Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPod any chance for firewire ipod like in the old times?

They dropped FW..

hayduke said:
But aren't they all FW400 capable? I thought they just stopped shipping both cables, but they still support it. Anyone?
Click to expand...

after the 3G model when the iPod line went on a diet, ie. slimmer.

This I believe, reading here, was due to FW requiring a chip both in the device ie. pod and computer whereas Usb only needs a chip in the computer and to take the pod slimmer FW had to be dropped. For the "perceived" loss of speed, it was felt better for the pod to be slimmer.

I, for one, wouldn't mind having FW back, if not only for Target Disk Booting!
 
The only reason why you would want FW400 if you were using USB 1.1. The new iPods use USB2.0 which is faster...why would you want to revert?

USB 1.1=12Mbps ***
USB 2.0=480Mbps
FW400=400Mbps

***this could be wrong I am going from memory
 
kwood said:
The only reason why you would want FW400 if you were using USB 1.1. The new iPods use USB2.0 which is faster...why would you want to revert?

USB 1.1=12Mbps ***
USB 2.0=480Mbps
FW400=400Mbps

***this could be wrong I am going from memory
Click to expand...

Because we are talking about sustained transfer speed not peak transfer speed. ;)
 
kwood said:
The only reason why you would want FW400 if you were using USB 1.1. The new iPods use USB2.0 which is faster...why would you want to revert?

USB 1.1=12Mbps ***
USB 2.0=480Mbps
FW400=400Mbps

***this could be wrong I am going from memory
Click to expand...

Yes, those are the stated specifications, but real-world transfer rates are much faster in Firewire 400 than USB2. This is fact - see Barefeats.com etc.

I'd love to see Firewire come back into the iPod, but it's a concession for size (and the Windows market) that they've made, and it ain't coming back.
 
kwood said:
The only reason why you would want FW400 if you were using USB 1.1. The new iPods use USB2.0 which is faster...why would you want to revert?

USB 1.1=12Mbps ***
USB 2.0=480Mbps
FW400=400Mbps

***this could be wrong I am going from memory
Click to expand...

I think FW400 generally has better performance than USB2 because the *sustained* data trasfer speed is higher, even though the *peak* (as you reported) is higher for USB2. I think a lot of people would agree that FW is a better standard (as already stated, also don't need USB hubs because it is chainable, and *may* offer better power support for devices...not sure about that one).
 
kwood said:
The only reason why you would want FW400 if you were using USB 1.1. The new iPods use USB2.0 which is faster...why would you want to revert?

USB 1.1=12Mbps ***
USB 2.0=480Mbps
FW400=400Mbps

***this could be wrong I am going from memory
Click to expand...

Theoretically yes. In reality USB 2 is about 4x slower from my experience. I've tested an external drive which offers both inputs and FW400 gets about 40MB/sec whereas USB2 can only manage about 11MB/sec. Certainly, my old 40GB 3G iPod syncs much more quickly than my 5.5G 80GB does so I sorely miss the FW400 interface.
 
I don't know how it goes for the iPod, but when transferring stuff to an external hard drive I found that USB 2.0 moved the same files faster then FW400.

I have heard Fire Wire was better because of the way it handles the information (I guess pre processing before the file gets moved) But I did not see it.

My unofficial test showed that USB 2.0 was quicker. Does anyone know what it is that is supposed to make FW400 faster? I know you said sustained data rate but I don't know what you mean by that. I just moved about 2Gb of music MP3s.
 
kwood said:
I don't know how it goes for the iPod, but when transferring stuff to an external hard drive I found that USB 2.0 moved the same files faster then FW400.

I have heard Fire Wire was better because of the way it handles the information (I guess pre processing before the file gets moved) But I did not see it.

My unofficial test showed that USB 2.0 was quicker. Does anyone know what it is that is supposed to make FW400 faster? I know you said sustained data rate but I don't know what you mean by that. I just moved about 2Gb of music MP3s.
Click to expand...


My iPod seems to sync faster with USB 2.0 its a 4th gen.
 
kwood said:
I don't know how it goes for the iPod, but when transferring stuff to an external hard drive I found that USB 2.0 moved the same files faster then FW400.

I have heard Fire Wire was better because of the way it handles the information (I guess pre processing before the file gets moved) But I did not see it.

My unofficial test showed that USB 2.0 was quicker. Does anyone know what it is that is supposed to make FW400 faster? I know you said sustained data rate but I don't know what you mean by that. I just moved about 2Gb of music MP3s.
Click to expand...

FW400 has constant transfer speed of 400Mbps where USB2 has a peak transfer speed of 480Mbps. USB2 will seem faster with small file transfers or large transfers consisting of many small files due to its bursts in speed. FW400 will blow the doors off of USB2 when trying to transfer larger files due to a constant speed.

Try this as a test - Copy a single file that is 1Gb or larger via USB2 & then FW400. FW400 will win hands down.
 
mustard said:
FW400 has constant transfer speed of 400Mbps where USB2 has a peak transfer speed of 480Mbps. USB2 will seem faster with small file transfers or large transfers consisting of many small files due to its bursts in speed. FW400 will blow the doors off of USB2 when trying to transfer larger files due to a constant speed.

Try this as a test - Copy a single file that is 1Gb or larger via USB2 & then FW400. FW400 will win hands down.
Click to expand...

All right I will test that one out tonight. That makes sense to me.
 
I like the Firewire connection much more than the USB2. USB2 doesn't seem to be as fast even though it's rated 80Mbps faster than firewire.

I'd like to see Firewire 800 in the iPods, but then again I only use it for rechargning and updating the occational music file...
 
Perhaps a Mac exclusive iPod? One that could do firewire and maybe usb, but because I haven't seen many PCs with firewire (I know they exist), it would be nice to be Mac only, and maybe some Mac only features in it as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back