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

FW800 on new Mac mini, but NOT MacBook!

glossywhite

glossywhite

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 28, 2008
1,120
3
I just noticed something rather odd; the new Mac mini still has FireWire (800) and it is an ENTRY LEVEL, switchers machine and not a Pro machine, so why doesn't the MacBook which is also a consumer machine, have FireWire 800?.

Just seems rather odd to me, that's all.
 
Do you regularly see the back of a Mac Mini? - No.
Do you regularly see the side of a MacBook? - Yes

Its all about Design, the Firewire 800 Port must have been too ugly for Apple to add.
 
MattZani said:
Do you regularly see the back of a Mac Mini? - No.
Do you regularly see the side of a MacBook? - Yes

Its all about Design, the Firewire 800 Port must have been too ugly for Apple to add.
Click to expand...

Don't be so ridiculous!!.
 
also, lets keep in mind the design of some MBP's where the superdrive is in the front - as opposed to the side. therefor creating more room for other jacks.


it is definitely a design issue and adding another port would make it look ugly!

i have both (however my mac mini is a bit older and only has the FW400) and i have only wanted the FW once for file transfer - but that's nothing an ethernet couldn't fix

:)
 
1) Only Apple would think of sacrificing usability for design.
2) This complaint has been made many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many times.
 
MattZani said:
Pretty Much Serious, and because there isnt room for it.
Click to expand...

No, that's right - no room whatsoever:

5f19hk.jpg


I think you'd realise, if you'd been in electronics as long as me, that PCB design is done AROUND the features you wish to include on the board; you don't draft the PCB, silk screen & etch it, and THEN say "Oh there's no room for Firewire" - there is PLENTY of room in this gap (shown below) - the logic board would just have extended round into this area, or a smaller PCB could have been made which was screw-mounted to the unibody (daughter board) and connected to the logic board by means of a screened cable.

xbfn1g.jpg


You really have been brainwashed, OR not used your common sense.
 
BlueRevolution said:
1) Only Apple would think of sacrificing usability for design.
2) This complaint has been made many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many times.
Click to expand...

While I agree with both points, there's very little sacrificing going on. The general public does not care about firewire, and for the most part, those who need firewire will go with the Pro line. It's almost a ploy for people to buy the more expensive machine, like when base MacBooks only came with a combo drive. Same idea.
 
glossywhite said:
No, that's right - no room whatsoever:

5f19hk.jpg


xbfn1g.jpg


You really have been brainwashed, OR not used your common sense.
Click to expand...

Your a royal numpty. Please go and learn how motherboards work before coming here and embarrassing yourself. A FW800 port would require its own dedicated controller chip on the motherboard, which is already full, plus the power regulations would need to be completely changed, it would require a logic board redesign. Infact they may as well use a Macbook Pro logic board, but then it would be a Macbook Pro and not a Macbook? :rolleyes:
 
kastenbrust said:
Your a royal numpty. Please go and learn how motherboards work before coming here and embarrassing yourself. A FW800 port would require its own dedicated controller chip on the motherboard, which is already full, plus the power regulations would need to be completely changed, it would require a logic board redesign. Infact they may as well use a Macbook Pro logic board, but then it would be a Macbook Pro and not a Macbook? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Hey well thanks for the unprovoked insults - appreciated. Well obviously they would have factored the FW chip into the design BEFORE they produced it, or have you not considered such an obvious point?. It could have been THE design, not a RE-design. Yes of course there is no room on the board now, because FW hasn't been included; however, it wouldn't have taken much brainpower to extend it half an inch in one corner, in order to site the controller IC. Do you really feel superior now?. I bet ya do.

Stop saying "no room" - you sound like the Inn-keeper whom Joseph and Mary encountered - there WAS room, they just decided against it, which was my initial, and whole, POINT. Power regulations would have been adjusted accordingly, as you can no doubt imagine - the previous gen had FW, so there really isn't that much of an issue here, Mr high and mighty. I'm sure if Apple suddenly discovered that putting the FW port back onto the MB was going to generate DOUBLE the sales, they'd find a way pretty quickly.

I'm gonna laugh my socks off if, with the next revision, they put it back. The preverbial egg will be well and truly on people's faces.
 
glossywhite said:
Hey well thanks for the unprovoked insults - appreciated. Well obviously they would have factored the FW chip into the design BEFORE they produced it, or have you not considered such an obvious point?. It could have been THE design, not a RE-design.

Stop saying "no room" - you sound like the Inn-keeper whom Joseph and Mary encountered - there WAS room, they just decided against it, which was my initial, and whole, POINT. Power regulations would have been adjusted accordingly, as you can no doubt imagine - the previous gen had FW, so there really isn't that much of an issue here, Mr high and mighty. I'm sure if Apple suddenly discovered that putting the FW port back onto the MB was going to generate DOUBLE the sales, they'd find a way pretty quickly.
Click to expand...

ok im sorry for being a bit rude, and your right, they could make room, but it would add $30 to the production cost, due to the FW costs itself, plus extra case production costs, plus better power system costs, and since Apple charges production x 4 to make a retail price as they like to make around 75% profit then it would add $100+ to the price of a Macbook. That would push it over the $1000 mark which wouldn't be clever of Apple for so many reasons, especially in a recession.
 
kastenbrust said:
ok im sorry for being a bit rude, and your right, they could make room, but it would add $30 to the production cost, and since Apple charges production x 4 to make a retail price as they like to make around 75% profit then it would add $100+ to the price of a Macbook. That would push it over the $1000 mark which wouldn't be clever of Apple for so many reasons, especially in a recession.
Click to expand...

Makes a mockery of your response to my initial *technical* point (nothing to do with economics). How does the recession make a difference?. If you can afford to pay £929 for a MB, which is ALREADY £229 more than the previous gen, I can't imagine many would be put off by an extra £50. I also severely doubt that it would cost them $30 to add firewire, when you consider HOW many they produce - it's called 'bulk price break'.

Your points hold no water.



SO - returning to my initial (and whole) point - why is it included on the Mini, and not the MB. After all, the point of a opening post is to glean replies to ascertain a logical explanation for the question asked - so why is it on the Mini but not the MB?. Makes not much sense right now.
 
We have seen Apple attempting all sorts of cost reducing/margin increasing (although I suspect that might not be the case) measures lately like not including remotes and producing hardware with long outdated tech until the chip makers say ENOUGH! (Mac mini). This could be one example but I suspect it had more to do with differentiating the MBP from the MB.
 
flopticalcube said:
We have seen Apple attempting all sorts of cost reducing/margin increasing (although I suspect that might not be the case) measures lately like not including remotes and producing hardware with long outdated tech until the chip makers say ENOUGH! (Mac mini). This could be one example but I suspect it had more to do with differentiating the MBP from the MB.
Click to expand...

First, and so far ONLY sensible and logical reply. Makes sense.
 
flopticalcube said:
We have seen Apple attempting all sorts of cost reducing/margin increasing (although I suspect that might not be the case) measures lately like not including remotes and producing hardware with long outdated tech until the chip makers say ENOUGH! (Mac mini). This could be one example but I suspect it had more to do with differentiating the MBP from the MB.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. If they included a FW800 in the Macbook i probably wouldnt use a MBP.
 
There is room if they delete the lock slot ... but then people would complain about that.
 
glossywhite said:
Hey well thanks for the unprovoked insults - appreciated. Well obviously they would have factored the FW chip into the design BEFORE they produced it, or have you not considered such an obvious point?. It could have been THE design, not a RE-design. Yes of course there is no room on the board now, because FW hasn't been included; however, it wouldn't have taken much brainpower to extend it half an inch in one corner, in order to site the controller IC. Do you really feel superior now?. I bet ya do.

Stop saying "no room" - you sound like the Inn-keeper whom Joseph and Mary encountered - there WAS room, they just decided against it, which was my initial, and whole, POINT. Power regulations would have been adjusted accordingly, as you can no doubt imagine - the previous gen had FW, so there really isn't that much of an issue here, Mr high and mighty. I'm sure if Apple suddenly discovered that putting the FW port back onto the MB was going to generate DOUBLE the sales, they'd find a way pretty quickly.

I'm gonna laugh my socks off if, with the next revision, they put it back. The preverbial egg will be well and truly on people's faces.
Click to expand...

You're gonna have to wait a long time for that laugh. The space you pointed out is the battery's space. where did you get "DOUBLE the sales" from? Non-educated guess or just dumb speculation? The previous revision had FW400 not 800 which requires much more power. And your main point of argument is that they designed it ONCE but that's not true. They must have thought about the FW port in the first prototype but found some problems with it, then redesigned it to exclude the FW port.
 
Hey, my iMac is chained to my desk and it hasn't been stolen yet!

Of course, I always brush my teeth at night, and I'm sure that has something to do with it too. Hope no enterprising crook discovers that my shelf has two pairs of wire cutters strong enough to slice through my lock cable.

I also almost forgot the combination once, since it stays locked in place for months at a time. That was embarassing.
 
BlueRevolution said:
Hey, my iMac is chained to my desk and it hasn't been stolen yet!

Of course, I always brush my teeth at night, and I'm sure that has something to do with it too. Hope no enterprising crook discovers that my shelf has two pairs of wire cutters strong enough to slice through my lock cable.

I also almost forgot the combination once, since it stays locked in place for months at a time. That was embarassing.
Click to expand...

3 and 4 pin number combination locks can be cracked in seconds, but yeah it would be funny if you forgot the number and turned your Macbook into an iMac.
 
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