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.
Inside iPod Video, iMac G5, and PowerMac G5
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm nearly certain, now, that Apple is slowly abandoning FireWire. The new G5's only come with 1 firewire port (and 1 FW800 port 
), but it comes with 3 USB ports. The new iPod is USB only, so is the nano.
I've noticed quite a few DV cameras moving to USB as well.
), but it comes with 3 USB ports. The new iPod is USB only, so is the nano.I've noticed quite a few DV cameras moving to USB as well.
e-coli said:I'm nearly certain, now, that Apple is slowly abandoning FireWire. The new G5's only come with 1 firewire port (and 1 FW800 port
I've noticed quite a few DV cameras moving to USB as well.
dual g5 2.7 ghz:
One FireWire 800 port, two FireWire 400 ports (one on front); three USB 2.0 ports (one on front), two USB 1.1 ports (on keyboard); AGP 8X Pro slot with graphics card installed
dual core g5 2.3 ghz:
ne FireWire 800 port, two FireWire 400 ports (one on front), four USB 2.0 ports (one on front), two USB 1.1 ports (on keyboard), two internal hard drive bays (one occupied)
what exactly did change in regard of the firewire ports between old and new G5's?
since FW400 ports are still found in all macs
i seriously think that apple should re-introduce FW connection in their ipods
i seriously think that apple should re-introduce FW connection in their ipods
Zoowatch said:
Quite common on Sony's, and the more expensive computers.~Shard~ said:But FireWire is much more rare on PCs....
I really wish Apple would try and get Firewire going again...It is so much faster than USB 2.0.
2.3 DC or 2.7 DP?
The 2.7 will be faster than the 2.3, but you are sacrificing on RAM and other benefits of the newer architecture. Personally, for the $300 difference (plus, the new RAM is cheaper), I would go with the 2.3. If you are that concerned with performance, I would spend the extra hundreds and jump to the Quad.
VCF said:
The 2.7 will be faster than the 2.3, but you are sacrificing on RAM and other benefits of the newer architecture. Personally, for the $300 difference (plus, the new RAM is cheaper), I would go with the 2.3. If you are that concerned with performance, I would spend the extra hundreds and jump to the Quad.
You're repeating a decade-old argument that Apple has repeatedly proven wrong.ltgator333 said:
They are always dropping product features that some people insist are irreplaceable. And the threat of alienating customers is always part of the argument. But when the change actually happens, very few people (other than a few obvious kooks) care for more than a month or two.
For instance, when the iMac first came out, dropping SCSI, serial ports, ADB and floppy drives.
Or when OS X shipped and most of these legacy devices stopped working without third party hacks.
Or when the PowerMac/G3 came out, dropping NuBus slots once and for all.
Or when Apple stopped shipping A/V macs, forcing everybody to go third party for video-input.
Or when the Cube was discontinued.
Or when Apple stopped shipping systems capable of booting OS 9.
So you'll have to excuse me when you point to yet another feature (this time, the PPC) that you claim Apple must continue supporting, lest they alienate all their customers and cede the market to Microsoft or something.
All the examples you provided were things excluded because of sheer practicalness. Something was out there that just was a lot better and/or less expensive. To a certain extent, Intel does describe that, but not fully. The Mac Cube doesn't quite fit that, neither did OS 9, but for technical reasons, their days were numbered.
Apple is throwing serious resources at ditching PPC across the board, which isn't necessarily practical at all, and surely not less expensive than just going with the flow. Which isn't to say that the Pentium M is not the best laptop chip out there and they're not justified in ditching PPC for laptops and even a good % of they're desktops. But hey, people will still buy PPC workstations and servers with or without Apple, and Apple offers and sells them and could continue doing so and making money off it. They will, for reasons of keeping they're OS portable, continue a internal port of OS X to PPC for some time so really it's not too much effort on they're part for the OS software.
And no I will not excuse you. Your rude and I didn't appreciate being flamed from the get go, nor it being implied that I am a kook. I wouldn't have replied at all if you'd kept your playground name calling to yourself, because it's become obvious to me long ago that you just drink too much Kool Aid from either Jobs or Intel or both and it doesn't matter to you at all what I say because after all, you ARE so much better than me in every way, right? So hey, chew on that and reply if you must.
I won't be sad if you don't though.
Apple is throwing serious resources at ditching PPC across the board, which isn't necessarily practical at all, and surely not less expensive than just going with the flow. Which isn't to say that the Pentium M is not the best laptop chip out there and they're not justified in ditching PPC for laptops and even a good % of they're desktops. But hey, people will still buy PPC workstations and servers with or without Apple, and Apple offers and sells them and could continue doing so and making money off it. They will, for reasons of keeping they're OS portable, continue a internal port of OS X to PPC for some time so really it's not too much effort on they're part for the OS software.
And no I will not excuse you. Your rude and I didn't appreciate being flamed from the get go, nor it being implied that I am a kook. I wouldn't have replied at all if you'd kept your playground name calling to yourself, because it's become obvious to me long ago that you just drink too much Kool Aid from either Jobs or Intel or both and it doesn't matter to you at all what I say because after all, you ARE so much better than me in every way, right? So hey, chew on that and reply if you must.
I won't be sad if you don't though.
I didn't say that that referred to you. As a matter of fact, I was specifically referring to several other people who, for the past five years, have continued to spam the various comp.sys.mac.* newsgroups with complants that Apple must bring back the floppy drives and serial ports or risk losing their entire customer-base. These people are, most definitely, kooks.ltgator333 said:
If you thought I was referring to you, I apologize.
This seems to have gotten pretty far off-topic...
Anyway, what dissappoints me most about the 5th Gen iPod is the battery life playing video. Apple compresses the heck out of some video and then fails to take proper advantage of it for purposes of battery life by going cheap on the iPod memory! Still only 32MB! that's been the same since 2001!
A modest investment could have 64 or even a glorious 128MB of system memory. With the standard video format using only .75 Mb or about .1 MB/sec. the iPod would be capable of taking 20-30 sec of power costly HD time to pre-load 10 minutes or more of video and extend the life significantly! (at this point someone with a much more advanced degree than I computes exactly how much.)
Other than that, the LCD Screen is cool, and we haven't seen too many broken iPod screens for the 5th gen yet, also the new Hard Drive is nice and small, any idea if the MK3008GAL or MK6008GAH uses Toshiba's new perpendicular recording? If so why the small capacity then?
Anyway, what dissappoints me most about the 5th Gen iPod is the battery life playing video. Apple compresses the heck out of some video and then fails to take proper advantage of it for purposes of battery life by going cheap on the iPod memory! Still only 32MB! that's been the same since 2001!
A modest investment could have 64 or even a glorious 128MB of system memory. With the standard video format using only .75 Mb or about .1 MB/sec. the iPod would be capable of taking 20-30 sec of power costly HD time to pre-load 10 minutes or more of video and extend the life significantly! (at this point someone with a much more advanced degree than I computes exactly how much.)
Other than that, the LCD Screen is cool, and we haven't seen too many broken iPod screens for the 5th gen yet, also the new Hard Drive is nice and small, any idea if the MK3008GAL or MK6008GAH uses Toshiba's new perpendicular recording? If so why the small capacity then?