Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple should have used this "strict review" when making their choice for a Firewire chipset for the late-2007 MacBook Pros.
First, this review process refers to vertical review within a product, as the claim was that the "same" hardware was "cheaper" in other products. The issue is whether Apple used the top-rated units of the Agere chip (as rated and sold by Agere; buyers don't rate), and you are trying to force the question over to the selection among competing products. In other words, you're trying to claim that their selection of best-rated Intel chips was not applied because they should have selected AMD. One has nothing to do with the other.

You're not saying that Apple's stock of the Agere chips is below passing. You're claiming a design problem with all Agere chips, regardless of rating, and you're using the wrong argument to do so.

Second, who's to say which is faulty? It does not appear to have had a negative consequence on either Apple's or Lucent's sales, it is still on the market and being used by Apple and several PC manufacturers, and as your reference points out, it saves OEMs half the price. Is there any indication that it's not the audio devices that are noncompliant?

Edit: It seems to me on further reading that it's only audio products affected, only certain products, and only some users of those products, and that putting something in between the two on the bus solves the problem. If the chipset itself were defectively designed, one would think other classes of equipment would be affected, or at least that all audio equipment would be. Seems odd to blame Agere based on that.
 
WTF are you talking about? My 8 year old G4, that originally ran OS9, now runs OSX 10.4.11 and with all the security updates and latest iTunes? What more do you need?

When Snow Leopard ships, Apple policy is to stop issuing security updates for 10.4. They should be pushed to offer security updates for a five year period after they last sell 10.4 at retail. This would amount to about an addition 2 years of coverage, still far less than Microsoft delivers.
 
Apple, get the message:

No Firewire and no ethernet, no purchase (MacBook Air).
No Firewire, no purchase (MacBook).
No Firewire, no purchase (Apple Displays).
Glossy displays, no purchase (Apple Displays & MacBooks)

New Apple legend:
Why do things right when they can be done wrong??!!
 
Apple, get the message:

No Firewire and no ethernet, no purchase (MacBook Air).
No Firewire, no purchase (MacBook).
No Firewire, no purchase (Apple Displays).
Matte displays, no purchase (Apple Displays & MacBooks)

New Apple legend:
Why do things right when they can be done wrong??!!

They seem happy to trade you as a customer for the 2.7 million Macs they sold last quarter. Go buy a Windows notebook with matte, ethernet and Firewire. Then you'll be happy right? You'll probably save money!

Or, is there more to what you want then those three specs?
 
Lots of "huh?" moments in these posts today....

You "rest your case" with THAT argument? Fine, but in court, that'd be epic loss for your side.

Non-franchise restaurants don't work from a strict, known-efficient and known-profitable formula. Each one is UNIQUE. So obviously, they're going to have FAR higher failure rates overall, vs. one established, profitable fast food chain.

My whole point with that McDonalds analogy was merely to illustrate that just because their food sells very well doesn't make it "better food" than other, more expensive places offer. Dell and HP are companies I'd call the "McDonalds and Burger King of computers". They're great at mass producing product at as low a price as possible, and sure - they offer a large variety of little customizations (just like Burger King promises you can "Have it your way!" with their food). But just because you can "hold the onions" or ask for extra mustard and light ice in your soda doesn't mean you're going to escape their basic menu of burgers, a token fish sandwich, salads and a few chicken-based things. (Hmm... sort of like you can have several varieties of Windows Vista on your new Dell, but you can't get OS X at all.)

And these posts claiming Macs are a "ripoff" because they use the same Foxconn motherboards as cheaper generic PCs? Again, I just shake my head and say "Huh?" Every time I take an airline flight someplace, I see Apple notebooks outnumbering everything else by at LEAST 2 to 1. I see Macbooks all over on college campuses. Why? I *really* don't think it's just because all those people had no clue, and believed Justin Long on those TV ads. I think it's obvious to people who have owned the "other stuff" already; the Apple notebooks are superior products, all the way around!

My last Toshiba laptop had a phone and ethernet jack that flipped open when you pulled down these flimsy plastic "doors". Within months, the little hinges broke on them, making the ports unusable. My friend's Dell notebook went through a DVD-ROM drive pretty quickly when the tray assembly broke. I still have yet to see a competitor's notebook that offers anything as innovative as the mag-safe AC adapter plug concept, or the backlit keyboard the way Apple did it. The new Macbook Pro even rethought the Kensington lock concept - so it locks the access panel to the system RAM and hard drive when you use it. (With the others, it might keep a person from easily stealing the laptop itself, but they could steal the components out of it.)

My old Powerbook 17" was FAR thinner and lighter than ANYONE else's 17" notebook, when it came out, too.

A lot of people don't know (or really CARE) who makes the motherboard inside their computer. But the attention to the details is easier for people to see when they compare products.


Do some research - the failure rate for a non-franchise restaurant in the United States in 70% - the failure rate for a Mickie D's, 3%. I rest my case.

D
 
This is utter nonsense. You might want to skip the insults and the emotional appeals, and stick to the facts. And what are the facts? The facts are that Apple has grown Mac shipments at ten times the rate of the Windows PC industry over the last couple of years. The facts are that they have done so with the current Mac product lineup. Does it seem even remotely plausible that this trend has completely reversed in one month? I don't care if you're a Nobel Laureate in economics, this doesn't make sense on its face.

It does - but you are way smarter than most so you just cannot see it. Apple had only UP to go or they would be out of business. They have a great product and a great marketing campaign - but that only goes so far when the cost is prohibitive with those you are competing. So what if they have done that with the current line-up? Are they continuing to do that now? NO - but the numbers lie, right? But again, your are more in tune with economics so I give-up.

Apple had 2% of the market - why? Terrible products and a high prices. They fixed the product line-up and with the new OS they cleaned-up. What happens when the market dries-up at your price-point - well, you know, being an economist and all - THEY BECOME STAGNANT!

Merry Christmas - D
 
You "rest your case" with THAT argument? Fine, but in court, that'd be epic loss for your side.

Non-franchise restaurants don't work from a strict, known-efficient and known-profitable formula. Each one is UNIQUE. So obviously, they're going to have FAR higher failure rates overall, vs. one established, profitable fast food chain.

My whole point with that McDonalds analogy was merely to illustrate that just because their food sells very well doesn't make it "better food" than other, more expensive places offer. Dell and HP are companies I'd call the "McDonalds and Burger King of computers". They're great at mass producing product at as low a price as possible, and sure - they offer a large variety of little customizations (just like Burger King promises you can "Have it your way!" with their food). But just because you can "hold the onions" or ask for extra mustard and light ice in your soda doesn't mean you're going to escape their basic menu of burgers, a token fish sandwich, salads and a few chicken-based things. (Hmm... sort of like you can have several varieties of Windows Vista on your new Dell, but you can't get OS X at all.)

And these posts claiming Macs are a "ripoff" because they use the same Foxconn motherboards as cheaper generic PCs? Again, I just shake my head and say "Huh?" Every time I take an airline flight someplace, I see Apple notebooks outnumbering everything else by at LEAST 2 to 1. I see Macbooks all over on college campuses. Why? I *really* don't think it's just because all those people had no clue, and believed Justin Long on those TV ads. I think it's obvious to people who have owned the "other stuff" already; the Apple notebooks are superior products, all the way around!

My last Toshiba laptop had a phone and ethernet jack that flipped open when you pulled down these flimsy plastic "doors". Within months, the little hinges broke on them, making the ports unusable. My friend's Dell notebook went through a DVD-ROM drive pretty quickly when the tray assembly broke. I still have yet to see a competitor's notebook that offers anything as innovative as the mag-safe AC adapter plug concept, or the backlit keyboard the way Apple did it. The new Macbook Pro even rethought the Kensington lock concept - so it locks the access panel to the system RAM and hard drive when you use it. (With the others, it might keep a person from easily stealing the laptop itself, but they could steal the components out of it.)

My old Powerbook 17" was FAR thinner and lighter than ANYONE else's 17" notebook, when it came out, too.

A lot of people don't know (or really CARE) who makes the motherboard inside their computer. But the attention to the details is easier for people to see when they compare products.

Wow - I cannot believe people on this forum! Did you not see the IRONY and HUMOR my post? I was making the point of how silly the comparison to Mickie D's was! Come-on people - get over yourselves! UNBELIEVABLE!

D
 
You "rest your case" with THAT argument? Fine, but in court, that'd be epic loss for your side.

Non-franchise restaurants don't work from a strict, known-efficient and known-profitable formula. Each one is UNIQUE. So obviously, they're going to have FAR higher failure rates overall, vs. one established, profitable fast food chain.

My whole point with that McDonalds analogy was merely to illustrate that just because their food sells very well doesn't make it "better food" than other, more expensive places offer. Dell and HP are companies I'd call the "McDonalds and Burger King of computers". They're great at mass producing product at as low a price as possible, and sure - they offer a large variety of little customizations (just like Burger King promises you can "Have it your way!" with their food). But just because you can "hold the onions" or ask for extra mustard and light ice in your soda doesn't mean you're going to escape their basic menu of burgers, a token fish sandwich, salads and a few chicken-based things. (Hmm... sort of like you can have several varieties of Windows Vista on your new Dell, but you can't get OS X at all.)

And these posts claiming Macs are a "ripoff" because they use the same Foxconn motherboards as cheaper generic PCs? Again, I just shake my head and say "Huh?" Every time I take an airline flight someplace, I see Apple notebooks outnumbering everything else by at LEAST 2 to 1. I see Macbooks all over on college campuses. Why? I *really* don't think it's just because all those people had no clue, and believed Justin Long on those TV ads. I think it's obvious to people who have owned the "other stuff" already; the Apple notebooks are superior products, all the way around!

My last Toshiba laptop had a phone and ethernet jack that flipped open when you pulled down these flimsy plastic "doors". Within months, the little hinges broke on them, making the ports unusable. My friend's Dell notebook went through a DVD-ROM drive pretty quickly when the tray assembly broke. I still have yet to see a competitor's notebook that offers anything as innovative as the mag-safe AC adapter plug concept, or the backlit keyboard the way Apple did it. The new Macbook Pro even rethought the Kensington lock concept - so it locks the access panel to the system RAM and hard drive when you use it. (With the others, it might keep a person from easily stealing the laptop itself, but they could steal the components out of it.)

My old Powerbook 17" was FAR thinner and lighter than ANYONE else's 17" notebook, when it came out, too.

A lot of people don't know (or really CARE) who makes the motherboard inside their computer. But the attention to the details is easier for people to see when they compare products.

So if you see the Apple outnumber anything else by 2:1 why isn't apple up by a 2:1 margin, based on your quantitative data? Please.

D
 
Why would they want to? (Edit: capture the low end, not offer a decent mini)

You are kidding, right? If that market is there to be tapped and money to be made and it does not pull from your premium products (and why would it) you would need to be a special kind of silly for not exploring that.

A refreshed course in econ 101 might be called for. Just a thought :). If you study the history of economics you will see that I DO have 400+ years of history backing-up my arguments - but so some that just does not matter.

D
 
Dell and HP are companies I'd call the "McDonalds and Burger King of computers". They're great at mass producing product at as low a price as possible.

As are Apple.

And these posts claiming Macs are a "ripoff" because they use the same Foxconn motherboards as cheaper generic PCs? Again, I just shake my head and say "Huh?" Every time I take an airline flight someplace, I see Apple notebooks outnumbering everything else by at LEAST 2 to 1. I see Macbooks all over on college campuses. Why? I *really* don't think it's just because all those people had no clue, and believed Justin Long on those TV ads. I think it's obvious to people who have owned the "other stuff" already; the Apple notebooks are superior products, all the way around!

Anecdotal evidence tbh.



My old Powerbook 17" was FAR thinner and lighter than ANYONE else's 17" notebook, when it came out, too.

So?? Tbh, if a little weight difference is that important, you need to get out more.
 
Apple, get the message:

No Firewire and no ethernet, no purchase (MacBook Air).
No Firewire, no purchase (MacBook).
No Firewire, no purchase (Apple Displays).
Glossy displays, no purchase (Apple Displays & MacBooks)

New Apple legend:
Why do things right when they can be done wrong??!!

Not everyone needs firewire, but it is really handy if you need it.
 
It does - but you are way smarter than most so you just cannot see it. Apple had only UP to go or they would be out of business. They have a great product and a great marketing campaign - but that only goes so far when the cost is prohibitive with those you are competing. So what if they have done that with the current line-up? Are they continuing to do that now? NO - but the numbers lie, right? But again, your are more in tune with economics so I give-up.

Apple had 2% of the market - why? Terrible products and a high prices. They fixed the product line-up and with the new OS they cleaned-up. What happens when the market dries-up at your price-point - well, you know, being an economist and all - THEY BECOME STAGNANT!

Merry Christmas - D
Huh?

They are continuing to do that now. Even with one stagnant month and regardless of the December data, 2008 will see a net increase of over 30% from 2007 units. Numbers don't lie, but you have to look at them and know what you're seeing.

There is zero chance that you are an economist based on the above post. The entire market has flattened. This doesn't affect Apple's relative standing unless the entire market surges and Apple remains flat.
You are kidding, right? If that market is there to be tapped and money to be made and it does not pull from your premium products (and why would it) you would need to be a special kind of silly for not exploring that.
It's called sustainability and competition. Again, your univariate analysis leaves much to be desired. Apple has nothing to gain by engaging competitors in a race to the bottom.
If you study the history of economics you will see that I DO have 400+ years of history backing-up my arguments
Cite it. So far you've demonstrated an utter failure to follow even the simplified charts of a journalist's article, let alone being able to separate market performance from an individual firm's performance. Hint: your reliance on macroeconomics is wholly mistaken. If you want to support your argument, you're looking for microeconomics.
 
Apple, get the message:

No Firewire and no ethernet, no purchase (MacBook Air).
No Firewire, no purchase (MacBook).
No Firewire, no purchase (Apple Displays).
Glossy displays, no purchase (Apple Displays & MacBooks)

New Apple legend:
Why do things right when they can be done wrong??!!

as much as i like apple this is so true. i don't like the direction apple is going with the notebooks right now so i didn't buy one.

i might buy a MB for my GF soon but that will be paid by work. and even then i think about delaying it as long as possible.

i think apple has to improve on many things here: features like ports, screen quality (in the MB).....
 
..
Edit: It seems to me on further reading that it's only audio products affected, only certain products, and only some users of those products, and that putting something in between the two on the bus solves the problem. If the chipset itself were defectively designed, one would think other classes of equipment would be affected, or at least that all audio equipment would be. Seems odd to blame Agere based on that.

(Sigh) Yes. It's an audio problem. And most people outside the audio world can't understand why that's a problem. But yes. It's a very real problem for anyone that needs a notebook to produce/record audio. For some strange reason audio people want a notebook that's actually able to record audio. Go figure.

The Lucent/Agere chipset has proven to be problematic with most of the Firewire audio interfaces on the market. Good luck to anyone trying to out specifically what interface will or won't work, since Apple hasn't publicly addressed the issue. The TI chipsets that Apple used to use "just worked". But they cost twice as much and are slightly larger, so for the sake of a few dollars and "thinness" Apple doesn't use them anymore.

Who in their right mind would buy a MacBook Pro that has a high likelihood of not functioning 100% with most Firewire audio interfaces?
 
(Sigh) Yes. It's an audio problem.
(Sigh) So maybe you should be asking why audio equipment manufacturers don't get their act together.

Some devices work, and some users of affected devices have no problems. Again, this suggests it's the audio devices that are problematic, since the problem is not universal in all audio products or all users of affected products. This kind of hardware has always come with "recommended chipsets" unlike most other 1394 devices, which suggests that they're the ones limiting compatibility.
The Lucent/Agere chipset has proven to be problematic with most of the Firewire audio interfaces on the market. Good luck to anyone trying to out specifically what interface will or won't work, since Apple hasn't publicly addressed the issue.
What exactly should Apple do about a compatibility problem between Agere and audio equipment manufacturers? Perhaps you should ask the audio equipment makers to fix their products or provide evidence that it's not their products that are out of spec and explain why the audio device controllers can't keep the bus alive when mass storage and video controllers can.
so for the sake of a few dollars and "thinness" Apple doesn't use them anymore.
Thinness has nothing to do with it. The chipsets are smaller (LxW), not thinner.
 
Here's a thought: try being cutting-edge like five years ago

And cutting edge is two hyphenated words to content creators: BLU-RAY. Playing, editing, and authoring.

It's way beyond time. A year past time. At least. The Apple of five years ago would have done it the middle of last year as soon as the war was over.

Or become the "Lloyd's" of the new millenium (one of the top transistor radio manufacturers in the 60's, long since defunct.)

iCrap can only get you by for so long. Now you have to service folks who have money: Content creators. Content creators who have to deliver that content with BLU-RAY.

And not so long between updates on the high-ticket items! People with money read this website and the "When To Buy" list!

:apple:
 
not good news. hopefully apple will do something at macworld to turn this around, like update all three desktops, including a total redesign of the mac mini
 
(Sigh) So maybe you should be asking why audio equipment manufacturers don't get their act together.

Some devices work, and some users of affected devices have no problems. Again, this suggests it's the audio devices that are problematic, since the problem is not universal in all audio products or all users of affected products. This kind of hardware has always come with "recommended chipsets" unlike most other 1394 devices, which suggests that they're the ones limiting compatibility.

What exactly should Apple do about a compatibility problem between Agere and audio equipment manufacturers? Perhaps you should ask the audio equipment makers to fix their products or provide evidence that it's not their products that are out of spec and explain why the audio device controllers can't keep the bus alive when mass storage and video controllers can.

Thinness has nothing to do with it. The chipsets are smaller (LxW), not thinner.

This (Firewire chipset) problem has been around for over a year and yet the geniuses at Apple haven't figured out the simple solution -- use the TI chipset, the one that's known throughout the audio world as the chipset that works with most audio devices.

This isn't a new sort of problem for audio. Back when USB(1) came out this same sort of problem reared its ugly head with most of the USB chipsets that wouldn't work (100%) with the new USB audio interfaces just hitting the market. You could buy most Intel machine and it would work fine, but anything else probably wouldn't because they were using USB chipsets from other manufacturers.

But yes. All the people who who've never done anything in audio always want to place the blame on something or someone else (other than the computer or chipset manufacturer) and they always express their amazement that a hard drive can copy files fine but a audio device can't work in real time. Virtually all of the audio manufacturers have written FAQs on the subject, yet many manufacturers have ignored their findings. Most (all?) PC manufactures (Apple included) no absolutely nothing about producing quality audio devices, and yet many people automatically believe that the fault of any given problem is that of the audio manufacturers.

This is a perfect example of the sorts of problems that can occur that rarely get solved because the self proclaimed "experts" aren't willing to listen to the people who've been using (or manufacturing) the equipment for decades. Instead, these experts simply talk about their theories of who's fault it is (or isn't) with the hopes that problem might magically go away.
 
Based on this quote from the Wall Street Journal Article, it isn't a myth: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122938758242108907.html

"Despite short-term weakness, analysts expect Apple's products to remain more profitable than many rivals' computers. The MacBooks are forecast to deliver close to 20% profit margins, compared with 6% or less for competitors, said Toni Sacconaghi, an analyst at Sanford Bernstein & Co."

That's triple or better profit margins compared to competitors...

Myth.

You know what the margin is for manufacturing companies? 30-35%. And that's to stay above water. People seem to have this idea that PC makers are immune to the same economic forces that other manufacturing industries have to follow---but that's not true. If you want to hang around, you're generally going to have to have margins in the 25-35% area. You MIGHT be able to cut into it with volume and cash...but you're playing with the company's life that way and you have much lower margin for error--and that's a recipie for company disaster.

High margins for Apple? Hmph. I think the magic pixie dust isn't where you think it is...


Computer folks don't know this and they complain about "high" margins, when business wise, it's what a company NEEDS TO SURVIVE.
 
It does - but you are way smarter than most so you just cannot see it. Apple had only UP to go or they would be out of business. They have a great product and a great marketing campaign - but that only goes so far when the cost is prohibitive with those you are competing. So what if they have done that with the current line-up? Are they continuing to do that now? NO - but the numbers lie, right? But again, your are more in tune with economics so I give-up.

Apple had 2% of the market - why? Terrible products and a high prices. They fixed the product line-up and with the new OS they cleaned-up. What happens when the market dries-up at your price-point - well, you know, being an economist and all - THEY BECOME STAGNANT!

Merry Christmas - D

This makes no sense at all. But you have managed to completely avoid addressing any of my comments, so congrats on that.
 
This (Firewire chipset) problem has been around for over a year and yet the geniuses at Apple haven't figured out the simple solution -- use the TI chipset, the one that's known throughout the audio world as the chipset that works with most audio devices.
That's putting the horse before the cart, though. The TI chipset's other disadvantages are obviously not worth it on balance, or it would have been selected by everyone. The problem of intermittently not working with audio hardware, particularly when the workaround is so simple, is not compelling and not their problem if the audio manufacturers can't implement hardware that is fully compliant. Frustrating, yes, but as you say, these are not new problems with real-time audio (yet real-time video hardware has largely managed to figure it out).
But yes. All the people who who've never done anything in audio always want to place the blame on something or someone else (other than the computer or chipset manufacturer) and they always express their amazement that a hard drive can copy files fine but a audio device can't work in real time.
Again, the problem isn't with real-time data transfers, because video and other dedicated data transfer hardware works fine. The problem is in audio hardware manufacturers refusing to deal with the known limitations and design around them. As far as 1394 is concerned on the destination peer end, it's real-time data and it works perfectly fine. If audio is the problem, then the audio devices are the problem.

The question is why certain chipsets work with certain audio controllers, and the reason is simple: because the audio people design to the chipset, rather than to the standard (because it is cheaper and easier), and then post FAQs about which chipset you should use with that particular device. That's perfectly valid, but you can't then blame other companies when they elect not to use that chipset, because their decision is equally valid.
This is a perfect example of the sorts of problems that can occur that rarely get solved because the self proclaimed "experts" aren't willing to listen to the people who've been using (or manufacturing) the equipment for decades.
The audio manufacturers have an opportunity to participate in the engineering of the standard. They have an opportunity to create their own standard interface. They have the opportunity to design around the problem.

This particular incompatibility is not inherent to audio transfers; data is data on the 1394 bus. It's solely about Firewire implementation, and "audio people" have the power to solve it. Again, it's as trivial as putting another FW device in between the two, so it's not some critical performance issue that the audio manufacturers can't deal with. And once again, I see no evidence that suggests that the Agere chipset is materially defective or not compliant with the standard.

You continually suggest that it is not the audio manufacturer's fault, when all signs indicate it is more likely that it is. I do a great deal of work with standards bodies and parties accusing each other of implementation failures, and your story simply doesn't add up. The compatibility issues are indeed well-known, but it's the audio industry that seems unwilling to do anything about it. I have yet to see a plausible explanation for why real-time audio is plagued at a much greater rate than real-time video that implicates Firewire hardware itself as the culprit.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.