iPod FireWire petition now bears more than three thousand si...


nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,551
1,186
3,000 indignant "victims"

Eleven of which will ACTUALLY be affected by this and truly find USB 2 unsuitable for a reason OTHER than deciding in advance to be upset :) (In other words, Mac owners who don't have USB 2 but DO have Firewire, AND who don't have an iPod yet but DO plan to get one.)

And nine of those will get a second job and buy the $19 Firewire cable. (The recent iPod price drops will help!)
 

mkubal

macrumors 6502a
Jul 22, 2002
557
0
Tampa
I personally could care less that they decided to include USB as opposed to firewire. It seems like a more logical choice to me and I don't even have USB 2.0. But I do realize technology changes and I can't expect my 4 year old Mac to always be current. Of course I could always just go get a USB 2.0 PCI card and then it wouldn't even be an issue. Apple did this to appeal to the PC user market.

That being said, a good idea would be to not include a cable at all, reduce the price accordingly, and let people buy whatever they need.
 

iGary

Guest
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
If they don't care, so what. At least they know.

Tera Patricks mentioned it today, Cnet yesterday, MacNN yesterday, Mac Daily News, Mac Mischief....

So it's not as if anyone doesn't CARE...and it doesn't matter if anything comes of it. At least some voices are being heard.

The petition may not do anything in itself but spark debate, which is alive on the web right now - that's a good thing. At least Apple knows we're still a bunch of cult-like lunatics who love their stuff. :D

Cheers,

Gary :D
 

solvs

macrumors 603
Jun 25, 2002
5,693
1
LaLaLand, CA
Yeah it sucks for some people, but it's not that big of a deal. I expected some people to be a little miffed, but this has already gotten way too much attention. Yes, Apple is shooting it's baby in the foot for the sake of marketing and making a buck. You'd think they were a for profit business or something. :rolleyes:
 

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,551
1,186
Except Apple's not EVEN hurting Firewire... iPods were NEVER a useful vehicle for promoting Firewire adoption. USB 2 has always worked just fine.

Camcorders, on the other hand, and external HDs, keep Firewire going strong.
 

eclipse525

macrumors 6502a
Aug 5, 2003
849
0
USA, New York
It's probably a smart business move. Lowers their cost and increases their profits. It's only a good move from a technology point of view if USB2.0 is as good as Firewire. If this is the case then it really doesn't matter. I'm all for standards across the board AS LONG AS the best technology is applied and they didn't settle for second rate.


~e
 

zelmo

macrumors 603
Jul 3, 2004
5,490
1
Mac since 7.5
Probably 2,500 of those 3,000 people already have an iPod and a firewire cable. :rolleyes:

It'd be nice if they still included the cable, but I bet 90% of iPods are being sold to people who don't need one anyway. If it helped Apple lower the price to "appear" a little more competitive, well, that's what they seem to be focusing on more these days, isn't it? Lure the PC users in with shiny objects and lower than typical Apple pricing. I hope it grows share a little bit, so we can all benefit from Apple sticking around the computer industry a while longer.
I'm not saying it's a non-issue, just that it has gotten a disproportionate amount of focus, IMHO. Guess that's why I won't bother signing a petition that isn't going to do anything anyway.

Is there also a petition going over the fact that Apple appears to have lowered the iPod Photo pricing by $150, when all they really did was drop the 40GB to 30 and leave out all the extra bits?
 

dotdotdot

macrumors 68020
Jan 23, 2005
2,381
31
JeDiBoYTJ said:
I doubt Apple will care... I bet almost 2/3rd's of the people who signed that petition already own an iPod...
I bet more than 2/3, unless 3,000 people purchased iPods in 3 days, considering all older iPods had firewire, so why would they care?
 

dotdotdot

macrumors 68020
Jan 23, 2005
2,381
31
I was one of the lucky people who needed to purchase a USB 2.0 cable for their iPods, as my computer has no firewire.
 

JeffTL

macrumors 6502a
Dec 18, 2003
733
0
What I really like is how when you buy a LaCie Big Disk that supports FW400, FW800, and USB2HS, they give you the cables for all of those, including a 6-pin to 4-pin FW400 cable, which I use to hook up a Sony Media Converter to my iMac, saving me $15 on a cable.


But an iPod isn't a LaCie drive -- the margins are a lot thinner, I imagine, on an iPod -- my $500 500GB LaCie drive is just two standard 250GB hard drives and an Oxford chipset (plus any other support chips) inside a custom enclosure, as opposed to the iPod, which for less includes a highly miniaturized hard drive, a big battery, a screen, a touchpad, and the PortalPlayer chipset and other audio hardware. Also the volume isn't as big on Big Disks, and thus the effect of cable generosity doesn't hit the company as hard as it must have been hitting Apple when they supplied two cables.
 

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,551
1,186
Not quite AS good, but...

USB 2 is:

* 90% as good as Firewire for the initial sync.

* 99% as good as Firewire for the rest of your iPod's life (small syncs).

* 100% better than Firewire if you don't have Firewire--which is more common than not having USB 2.0. (And USB 1.1 does work, but slowly.)

* Far inferior to Firewire for lots of OTHER applications.

As for Apple listening to their customers.... they certainly do, and the switch to USB 2 as the default is partly the result of that!

So people SHOULD say what they want from Apple, whether by petition or not.

However, don't get your hopes up. The reasons for Apple's choice are not small ones. They're not going to suddenly return to throwing in Firewire cables that most iPod users don't need.

Lastly, people who see this as somehow "anti-Mac" (what do PC users get that we don't, again?) should look at the big picture: iPod success--which results in part from pricing--is GREAT for the Mac platform if you look at the long term: the halo effect.
 

plinkoman

macrumors 65816
Jul 2, 2003
1,144
0
New York
eclipse525 said:
It's only a good move from a technology point of view if USB2.0 is as good as Firewire.
well, there inlies the problem. usb2 is not as good as firewire, the burst speed of usb2 is slightly higher then firewire (60MB/s as opposed to 50MB/s), so sending one song over will be a few seconds faster, but usb2 has a sustained transfer rate of 34MB/s whereas firewire has a sustained rate of 40MB/s, and when your transfering over a library of 5,000 songs, thats a big difference. another thing, usb2 was not designed with host powering in mind as firewire was. firewire has two dedicated power pins, usb does not. in order to power something from usb, it uses two of the data pins, and just what do you think that does to the transfer rate?

sure it's not that big a difference, but to get rid of that slightly faster interface that the iPod was born with instead of continuing to provide both really bugs me. and would it be that hard to on there own site atleast, have a little checkbox asking which you want included?

think about it, a 4 year old 1g 5GB iPod with its firewire interface can fill itself to capacity about a minute quicker then you can put 5 GB on a brand new iPod with it's usb2. if iPod had always came with usb2, it would be no problem, but the fact that it started with something faster, and they are slowing it down, albeit a small amount, is just inexcusable in my mind
 

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,551
1,186
plinkoman said:
and would it be that hard to on there own site atleast, have a little checkbox asking which you want included?
It's about cost, vs. the benefit for that cost. The benefit of including a FW cable is too small to be worth the cost. And having the option--two different bundles for EACH iPod model--is costly too.
 

jbembe

macrumors 6502a
Jun 2, 2003
765
0
Baltimore, MD
nagromme said:
It's about cost, vs. the benefit for that cost. The benefit of including a FW cable is too small to be worth the cost. And having the option--two different bundles for EACH iPod model--is costly too.
The original firewire cable on my iPod wore out from transfering daily between wall charger and syncing on the computer. When I bought a new one at target, it has both cables coming directly out of the iPod specific port. Why not that? But who cares really? :rolleyes:
 

Monk Edsel

macrumors regular
Apr 7, 2004
193
0
plinkoman said:
well, there inlies the problem. usb2 is not as good as firewire, the burst speed of usb2 is slightly higher then firewire (60MB/s as opposed to 50MB/s), so sending one song over will be a few seconds faster, but usb2 has a sustained transfer rate of 34MB/s whereas firewire has a sustained rate of 40MB/s, and when your transfering over a library of 5,000 songs, thats a big difference. another thing, usb2 was not designed with host powering in mind as firewire was. firewire has two dedicated power pins, usb does not. in order to power something from usb, it uses two of the data pins, and just what do you think that does to the transfer rate?
Well, it takes less than a second to transfer the average song via FireWire as it is. In light of this, I'm not sure what you're getting at. Also, I don't know of anyone who regularly transfers 5,000 songs to their iPod. I can't imagine the average person being so pressed for time that even during the initial transfer of music to a new iPod that they couldn't bear to wait a few more minutes for it to complete. The hit to speed is regrettable, but you aren't looking at the bigger picture here, and in the end it really is not very important.

In any case, if you really want to use FireWire, no one is stopping you. You'll just have to buy the cable separately from now on.
 

iJon

macrumors 604
Feb 7, 2002
6,557
36
To be honest I think it is worse that the Mini's don't come with a power adapter anymore, I feel that is more important. When I am overseas I use it a ton, or really anytime I am not at home. The firewire issue isn't as bad. Apple sells the cable for $20 and Griffin Technologies sells a car charger that includes a dock connecter via firewire for $25. Seems like a good deal to me. Lucky for me though I picked myself up the discontinued 60GB, and now I have a USB cable, Firewire cable, dock, case and a the RCA inputs, can't beat it.

jon
 

aswitcher

macrumors 603
Oct 8, 2003
5,351
14
Canberra OZ
iJoon said:
Seems like a good deal to me. Lucky for me though I picked myself up the discontinued 60GB, and now I have a USB cable, Firewire cable, dock, case and a the RCA inputs, can't beat it.

jon
Same here. Interestingly, when I went to synch my music to my new 60gig, the USB2 collapsed half a dozen times after 3-4 songs at a time. I gave up, and switched the dock to firewire and it went fine... Error was somethign like -31 unknown error or some such...
 

plinkoman

macrumors 65816
Jul 2, 2003
1,144
0
New York
Monk Edsel said:
Well, it takes less than a second to transfer the average song via FireWire as it is. In light of this, I'm not sure what you're getting at. Also, I don't know of anyone who regularly transfers 5,000 songs to their iPod. I can't imagine the average person being so pressed for time that even during the initial transfer of music to a new iPod that they couldn't bear to wait a few more minutes for it to complete. The hit to speed is regrettable, but you aren't looking at the bigger picture here, and in the end it really is not very important.

In any case, if you really want to use FireWire, no one is stopping you. You'll just have to buy the cable separately from now on.
did you not read the rest of what i said? right after explaining how it was slower, i explicitly said that the hit in speed was not a big deal. what is a big deal and inexcusable to me is that although it may only be barely slower, the fact that they are slowing it down to begin with.

when a 4 year old iPod can transfer a certian amount of music faster then a brand new one can transfer the same amount, i find that inexcusable