So tack on an extra $99 for a 2nd (and 3rd) firewire port. Tack on an additional $99 if you want the mini to dual link dvi dongle. What a great price drop this has been. 
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Firewire 400 is GONE...what do you think?
- Thread starter Stang68
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hey ladies!
I only registered here to set something straight concerning the "old FW400 port" on former MBP. Excuse the use of underlines and bolds, but some things need to be made clear and obvious for even the most lazy reader.
The FW400 port on former MBP is nothing more than an FW800->FW400 adapter, there is only one physical FW800 interface in the former MBP that comes with 2 ports. In fact the Agere chipset used in last years MBPs offers even upto 3 ports internally that can be coupled with either a FW800 or FW400 connector.
To clarify that: There were no two independent FW interfaces/busses in the old MBP, but only one!
That means that when you had devices plug into both ports they were effectively daisy-chained with the MBP FW controller being nothing more than another FW device in the chain. That's what FW is all about, every device is a controller.
As a result all that all you are losing with the new MBP's is a convinient inbuild FW800->FW400 adapter!
Surely a nice TI FW400 port would have been alot more convinient, but obviously Apple found a place to cut manufacturing costs by a couple of cents.
What does that mean in practice when connecting Firewire devices to a MBP?
Just like before you should make sure that all FW400 and FW800 devices are clouded together with other devices of the same speed and apart from devices of lower speed. Connect all your FW800 devices directly into the MBP FW800 port and put all FW400 devices behind your last FW800 device.
Granted, you are dependent on the quality of your FW800 gear's own FW controller. But given the issues happening with professional FW Audio interfaces being connected to the FW400 port of last years Agere chipset that might not even be a bad thing. FW is a well defined protocol and most external gear should deliver.
To all you Audio professionals out there: If putting a FW Audio interface and a FW harddrive together results in worse low latency performance consider buying a FW or even better eSATA ExpressCard for your harddrive.
Thanks for listening!
I only registered here to set something straight concerning the "old FW400 port" on former MBP. Excuse the use of underlines and bolds, but some things need to be made clear and obvious for even the most lazy reader.
The FW400 port on former MBP is nothing more than an FW800->FW400 adapter, there is only one physical FW800 interface in the former MBP that comes with 2 ports. In fact the Agere chipset used in last years MBPs offers even upto 3 ports internally that can be coupled with either a FW800 or FW400 connector.
To clarify that: There were no two independent FW interfaces/busses in the old MBP, but only one!
That means that when you had devices plug into both ports they were effectively daisy-chained with the MBP FW controller being nothing more than another FW device in the chain. That's what FW is all about, every device is a controller.
As a result all that all you are losing with the new MBP's is a convinient inbuild FW800->FW400 adapter!
Surely a nice TI FW400 port would have been alot more convinient, but obviously Apple found a place to cut manufacturing costs by a couple of cents.
What does that mean in practice when connecting Firewire devices to a MBP?
Just like before you should make sure that all FW400 and FW800 devices are clouded together with other devices of the same speed and apart from devices of lower speed. Connect all your FW800 devices directly into the MBP FW800 port and put all FW400 devices behind your last FW800 device.
Granted, you are dependent on the quality of your FW800 gear's own FW controller. But given the issues happening with professional FW Audio interfaces being connected to the FW400 port of last years Agere chipset that might not even be a bad thing. FW is a well defined protocol and most external gear should deliver.
To all you Audio professionals out there: If putting a FW Audio interface and a FW harddrive together results in worse low latency performance consider buying a FW or even better eSATA ExpressCard for your harddrive.
Thanks for listening!
.Thanks for listening!
Reading
Good post. Still need that second port even if it's built in... I'm just saying this "price drop" Apple was touting is a half truth.
Just to make that clear. You don't need no special adapters to connect a FW400 device to a FW800 port, just a cable with FW800 connector on one end and FW400 connector on the other. And since most FW devices should allow you to daisy-chain (not sure about consumer cameras though) the loss of the FW400 port should really be minimal.
To all you Audio professionals out there: If putting a FW Audio interface and a FW harddrive together results in worse low latency performance consider buying a FW or even better eSATA ExpressCard for your harddrive.
Thanks for listening!
Well this is good to know...I'll be roadtesting my Duet (400) daisy chained into a PortaGig (800) HD in the new MBP...and hope I'm not dealing w/ excessive latency or other issues. Great post btw!
I've said this before I'd gladly pay MORE for 2 FireWire ports each w/ their OWN distinct bus. Apple would be wise to pimp out a machine for video & audio users, they could charge a mint for the things. eSATA would be welcome as well.
I don't understand why the MBs wouldn't have kept FW (of any kind) for the target disc mode...its been a lifesaver for many a Mac user. How much extra would that have cost per unit, 99cents?
Jeeeeez...sorry Mr. High and Mighty. We all aren't experts about Firewire. You don't have to be such an *******.
I'm pissed at this guy, but I'm happy he gave us some info. He just HAD to add in that last line?
Check his/her other posts...someone has a chip on their shoulder.
