Proof that FireWire isn't going anywhere...

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Voidness, Dec 30, 2005.

  1. macrumors 6502a

    Voidness

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2005
    Location:
    Null
    #1
    I'm not sure if someone has posted this before, sorry if this is a repost! :eek:

    I didn't believe Apple would be dropping FireWire in the first place (iMovie anyone?) But here's real proof, from Apple, that Firewire will stay with the Intel Transition:

    http://developer.apple.com/document...reDI/FWDevEndianness/chapter_5_section_1.html

    This is a developer document for Firewire device access on an Intel-based Mac, and how to port PowerPC apps that use FireWire to universal binaries.

    Everything will be clear in 10 days! :D Dang, I wish I could go to Macworld!
     
  2. macrumors member

    randas

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    #2
    Thankyou! I was worried apple was going to do something stupid
     
  3. macrumors 601

    mjstew33

    Joined:
    May 29, 2005
    Location:
    Illinois
    #3
    It's not like there were going to drop FireWire. They created it. And, Apple is the standard for video editing in which most cameras require atleast a FW400 port.
     
  4. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Voidness

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2005
    Location:
    Null
    #4
    Yes, I know. But since there was some "speculation" about this issue, I thought this should be enough to prove otherwise.
     
  5. job
    macrumors 68040

    job

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2002
    Location:
    in transit
    #5
    Dropping the FW support on the newer iPod models might have added to the speculation...

    Good news.
     
  6. macrumors 6502

    maddav

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #6
    I actually thought that this was the main/only source behind the speculation
     
  7. macrumors 6502a

    thequicksilver

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham
    #7
    I don't see how this is enough to prove this. Apple are still going to support Firewire in the same way that they support, say, Microsoft mice. Intel-based Macs are still going to be able to address Firewire, but that doesn't by default mean that all the Intel-based Macs are going to have built-in Firewire.

    For different reasons I don't see Apple dropping Firewire in any of their computers any time soon (unless they introduce some kind of nanoBook) - it would make iMovie and existing iSights worthless for a start - but we'll see.
     
  8. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Location:
    Hollywood, FL
    #8
    I thought Apple drop FW in the 5G iPods to be able to make them thinner.
    Of course I could be wrong.
     
  9. macrumors 65816

    macEfan

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Location:
    Forbidden, you do not have access to that server
    #9
    I could't live without firewire... Also they would probally never drop firewire..... target disk mode is so useful :)
     
  10. macrumors 68000

    shadowmoses

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    #10
    Thats really good news i love firewire, if only they could bring it back for the next revision of iPods i would be a happy bunny!!!

    Shadow
     
  11. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    #11
    :)

    Which is exactly why im Keeping my 40GB iPod photo!

    FireArse
     
  12. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    #12
    I always thought firewire for ipods was overkill for syncing music. I never saw a difference between USB2 and Firewire when syncing or using it as an external hard drive. The disk can't even put out that much throughput, so it wasn't a bottleneck.

    I guess the only thing I see missing is the ability to install OS X on the iPod and use it as a transportable OS for any Mac.
     
  13. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2005
    #13
    Doesn't prove that they won't drop the Fw400 ports and just have Fw800.
     
  14. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    #14
    I like FW a lot

    I couldn't agree with you more. My Girlfriends 6GB Mini always used USB 2.0 to sync and had the same transfer rate. Mind you its pink.

    Now syncing an External disk with a USB2.0 and FW400 Caddy is another story - FW400 a good 25% (at least) quicker - we measured it with 3GB files.

    Anyway, back to the point - I think the link is a good suggestion that developers would be coding for Intel based machines. I don't think Apple would get rid of FireWire - I even think that dropping support for 1394a would be a bad idea - can you link up a windows machine with a mac through FW400? If so - further reason NOT to drop FW400 on ANY mac.

    Anyone got a link of how it's done? Is it through networking - i.e. TCP/IP? I read a report on the IEE Student & Graduate magazine on FireWire's developmen. 6pages in total. Makes a great read. If enoug people are interested i can scan + upload the entire article.

    FireArse
     
  15. macrumors regular

    lucface

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    #15
    i wish they would make a better connection though. like that of an eithernet/cat5. cause its not good to have a fire wire get knocked out! especialy when you got a drive pluged in doing transfers or whatever.
     
  16. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    #16
    You can still use a FW800 port to hook up to a Windows machine, you just need to Windows machine to also support FW800, or you need FW800<->FW400 cable.

    Connecting a Mac to Windows using firewire is handled as a network like you suggest. You end up tunneling IP packets over the firewire link. A driver (and free demo) is available at http://www.unibrain.com/1394_products/1394_networking/firenet_pc.htm

    Though if you have Gigabit ethernet on each machine then that is less hassle to configure and runs at speeds similar to networking over FW400.
     
  17. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    #17
    You can use FW400 ports as well to connect computers as well. FW800 is not required.

    GigE is much faster than either Firewire version, given that GigE is 1000Mbps, and FW is 800Mbps or 400Mbps. Not sure how you conclude that GigE is similar to FW400 speeds.
     
  18. macrumors 601

    jaw04005

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Location:
    AR
    #18
    I wouldn't be surprised if Intel included a 6-pin Firewire ports standard on their new motherboards they release this year. Why not? It seems to fit into their digital media strategy (DV Camcorders, Cable Boxes, etc).
     
  19. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Voidness

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2005
    Location:
    Null
    #19
    They already do:
    http://www.intel.com/support/motherboards/desktop/sb/cs-002887.htm

    Some have pointed out that Apple might be dropping Firewire on the low-end Macs and keep Firewire 800 for the higher-end ones. If this were the case, the developer document would have mentioned that an app shouldn't assume that Firewire would be always present, and it should first check for a Firewire port.
     
  20. macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #20
    i understand the reasoning for dropping FW support and usage in the iPods, even though i don't neccissarily agree with it.

    but i don't see it going anywhere or leaving the computers. the only possible change may be that the FW400 ports on the high end computers get replaced solely by FW800.
     
  21. adk
    macrumors 68000

    adk

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Location:
    Stuck in the middle with you
    #21
    Just did my own USB vs. Firewire 400 Analysis.

    The Experiment: Transferring a 4.07 GB file from my powerbook to my 250GB 7200RPM external drive. Both types of cables were plugged directly into the powerbook.


    Firewire 400: Time 2:43, which equals 199 Mbps (half of its max theoretical speed, not bad

    USB: Time 5:07, which equals 106 Mbps (less than a quarter of theoretical maximum)


    As you can see, Firewire (in this case at least) was about twice as fast as USB.
     
  22. macrumors G3

    Counterfit

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    sitting on your shoulder
    #22
    Was that FW400 or 800? Also, Intech SpeedTools has some great tool for maximizing the speed of external drives. It's included with every OWC drive.
     
  23. adk
    macrumors 68000

    adk

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Location:
    Stuck in the middle with you
    #23
    my bad, 400
     
  24. macrumors 6502a

    funkychunkz

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2005
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    #24
    I don't think they dropped fw on ipods because it was overkill, but because the hardware would be cheaper. Or maybe the they're dropping it because they are about to replace it with a better standard. They wanted the new ipod to be compatible with it, and not encourage the use of the previous method.

    Was the length of the cables the same? You also have to factor in which was transferred first,(information pre-loaded in ram and such)
     
  25. adk
    macrumors 68000

    adk

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Location:
    Stuck in the middle with you
    #25
    Firewire cable is about 2 meters, USB cable is about 1 meter. I first tried with firewire, then with USB2. This was by no means a scientific experiment, it was just to settle a dispute between my dad and me over which one was faster. I won :p
     

Share This Page