Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Notebooks > MacBook Pro

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old May 9, 2009, 12:16 PM   #1
chowmein
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
So... when's FireWire 1600 and 3200 coming out?

According to Wikipedia:
"In December 2007, the 1394 Trade Association announced that products will be available before the end of 2008 (LOL!) using the S1600 and S3200 modes that, for the most part, had already been defined in 1394b and was further clarified in IEEE Std. 1394-2008. The 1.6 Gbit/s and 3.2 Gbit/s devices use the same 9-circuit beta connectors as the existing FireWire 800 and will be fully compatible with existing S400 and S800 devices."

The standards have been ratified but what's taking so long?
chowmein is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2009, 12:54 PM   #2
The General
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Just get eSATA.
The General is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2009, 01:32 PM   #3
Sneakz
macrumors 65816
 
Sneakz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
FireWire biggest supporter was Apple and now it looks like Apple getting ready to dump them within the next 4-5 years. USB is more "universal". Everything is USB. Firewire looses the speed advantage with USB 3.0 as it still faster than FW 3200. Personally, I think that eSATA/USB (You know those dual eSATA/USB ports that some Dells and Toshibas have) are the future and hopefully we will see them on future Macs.
Sneakz is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2009, 01:40 PM   #4
MikhailT
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by The General View Post
Just get eSATA.
eSATA sucks on Macs. It may be the fastest interface but the support for it is extremely horrible.

At the moment, Firewire 800 is the best interface for macs.


As for USB 3.0, it may not be faster than Firewire 3200 for a while since it takes time for the technology to improve to 5Gbps. With firewire, we know it can go to the max possible speed. USB really depends on a lot of things to get the max speed, cpu + drivers + chipset all needs to be at the top game in order for USB to work well. Firewire, everything is at the firewire chipset. Unless USB 3.0 will include its own chipset to do the work, last time i check, it doesn't appear to be so.
MikhailT is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2009, 11:26 PM   #5
Minimoose 360
macrumors 65816
 
Minimoose 360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NY
Never.
__________________
iPhone 5 64GB 'HAL 9000' - 17"MacBook Pro 2.93GHz, 320GB 7200rpm, 4GB RAM
'Skynet' - Phenom II BE X6 @4.0GHz, RadeonHD 6950 XXX 2GB (2)CrossFireX @ 925MHz, 8GB RAM @ 1600MHz
Minimoose 360 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 9, 2009, 08:29 AM   #6
ncdasa
macrumors member
 
Join Date: May 2009
firewire > usb , i mean practically speaking

I hardly know enough about computers to be commenting here but still as far as i understand and have experienced fw always smokes usb. From what i have read the only real thing that seems to be keeping firewire from eating usb and esata alive is some bad royalties deal which makes supporting that technology more expensive then the competition (or something like that).

FW can power any and every 2.5 disk with one port as the long as the sun shines ( usb and esata ) and more then that it can support numerable FW drives daisy-chained on that same port. So a comp only really needs 1 FW port and everything is possible.

Target disk mode

and finally what is all the garbage i always hear about usbs "theoretical" speeds? Who actually cares? When has a FW drive ever been slower then a usb drive in real life? And you know that whatever usb3s actually speeds are they will be (at best) only a little bit faster then FW 3200 if not slower in real life. and that is still minus all the functions FW can do that usb cant.

Still everything is usb compatible and its cheaper, but then again it is a cheaper product, if u know what i mean.
ncdasa is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 10:01 AM   #7
EssentialParado
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
You realize we all effectively have FW3200 ports on all current Macs and MacBooks?

When manufacturer's release 1600 and 3200 devices, they'll plug into the 800 port but we'll get 3200 speeds as FW800 is forwards compatible.

There's a lot of decent USB 3.0 vs FW800 articles on the net, and the consensus appears to be FW being a much better technology than USB (which it always has been) but USB has the advantage of being slightly cheaper for iPods and things. But if I'm buying another external drive, there's no question it'll be a firewire drive and not a USB drive. USB just takes up too much of my CPU… (Firewire uses none)
EssentialParado is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 10:15 AM   #8
reallynotnick
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by EssentialParado View Post
You realize we all effectively have FW3200 ports on all current Macs and MacBooks?

When manufacturer's release 1600 and 3200 devices, they'll plug into the 800 port but we'll get 3200 speeds as FW800 is forwards compatible.

Please post info on this as I have never heard of such a thing, or if someone could chime in that would be helpful. But I am 90% sure this is not the case otherwise FW1600 and 3200 would have got rolling awhile ago.
reallynotnick is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 10:21 AM   #9
amoda
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
"Firewire 3200 will use the same connectors as its predecessor FireWire 800 but it should deliver at least 4 times the performance. It will increase FireWire speed from 800 Mbps to 3.2 Gbps." - http://www.firewire3200.com/

They go on directly to state that it'll be released in 08 aha.
amoda is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 10:24 AM   #10
MacModMachine
macrumors 68000
 
MacModMachine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by amoda View Post
"Firewire 3200 will use the same connectors as its predecessor FireWire 800 but it should deliver at least 4 times the performance. It will increase FireWire speed from 800 Mbps to 3.2 Gbps." - http://www.firewire3200.com/

They go on directly to state that it'll be released in 08 aha.
the 800 will not support 3200...its the same connector but a new chipset.

the 800 is compatbile with the 3200/1600

as the 400 is compatible with the 800 with a converter.
MacModMachine is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 10:24 AM   #11
sushi
Moderator emeritus
 
sushi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: キャンプスワンピー [Japan]
Quote:
Originally Posted by EssentialParado View Post
When manufacturer's release 1600 and 3200 devices, they'll plug into the 800 port but we'll get 3200 speeds as FW800 is forwards compatible.
You mean backwards compatible.

For example, if you purchase a current MBP13 with FW800 you can connect it to FW400, FW800, FW1600 and FW3200 devices. However, the data transmission speed will be limited to your MBP13's FW800 bus. So for FW1600 and FW3200 devices you will see FW800 transmission speeds. For a FW400 device you will see FW400 transmission speeds because your transmission speed will be limited by the FW400 device.
__________________
You only live twice, once when you are born, and when you look death in the face. *Basho style poem from 007 YOLT.
sushi is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 10:27 AM   #12
spinnerlys
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: forlod bygningen
Quote:
Originally Posted by amoda View Post
"Firewire 3200 will use the same connectors as its predecessor FireWire 800 but it should deliver at least 4 times the performance. It will increase FireWire speed from 800 Mbps to 3.2 Gbps." - http://www.firewire3200.com/

They go on directly to state that it'll be released in 08 aha.
Using the same connectors doesn't mean anything, they just won't change the connector type.
USB 1 and USB 2 also use the same connector, but using a USB 2 device on a USB 1 device won't give you USB 2 speeds, will it?

Also the chipset has to support the transfer speeds, so Apple has to include FW3200 chipsets and ports.

If they already did, they would advertise some small hell out of it, like being advanced and such.
spinnerlys is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 10:28 AM   #13
Anuba
macrumors 68040
 
Anuba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by reallynotnick View Post

Please post info on this as I have never heard of such a thing, or if someone could chime in that would be helpful. But I am 90% sure this is not the case otherwise FW1600 and 3200 would have got rolling awhile ago.
The connectors are indeed the same as FW800, but wouldn't it require a new chipset? Some things can be done with a firmware update... I remember back when Apple enabled 802.11n on 802.11g machines with a simple update.
Anuba is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 10:28 AM   #14
amoda
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
By what I understand this will happen:

If you plug a device/cable using FW3200 into a FW800 port, it will run at 3200 speeds.

If you plug a device/cable using FW800 into a FW3200 port, it will run at FW800 speeds.
amoda is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 10:28 AM   #15
reallynotnick
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
That's great it uses the same cables, BUT you still need FW3200 equipment so you're mistaken. Otherwise if what you said were true everything would simply run at 3200.
The FW chipsets or whatever in the machine need to be 3200 compliant, the ones in the MBPs are only 800, you won't see any faster out of them.

EDIT: everyone already jumped on this really fast, lol
reallynotnick is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 10:38 AM   #16
amoda
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
I'll admit complete ignorance, just going by what sources say:

"...it should be noted that if you have a new FireWire 3200 cable/device you can use it with your old FireWire 800 port and still achieve 3.2Gpbs speeds."
-PC Fastlane

"...FireWire 3200 is also backwards compatible with FireWire 800, and you can even plug your new FireWire 3200 hardware into the old FireWire 800 ports and instantly get the new 3.2Gbps speed"
- Techiesouls

"Of course, there are other factors to consider; the FireWire 3200 standard is also in the works and promises to allow 3.2GHz speeds on existing FireWire 800 hardware."
-ZDnet

None of these are straight from the source quotes, and I'm not familiar enough to read technical specs of electronic hardware, so it's a good thing that we're all taking it with a grain of salt until the product actually comes out.
amoda is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 10:43 AM   #17
spinnerlys
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: forlod bygningen
That's strange, can you please post the links to those sources?

Why wouldn't Apple advertise such a feature of being forwards compatible?

And how does that work in reality? A firmware upgrade that enables the FW800 chipsets to then work at FW3200 speeds?

When the specs for FW3200 were approved in the end of 2007, how could the much older FW800 work with that?
spinnerlys is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 10:58 AM   #18
sushi
Moderator emeritus
 
sushi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: キャンプスワンピー [Japan]
Quote:
Originally Posted by amoda View Post
By what I understand this will happen:

If you plug a device/cable using FW3200 into a FW800 port, it will run at 3200 speeds.

If you plug a device/cable using FW800 into a FW3200 port, it will run at FW800 speeds.
This is incorrect.

FW transmission speeds will be limited to the lowest common denominator of the controlling port and attached device, whichever is lower (slower).

So if you have a MBP15 with a FW800 port:

You can run at FW800 speeds when connecting FW1600 and FW3200 external devices such as external hard drives.

You can run at FW400 speeds when connecting FW400 external devices such as external hard drives.
__________________
You only live twice, once when you are born, and when you look death in the face. *Basho style poem from 007 YOLT.
sushi is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 11:00 AM   #19
amoda
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by spinnerlys View Post
That's strange, can you please post the links to those sources?
ZDnet Link - Article on USB 3.0, but compares it to FW3200.

TechieSouls Link

PC FastLane Link

Again, I completely plead ignorance aha. I'm just the messenger. I don't even use FW800 so I don't really have a vested interest in this.

Last edited by amoda; Jun 13, 2009 at 11:09 AM.
amoda is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 11:15 AM   #20
sushi
Moderator emeritus
 
sushi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: キャンプスワンピー [Japan]
Quote:
Originally Posted by amoda View Post
ZDnet Link - Article on USB 3.0, but compares it to FW3200.

TechieSouls Link

PC FastLane Link

Again, I completely plead ignorance aha. I'm just the messenger. I don't even use FW800 so I don't really have a vested interest in this.
The reason for the confusion is the connectors.

FW800, FW1600 and FW3200 all use the same cable/connector.

To use a FW400 device, you can have a FW800/FW400 cable or an adapter.

However, to the best of my knowledge a FW800 port, without upgrading, cannot provide faster throughput beyond that of FW800.
__________________
You only live twice, once when you are born, and when you look death in the face. *Basho style poem from 007 YOLT.
sushi is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 12:33 PM   #21
Anuba
macrumors 68040
 
Anuba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by spinnerlys View Post
Why wouldn't Apple advertise such a feature of being forwards compatible?
They did a similar thing before with WiFi. Apple were among the first to add Draft-N capability, and the surprise was that you didn't need to buy a new Mac -- AirPort was already prepared on previous Macs so Apple just had to flick a switch.

I'm not saying that's what's going on here, but in theory there could be artificially crippled FW3200 hardware in the new MBP's, and Apple could then unleash 3200 in current machines through a firmware update.
Anuba is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 12:35 PM   #22
sushi
Moderator emeritus
 
sushi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: キャンプスワンピー [Japan]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anuba View Post
I'm not saying that's what's going on here, but in theory there could be artificially crippled FW3200 hardware in the new MBP's, and Apple could then unleash 3200 in current machines through a firmware update.
This could be true.

To find out, we would need to know the chip being used.
__________________
You only live twice, once when you are born, and when you look death in the face. *Basho style poem from 007 YOLT.
sushi is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2009, 05:45 PM   #23
EssentialParado
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Please ignore my post before, I contacted the 1394 trade association and sushi was right, you won't get 3200 speeds through an 800 port. It seems there are a lot of mistaken articles out there…
EssentialParado is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 29, 2010, 10:45 AM   #24
PracticalMac
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Thumbs up

Looks like finally have something solid!

http://www.daptechnology.com/index.php?id=640

April for 1600
Later for 3200.


Symwave's 1600 (last year) seems to be dead. I was told it had performance issues.
__________________
FireWire 1394 Intelligent network guaranteed data transfer, 1500mA power, Ethernet compatible
Read: 160 files, 650MB total, FW400 70% faster then USB2
Write: 160 files, 650MB total, FW400 48% faster
PracticalMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 29, 2010, 11:09 AM   #25
m85476585
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikhailT View Post
eSATA sucks on Macs. It may be the fastest interface but the support for it is extremely horrible.

At the moment, Firewire 800 is the best interface for macs.
It doesn't have to. If Apple would just add a simple combo eSATA/USB port, it would work just as well as the internal SATA that's used for the hard drive and superdrive. Since Apple refuses to add such a useful port, we are stuck with eSATA expresscards that Apple refuses fix the drivers for.

If Apple doesn't add something faster than FW800 to MBPs in the next refresh, I won't consider buying one. I don't care if they add USB3, Firewire 1600/3200, or Lightpeak, as long as it's faster than decade-old USB2 and 7-year old FW800.
__________________
Matt
m85476585 is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Notebooks > MacBook Pro

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
1333 vs 1600 RAM DaREdBaRoN Mac mini 3 Feb 21, 2014 02:18 PM
iPhone: Getting 1600 error Iphpne 3g CROSP Jailbreaks and iOS Hacks 1 Jan 13, 2014 09:07 AM
Ram 1600 vs 1333 ToomeyND Buying Tips and Advice 2 Apr 12, 2013 04:57 PM
Best UK price 1600 RAM right now please? 2bcool2 iMac 21 Mar 4, 2013 11:48 AM
iPad 3g error 1600 Joe13789 iPad Tips, Help and Troubleshooting 0 Dec 5, 2012 11:55 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:21 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC