, and the transport mechanism from NFS over TCP/IP to USB/Firewire, you have what Apple wants to patent. There is nothing new here.The world of patents is strange. Sometimes changing "this to that" is the brilliant move that makes an idea patentable. In this case, however, I agree that having a portable storage device for a home directory doesn't sound very innovative.

[k8to]

Hooray for trivial patents.

[redAPPLE]

so will apple support firewire-powered iPods again!? :confused:

hope so. down with usb!

[SeaFox]

so will apple support firewire-powered iPods again!?

No, because they would have to add the Firewire controller back to the PCB, and it was removed because it didn't fit in the current case thickness. So they would have to redesign the iPod.

[sunfast]

This is a FANTASTIC idea! I didn't have a Mac in the Panther days so never heard about that slip-up. But what a great idea.

I really wish I had a bigger capacity iPod now though

[Dunepilot]

iPod has moved in a direction toward greater external HD use, if anything. Intel Macs, most PowerPC Macs (with the exception of boot capability), and PCs all work with current iPods. Like it or not, Firewire is being repositioned in the computer market as a whole. This technology is one developed for OS X and of course would not work with any other OS. Whether or not it will require an iPod is unknown (but doubtful)--it just happens that lots of people have iPods, which make for convenient "satellites" for this system.

I beg to differ. I have a 5th Gen iPod which transfers much more slowly by USB2 than my 3rd Gen did by FW400. A quick look at barefeats would show you the real-world speed advantages of Firewire over USB2.

Also, are you saying that Firewire won't work with any other OS, or by 'this technology' were you referring to 'home on iPod'?

[Macnoviz]

No, because they would have to add the Firewire controller back to the PCB, and it was removed because it didn't fit in the current case thickness. So they would have to redesign the iPod.

Couldn't they offer 30 pin to Firewire cables?

[Henriok]

There's a Menu Extra (/S/L/CoreServices/Menu Extras/) in Leopard that is called "Home on iPod". It was there in Tiger and Panther too during the development but was taken away later on.

[matticus008]

I beg to differ. I have a 5th Gen iPod which transfers much more slowly by USB2 than my 3rd Gen did by FW400. A quick look at barefeats would show you the real-world speed advantages of Firewire over USB2.

Also, are you saying that Firewire won't work with any other OS, or by 'this technology' were you referring to 'home on iPod'?
"This technology" refers to the "portable accounts" development, not Firewire. Sorry for the confusion.

As for your USB transfers, it's well known that Apple's USB drivers basically suck. The Barefeats website also has a number of flaws in the way they collect and present data (though it's historically been one of the only resources available for Mac benchmarks), and that data refers to a comparison of high-speed desktop drives, not the 1.8" micro drives in an iPod. The biggest flaw with Barefeats is that the data composition is not disclosed--is it large files, small files, a mix? Firewire's speed benefit is only realized by a large margin when transfering at a sustained rate, which requires relatively large files. In other words, there's a clear advantage for video work, but little to no "real world" advantage to moving thousands of Word documents, for example.

An iPod hard drive is slower than USB 2.0's peak "real world" speeds--transfers to and from my 4G iPod (30+ GB, mostly 3MB-10MB files) on my PC are within a few seconds of the time required by my PowerBook (FW). When using USB on the PowerBook, the speed difference is more substantial (15-30 seconds).


Couldn't they offer 30 pin to Firewire cables?
No, because there's no Firewire logic in the iPod. The pins in the dock connector would still have to connect to something inside the iPod, and there's nothing but USB present.

[GregA]

This feature would be MUCH more useful if there were more "panther-equipped" (leopard, now, if anything) Macs lying around. It would seem to make it much easier to implement if you had identical operating systems.

However, if your application supports 10.3/10.4/10.5, then it'd really become a question of whether 10.3 supports iHome.

I know an upgraded iPhoto library doesn't load on an older version - could Apple upgrade the older iPhoto to handle the new files only (but no other newer features). I'd like to see a free 10.5-lite - without all the goodies - just to get people on a common platform.

So anyway, if Apple let us backup (time machine) to an online server, do we need an iPod to log on to any Mac and see our desktop? Or could we do it from the online copy?

[Jimmieboy]

Don't know why they decided to drop it. I'd love it if that featyre was avaible!