Firewire 800 Gone on MacBook!

adk · Jan 10, 2006, 01:32 PM

The new MacBook Pros have gotten rid of firewire 800. so much for that Idea I guess...

groovebuster · Jan 10, 2006, 01:36 PM

For what do you need it anyway on a portable? Never got why people got so worked up about it...

groovebuster

bloopybone · Jan 10, 2006, 02:48 PM

I'm a sound engineer and do all my recording through a firewire interface...not the end of the world but, as macs are the standard for this kind of work, I think it's a shame the new laptops don't have it.

stoid · Jan 10, 2006, 03:09 PM

Honestly, that's the deal breaker right there, having only one FireWire port.

I'm really tempted to upgrade from my Rev A Aluminum 15 inch PowerBook, get the better proc/HD/graphics/SuperDrive but I need two FireWire ports. It's great that FireWire ports daisy chain, but not all devices do. I use my laptop as a desktop replacement, and I need to be able to plug in my 3G iPod and have my external drives at the same time. Yeah I can put the iPod at the end of the chain, but that terminates it and places undue limitations on my workflow.

Lord Blackadder · Jan 10, 2006, 03:40 PM

I never used FW myself so it doesn't really affect me.

But if they are going to to keep a FW port on their pro laptop, why not make it a FW800 port?

groovebuster · Jan 10, 2006, 04:30 PM

There are FireWire-Hubs...

groovebuster

howesey · Jan 10, 2006, 04:49 PM

Hey, another sound engineer here too.

I have noticed the iMac has been downgraded from Firewire 800 to 400. Which is kinda bad a in our studios we have four recording/edit rooms, thee have iMacs and one has a PowerMac. Upgrading the iMac's may be a no go (would like PowerMacs in the future in them anyway).

howesey · Jan 10, 2006, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by groovebuster

There are FireWire-Hubs...

groovebuster

Makes no difference, the bandwidth will still be 400Mbps, all you are doing is sharing the bandwidth out to all the devices connected to it.

Loge · Jan 10, 2006, 04:53 PM

There is plenty to like about the MacBook, but losing FW800 is a disappointment, and they didn't even add another USB port to make up for it. Adding hubs to a portable machine is tiresome to say the least.

rot@ti.org · Jan 10, 2006, 04:57 PM

I use Firewire 800 for backing up my PowerBook. I also need to use dial-up once in awhile. But the MacBook has no internal modem -- an external USB modem is a $50 extra.

Guess I'll have to lobby all my friends to install DSL and stop staying at cheap hotels that don't have wireless.

iEdd · Jan 10, 2006, 05:08 PM

It's a shame about FW800, the modem and the superdrives. DL superdrives can be plugged in with FW (400), modems and FW800 can be made with the card port. Still, internal modems in portables should be kept going for the next 15 or so years before dial-up is (finally) shoved.

joepunk · Jan 10, 2006, 05:24 PM

Since Apple droped FW800 I wished they could have added another USB port as a replacement.

-Escher- · Jan 10, 2006, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joepunk

Since Apple droped FW800 I wished they could have added another USB port as a replacement.

Agree!!!!!!!
My HP pavilion DV4000 has 4 USB ports!!! 3 would be reasonable..

MacRumorUser · Jan 10, 2006, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Escher-

Agree!!!!!!!
My HP pavilion DV4000 has 4 USB ports!!! 3 would be reasonable..

Yeah since no modem, they could have given us 1 more usb at least. Modem wasn't a shock though as theyve been removing it from all their products lately.

Battery life is my concern though...

-Escher- · Jan 10, 2006, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epepper9

It's a shame about
-FW800,
-the modem
-the superdrives.

FW800: don;t use it..don't need it...
The modem: well..for 39 bucks you can get a external one IF you eventually need it...
the superdrive: I really don't understand why they took it out!!!

One of the reasons for these changes could be the price! They took out some features, added others for the same price....

atszyman · Jan 10, 2006, 06:08 PM

Where is all of this data coming from? The sustained data bandwidth with a normal serial ATA drive is roughly 30 MB/s which is roughly on par with a FW400 port.

If you think you need FW800 you have to be pushing data out to a RAID array hanging off of the FW800 port and the data cannot ever pass through your local HD. If this is the case then you can bemoan the lack of FW800 otherwise FW400 should be sufficient for the data you are moving.

The fact that there is only a single FW port is a valid complaint however if you are pulling video off of a camera to an external drive since you are now stuck with one port to do the task (however if the hub is smart enough to basically connect the source directly to the disk then you don't have a problem here either).

Mac_Freak · Jan 10, 2006, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atszyman

Where is all of this data coming from? The sustained data bandwidth with a normal serial ATA drive is roughly 30 MB/s which is roughly on par with a FW400 port.

If you think you need FW800 you have to be pushing data out to a RAID array hanging off of the FW800 port and the data cannot ever pass through your local HD. If this is the case then you can bemoan the lack of FW800 otherwise FW400 should be sufficient for the data you are moving.

The fact that there is only a single FW port is a valid complaint however if you are pulling video off of a camera to an external drive since you are now stuck with one port to do the task (however if the hub is smart enough to basically connect the source directly to the disk then you don't have a problem here either).

I get up to 60MB/s (~55MB/s sustained) on my single drive configuration that I use as a scratch disk for my pro apps.

atszyman · Jan 10, 2006, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac_Freak

I get up to 60MB/s (~55MB/s sustained) on my single drive configuration that I use as a scratch disk for my pro apps.

Even that only barely exceeds 400 Mb/s of FW400. In our testing at work we had a hard time breaking 50 MB/s on a single drive and were usually stuck closer to 30, but all of this was on Intel based boxes with Windows/Linux (We don't support Macs ... Yet).

We have noted massive inefficiencies in the Intel architecture when it comes to moving data in Memory so it's possible that some of these inefficiencies are still existent in the new Intel chips making FW800 a pointless endeavor since you'd never be able to saturate even half of the available bandwidth...

Heb1228 · Jan 10, 2006, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epepper9

internal modems in portables should be kept going for the next 15 or so years before dial-up is (finally) shoved.

15 years? are you kidding? I guess they should probably have kept floppy drives on all the powerbooks too?

iEdd · Jan 10, 2006, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heb1228

15 years? are you kidding? I guess they should probably have kept floppy drives on all the powerbooks too?

It was (obviously) somewhat of an exaggeration. There are still plenty of places lacking a means of adsl though. Hotels generally have a (incredibly expensive) ADSL service, but smaller motels and holiday apartments don't. Most don't even have the possibility of lugging your own adsl modem up there.

adk · Jan 10, 2006, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atszyman

Where is all of this data coming from? The sustained data bandwidth with a normal serial ATA drive is roughly 30 MB/s which is roughly on par with a FW400 port.

If you think you need FW800 you have to be pushing data out to a RAID array hanging off of the FW800 port and the data cannot ever pass through your local HD. If this is the case then you can bemoan the lack of FW800 otherwise FW400 should be sufficient for the data you are moving.

The fact that there is only a single FW port is a valid complaint however if you are pulling video off of a camera to an external drive since you are now stuck with one port to do the task (however if the hub is smart enough to basically connect the source directly to the disk then you don't have a problem here either).

I'm not necessarily mad that it's gone, All I have for FW800 is one HD, and it can also use FW400. The reason I'm shocked is because Apple has been touting FW800 as the future.

MacTruck · Jan 10, 2006, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heb1228

15 years? are you kidding? I guess they should probably have kept floppy drives on all the powerbooks too?

Yeah say that again when you are out on business and your company puts you in a hotel with no hi speed access. OH CRAP!

kretzy · Jan 10, 2006, 09:23 PM

I can understand this would how and why this would annoy people. However I really don't think it's that bigger deal - I'm yet to come across anything able to utilise FW 800 anyway.

MacTruck · Jan 10, 2006, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by max_altitude

I can understand this would how and why this would annoy people. However I really don't think it's that bigger deal - I'm yet to come across anything able to utilise FW 800 anyway.

Well its not that big a deal for me as I have no firewire 800 anything. But firwire 800 is backward compatible with firewire 400. IMHO they should have axed firewire 400 and provided an adapter. Makes sense huh?

budugu · Jan 10, 2006, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atszyman

We have noted massive inefficiencies in the Intel architecture when it comes to moving data in Memory so it's possible that some of these inefficiencies are still existent in the new Intel chips making FW800 a pointless endeavor since you'd never be able to saturate even half of the available bandwidth...

Cost cutting! Period. Well apple has been cutting corners anyway... so a big surprise?

Jan 10, 2006, 01:32 PM	#1
adk macrumors 68000 Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Stuck in the middle with you	Firewire 800 Gone on MacBook! The new MacBook Pros have gotten rid of firewire 800. so much for that Idea I guess...
	0

Jan 10, 2006, 01:36 PM	#2
groovebuster macrumors 65816 Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: 3rd rock from the sun...	For what do you need it anyway on a portable? Never got why people got so worked up about it... groovebuster __________________ Look & Feel of Windows: "I LOOK at the product and I FEEL that it doesn't solve my problem."
	0

Jan 10, 2006, 03:40 PM	#5
Lord Blackadder macrumors G4 Join Date: May 2004 Location: Sod off	I never used FW myself so it doesn't really affect me. But if they are going to to keep a FW port on their pro laptop, why not make it a FW800 port? __________________ Oh, God, God, God! What on earth was I drinking last night? My head feels like there's a Frenchman living in it. - Edmund Blackadder
	0

Jan 10, 2006, 04:30 PM	#6
groovebuster macrumors 65816 Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: 3rd rock from the sun...	There are FireWire-Hubs... groovebuster __________________ Look & Feel of Windows: "I LOOK at the product and I FEEL that it doesn't solve my problem."
	0

Jan 10, 2006, 04:57 PM	#10
rot@ti.org macrumors newbie Join Date: Jan 2005	Firewire 800 and internal modem gone too! I use Firewire 800 for backing up my PowerBook. I also need to use dial-up once in awhile. But the MacBook has no internal modem -- an external USB modem is a $50 extra. Guess I'll have to lobby all my friends to install DSL and stop staying at cheap hotels that don't have wireless.
	0

Jan 10, 2006, 02:48 PM	#3
bloopybone macrumors newbie Join Date: Jan 2006	I'm a sound engineer and do all my recording through a firewire interface...not the end of the world but, as macs are the standard for this kind of work, I think it's a shame the new laptops don't have it.
	0

Jan 10, 2006, 03:09 PM	#4
stoid macrumors 68040 Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: So long, and thanks for all the fish!	Honestly, that's the deal breaker right there, having only one FireWire port. I'm really tempted to upgrade from my Rev A Aluminum 15 inch PowerBook, get the better proc/HD/graphics/SuperDrive but I need two FireWire ports. It's great that FireWire ports daisy chain, but not all devices do. I use my laptop as a desktop replacement, and I need to be able to plug in my 3G iPod and have my external drives at the same time. Yeah I can put the iPod at the end of the chain, but that terminates it and places undue limitations on my workflow.
	0

Jan 10, 2006, 04:49 PM	#7
howesey macrumors 6502a Join Date: Dec 2005	Hey, another sound engineer here too. I have noticed the iMac has been downgraded from Firewire 800 to 400. Which is kinda bad a in our studios we have four recording/edit rooms, thee have iMacs and one has a PowerMac. Upgrading the iMac's may be a no go (would like PowerMacs in the future in them anyway).
	0

Jan 10, 2006, 04:53 PM	#9
Loge macrumors 68000 Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: England	There is plenty to like about the MacBook, but losing FW800 is a disappointment, and they didn't even add another USB port to make up for it. Adding hubs to a portable machine is tiresome to say the least.
	0

Jan 10, 2006, 05:08 PM	#11
iEdd macrumors 68000 Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Australia	It's a shame about FW800, the modem and the superdrives. DL superdrives can be plugged in with FW (400), modems and FW800 can be made with the card port. Still, internal modems in portables should be kept going for the next 15 or so years before dial-up is (finally) shoved.
	0

Jan 10, 2006, 05:24 PM	#12
joepunk macrumors 68020 Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: a profane existence	Since Apple droped FW800 I wished they could have added another USB port as a replacement. __________________ 15" Al PB revB G4 1.5ghz/2gbRam/320gbHD/128vram 10.5.8 iMac G3 333mhz/128mbRam/6gbHD Flickr
	0

Jan 10, 2006, 06:08 PM	#16
atszyman macrumors 68020 Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: The Dallas 'burbs	Where is all of this data coming from? The sustained data bandwidth with a normal serial ATA drive is roughly 30 MB/s which is roughly on par with a FW400 port. If you think you need FW800 you have to be pushing data out to a RAID array hanging off of the FW800 port and the data cannot ever pass through your local HD. If this is the case then you can bemoan the lack of FW800 otherwise FW400 should be sufficient for the data you are moving. The fact that there is only a single FW port is a valid complaint however if you are pulling video off of a camera to an external drive since you are now stuck with one port to do the task (however if the hub is smart enough to basically connect the source directly to the disk then you don't have a problem here either). __________________ "I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." - Paul Erdös Every little bit helps, put your spare CPU cycles to good use, join the MacRumors Folding@Home team! Get the widget
	0

Jan 10, 2006, 09:23 PM	#23
kretzy macrumors 601 Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Canberra, Australia	I can understand this would how and why this would annoy people. However I really don't think it's that bigger deal - I'm yet to come across anything able to utilise FW 800 anyway.
	0

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Firewire devices	waltervt	Mac Peripherals	13	Sep 22, 2011 12:36 PM
2008 Mac Pro Becoming Unresponsive when plugging in FireWire 800 HDD?	Mythlin	Mac Pro	6	Jul 30, 2011 03:34 PM
Need help on constructing a firewire 800 harddrive on my own	Philberttheduck	Buying Tips and Advice	14	Aug 25, 2007 09:17 PM