New Apple Portables To Drop FireWire Support?

[Crikey]

FireWire, and its deep OS support and its across-the-line ubiquity, is a huge competitive advantage for the Mac. I don't see it going away.

I have a considerable investment in external FireWire hard disks, audio interfaces, media readers, and so on. My future computers WILL have FireWire, regardless of what operating system they run.


Crikey

 

[Peace]

Maybe Steve is going to replace Firewire with wireless firewire instead!

Hmm, "wireless firewire" - wouldn't that just be fire?...

BINGO!! Give that person a prize.

That story has it backwards...Apple will be phasing out Firewire 800 in favor of Firewire Wireless, Firewire 400 and 802.11n
These standards will be seen in January when Jobs shows off the new Intel Mac Mini.

 

[electronboy]

I hope not. USB 2.0 has some serious throughput issues when compared to firewire. All of our external disc burners, scanners, cameras, and hard drives are all firewire 400. Leave it alone! There is no reason to stop putting firewire 400 ports on laptops, desktops or servers. Why did they have to change the connector anyway?

 

[fklehman]

I've been saying this ever since Apple dropped Firewire support in the video iPods: Firewire 400 is toast. Sure it kicks the crap out of USB2 (WAY higher sustained transfer rates), but then Beta was better than VHS and look what happened...MacOS was better than Windows and look what happened.

Firewire 400 will be jettisoned as part of Apple's ongoing efforts at platform convergence/compatibility. It's part of a LONG timeline and is thus no surprise--Apple dropped Nubus and adopted PCI; Apple dropped ADB and adopted USB; Apple dropped PPC and adopted Intel. All of these changes have (or will have, in the case of Intel) led to more choice in peripherals for Mac users, which has been a good thing. In the case of Firewire 400 vs. USB2, it's a contest between a "better," Apple-proprietary standard that has enjoyed some success and a "good enough" alternative that enjoys complete market penetration, and if one has to go that's just business. Sucks, but that's the way it is. I predicted on several past threads that the Intel 'Books would have only USB2 and Firewire 800 for pro users.

I actually think that dropping Firewire 400 will be a good thing for Firewire 800. More developers might make devices Firewire 800 compatible at that point. At this point, there is no Firewire 800 consumer device market to spak of, it is pretty much a professional market. With 400 out of the picture, though, the performance gap between USB2 and Firewire 800 is so huge that consumers may become interested. Either way, I'm not at all surprised to hear that Apple is considering giving Firewire 400 the axe--I would probably do the same thing.

 

[yellow]

That would SERIOUSLY suck! And I'll tell you why..

Not only for the lack of DV video cam support..

But for those of us who do Mac IT support and actually USE the FW ports constantly to troubleshoot and move large amounts of data!

Using my PB to (legally) install OS X on older Macs that don't have DVD drives or fully functioning optical drives, or other problems has been incredibly helpful. Not to mention being able to use target mode to run my PB's OS on a desktop to use various utilities/scripts to fix problems, rename files, etc. AND not to mention that I have no internet at home and use the PB to haul data back to my Macs at home.

I hate USB 2.0. They better not limit it to that ****.

 

[dqk]

Not so bad - just buy a new cable

This wouldn't be bad if firewire 800 was still included on all portables and all you had to do was buy a new cable. I wouldn't miss firewire 400 at all as long as I could buy a 4pin to 9pin and still connect my video camera to my laptop. Sure I'd have to spend $20, but I don't really think that's a huge deal. So here's my prediction. Firewire 400 will indeed disappear, but firewire 800 will be present on all machines (indluding new ibooks I hope). Not so bad - just buy a cable.

 

[SeaFox]

I don't believe this either. Just Page Two It!
1. Camcorders and iMovie and iDVD.

That spells this out as bullcrap to me, too. No Firewire means no need for iLife.

2. iSight.

Only if Apple made all computers include iSights like the iMac does.

4. FW400 faster (except in bursts) than USB2.0. FW800 faster still--and it doesn't end there.

This is one of those things Apple needs to market more. All consumers ever do is look at the burst figures they are shown and say "Well clearly USB2 is faster."

9. You still need multiple things connected at once, so they'd only have to add more USB ports anyway.

They already need more USB ports. Dells ship with 6 USB 2.0 ports and they aren't even using them for the keyboard and mouse most of the time.

12. Other rumored FW devices from Apple in the recent past: Asteroid.

Whatever happend to Asteroid?

14. FW has been catching on with PCs too. (And does Apple make fees when companies use Firewire?)

Not sure about that one. Sony had their "i-Link" port that was just unpowered Firewire. They did charge for the use of the name "Firewire" originally, which is why all early PC implementations have the port labeled 'IEEE 1394'. Apple eventually made the name licencing free to stop that so the Firewire name could be adopted in marketing.

But I can see how this COULD be a distorted "quarter-truth"--if LoopRumors is right (big if) about Apple prepping a sub-$500 stripped-down iBook.

THAT machine might be the one that doesn't have Firewire. The rest of the lineup? FW is here to stay. I can imagine pro models MAYBE going 800-only... as long as some adapter is provided. Some support for FW400 must remain.

I think maybe FW400 IS going away. The consumer level macs could all gain a single FW 800 port in place of the 400 ports and the pro level machine would get two FW800 ports. Since 800 is backwards compatable, Apple can just include the adapter dongle with all Macs.

 

[Peace]

Keep in mind we're talking about the two companies that pioneered firewire and wireless in Intel and Apple..These two inovators are simply coming up with something better..
Firewire 400 will be around for another 2 years.Firewire 800 isn't being adopted as anticipated..

 

[czardmitri]

O'Grady's full of it. This is just a sad, desperate act in order to garner attention for his new ZDnet column and moderately increase his revenue. The PowerPage used to be a reasonably good source of PowerBook/iBook and associated mobile device info, but it's languished over the last 2 years, plagued by poor writing, a lack of effort and general apathy on O'Grady's part when it failed to become a money-making venture. Now, it's simply an advertisement for his ZDnet column.

Can anyone even cite an example where, within the last three years, the PowerPage was even remotely correct on any of its exclusive rumors?

As stated before, Apple has numerous reasons to leave FireWire intact on the Powerbook and very few reasons to remove or reduce the number of FW ports.

O'Grady's specious reasoning seems to derive solely from the removal of the FW chipset on the 5G iPods, a decision based on the size of the chipset, rather than its utility.

Don't give O'Grady or his ilk any more attention -- it will only encourage more sites to go the route of MacOSRumors. (Yecht!)

Hallelujah!
O'Grady has no credibility. He writes off the top of his head and everyone is convinced that it's true. Powerpage really has slipped lately. I often wonder why I even bother reading it anymore. And I NEVER click through to the ZDNet column. He's probably getting paid by the number of referrals, and I refuse to contribute to that.

-czardmitri

 

[whooleytoo]

Keep in mind we're talking about the two companies that pioneered firewire and wireless in Intel and Apple..These two inovators are simply coming up with something better..
Firewire 400 will be around for another 2 years.Firewire 800 isn't being adopted as anticipated..

It hasn't been adopted because not enough machines have FW800 ports for it to achieve the critical mass needed to become a standard, plus relatively few people need it. Certainly audio/video engineers do, but until the Mac as a video hub for the living room takes off, most consumers can probably get by just fine without it.

In fact, if Apple is planning some kind of Intel-mini-media-hub in the new year, I'd imagine that might be part of the reason to really start pushing the FW800 again.

 

[iMan]

Wireless Firewire

This is kind of odd... because in my work I have come to hear a thing that pussled me a bit... we are in the market to invest in some equipment for digital imaging - pro-stuff, 22 megapixel digital camera backends (USD 10.000+ range). One supplier slipped some information on this backend going wireless, but apparently not wifi as we know it - but something he called "wireless firewire" (his wording) that would be released second quarter 2006... apparently coinciding with the new intel Powerbook... this was to enable complete freedom of shooting, transferring files of 50MB+ wirelessly in no time directly to the notebook (appr. 25m range) during the photo-session.

With an optional adapter for existing equipment this would really make for rebirthing firewire as technology... hence the computers won't need any FW ports, except the PB needing a FW800...

 

[Peace]

It hasn't been adopted because not enough machines have FW800 ports for it to achieve the critical mass needed to become a standard, plus relatively few people need it. Certainly audio/video engineers do, but until the Mac as a video hub for the living room takes off, most consumers can probably get by just fine without it.

In fact, if Apple is planning some kind of Intel-mini-media-hub in the new year, I'd imagine that might be part of the reason to really start pushing the FW800 again.

I see where you're coming from with the media hub.However.
The media hub won't be connecting to an LCD or HDTV via Firewire.

The ITU and the FCC has dictated that all new satellite receivers,cable boxes and pvr's come standard with Firewire ports.

Putting the data ON the media hub will be done either via firewire 400 or firewire wireless..
Or in the case of live television svideo or DVI for live content.

 

[pubwvj]

One more reason not to buy MacIntel machines.
The lack of Classic support is a deal killer.
Removing support for FireWire just piles it on.
Get your PPC PowerBooks and iBooks while you can.

 

[heisetax]

I don't know of a single camera that uses FW800...

They use FW800 external drives.

As you imply they also use a lot of FW400 items. Like their: camera, FW card readers & oter items.

Many items only come in USB2. Things like the Epsen P-2000 & P-4000 40 & 80GB Data Storage Unit with a 3.75" screen.

So like many of us, they need all three.

Apple has a history of developing a product until it is just about ready for use then dropping it. The only advantage we have with FireWire is that it was just started by Apple, but has it's own organization & following separate from Apple.

I've seen FW400 on some fairly cheap Windows boxes, like $500 ones. It also appears on many Windows portables. Apple is the only one that has FW800 that I've seen though.

I'm hoping that they don't drop FW either 400 or 800 from the PowerBooks. I just don't want to use my FW800/400 PC card adapters unless I have to.

Bill the TaxMan

 

[heisetax]

FW400 & FW800 connector

I hope not. USB 2.0 has some serious throughput issues when compared to firewire. All of our external disc burners, scanners, cameras, and hard drives are all firewire 400. Leave it alone! There is no reason to stop putting firewire 400 ports on laptops, desktops or servers. Why did they have to change the connector anyway?

I have been told that there is a problem with the FW400 connectors shorting out some FW400 interfaces when they are hot plugged-in or removed. I know that I have had 2 2.5" FW400 drive interfaces blown. This appears to be the reason why.

Can anyone out there confirm this?

Bill the TaxMan

 

[jiv3turkey748]

i dont see why everyone loves firewire so much i know its better but everything uses usb i would have much rather had 3 usb ports on my ibook than 2 usb and one firewire

 

[heisetax]

Using a FW800 to FW400 adapter

there are fw 400 > fw 800 connectors. obviously, it doesn't speed it up, but it allows you to utilize that port if you're not using any fw 800 devices.

But that slows everything down in a chain after the adapter. There's different ways around that problem though.

Bill the TaxMan

 

[mustang_dvs]

i dont see why everyone loves firewire so much i know its better but everything uses usb i would have much rather had 3 usb ports on my ibook than 2 usb and one firewire

Um... you said it yourself: It's better.

And by your logic, since >85% of the world runs on PC hardware, you really should be using a Mac because it has the smaller installed base.

 

[plastique45]

That is complete and utter ********. Apple's core business is video. Firewire is needed on all their machines.

Also, Apple didn't drop firewire support for the iPod. They stopped including a free FireWire cable to make extra cash. They did the same with their computers. My first Mac came with a firewire cable, my new G5 didn't.

 

[plastique45]

Um... you said it yourself: It's better.

And by your logic, since >85% of the world runs on PC hardware, you really should be using a Mac because it has the smaller installed base.

Also, where are the USB camcorders?

 

[dagger01]

Wait a minute ...

Doesn't this statement from a newer article on wireless iPods:

"The last time Steve Jobs spoke on the subject, he claimed that Bluetooth for the iPod isn't a good option due to sound quality and headphone recharging issues. As well, Apple is cautious in adding new features:

We are very careful about what features we add because we can't take them away"

kind of negate the whole rumor of Firewire going away? Duh! Also realize that Apple NEVER takes anything away without replacing it with something better; eg., ADB w. USB, SCSI w. Firewire. So *if* Firewire goes away, we can safely assume that something better will replace it. Frankly, I don't think it's going anywhere just yet.

 

[camomac]

BS, complete BS

Why is this BS on page one?

exactly apple won't give this up. this is complete BS, firewire is
the industry standard for DV... it is not going to happen.

 

[dagger01]

Classic support?!?!?!

One more reason not to buy MacIntel machines.
The lack of Classic support is a deal killer.
Removing support for FireWire just piles it on.
Get your PPC PowerBooks and iBooks while you can.

What on God's green Earth could anyone possibly need Classic support for? I can't think of a single commercial application that didn't make the move from Classic to Mac OS X. If the app in question is shareware, it's time to find a new app. If the app is open source, port it, or pay someone to do it! If it's infrastructure reasons, then your infrastructure is old, insecure, and highly unstable; all of which point to needing a new infrastructure. What in the world could you possibly need Classic for today?

 

[iEdd]

That is complete and utter ********. Apple's core business is video. Firewire is needed on all their machines.

Also, Apple didn't drop firewire support for the iPod. They stopped including a free FireWire cable to make extra cash. They did the same with their computers. My first Mac came with a firewire cable, my new G5 didn't.

Actually iPod nanos and video iPods do not have a firewire device chip in them, they will only charge through it. And my bondi blue iMac G3 included a Firewire cable, but my G5 didn't, just like yours.

Also, where are the USB camcorders?

Well seeing as FW400 transfers video while playing it, I assume transferring video with USB would be as reliable as trying to stream a video with windows media player.

What on God's green Earth could anyone possibly need Classic support for? I can't think of a single commercial application that didn't make the move from Classic to Mac OS X. If the app in question is shareware, it's time to find a new app. If the app is open source, port it, or pay someone to do it! If it's infrastructure reasons, then your infrastructure is old, insecure, and highly unstable; all of which point to needing a new infrastructure. What in the world could you possibly need Classic for today?

Please don't turn this into an intel debate thread with all the others. I wonder if some classic users also need SCSI, Serial and all that for their 'legacy' printers and scanners (of course, new ones haven't come out yet) Meh, I'm over classic, but some people want it on their new machines, let them winge. I'm sure some M$ users were reluctant to go from DOS to 3.1 (shows how well M$ can count )

 

[iEdd]

We are very careful about what features we add because we can't take them away

That's reassuring, apple doesn't let us down. I'm thinking someone will quote that and then say "Well apple took classic away!", however the statement only relates to things that aren't being replaced by something better with the same(or more) support.