If only it were that simple. It supposedly meets "standards", but the errors seem random. I am willing to bet that it's OS X doing the last bit of non-compatibility-work, so to speak, considering one cannot even use a TI-chipset on an expresscard under OS X. I mean, who other than Apple have said that the Agere chipset "meets the standards"?
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.
Steve Jobs on Lack of Firewire in MacBooks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If only it were that simple. It supposedly meets "standards", but the errors seem random. I am willing to bet that it's OS X doing the last bit of non-compatibility-work, so to speak, considering one cannot even use a TI-chipset on an expresscard under OS X. I mean, who other than Apple have said that the Agere chipset "meets the standards"?
Apple would like to define a class of "consumers" and a class of "creators" because it suits their marketing needs, but the truth is that most users both consume and create.
Where did heck you get the idea that the chipset "meet all standards" but "some peripherals don't"?
Please cite at least one credible source that backs up your statement.
The issue has been discussed to death online since late-2007 when Apple started using the problematic Lucent/Agere chipset and I've never heard what you are claiming.
A commonly used definition of "content provider" follows:
"An organization or individual that creates information, educational or entertainment content for the Internet, CD-ROMs or other software-based products."
Within the scope of that definition, do you still believe that "most users both consume and create"?
Not to sound like an arse, but everyone here complaining had planned on buying THIS MacBook? What was wrong with the prior version? No one REMOVED FireWire from your current setup.
Of course if your serious about video editing and importing on the road you would get a MacBook Pro.
Or is this another case of "Well in all honesty I was not going to buy one, I just like to complain."
Sorry guys, but I see this all to often. Remember that the consumer end did not have FireWire til MUCH later in the game.
Also keep in mind that $400 IS $400 dollars, but not a whole lot when you consider the MacBook over a MacBook Pro which will not ONLY have FireWire but ALSO twin video cards - you know, for all you "serious" video editors. And lets not forget a 15" screen over the MacBook's 13" screen. Something else most video guys seem to want.....
So, to put it bluntly if you are this serious about the video thing and can pony up the cash for a DV camera with firewire, spend $400 more for the better machine with FireWire or just pick up the prior model.
Ok, done with rant...
The Macbook pro cost more than $400 over the Macbook doesn't it?
Can I transfer downloads from one computer to another??
Hi,
I am new to using firewall - in fact I only discovered it yesterday when looking at my sony handycam and trying to work out how I could download the tapes onto the computer as I have collected quite a few from various holidays, and I want to send a copy to my parents on DVD so they can watch them.
I have just bought the silver macbook, and have now found out I can't use firewall, but is there any other way to download tapes onto the computer. If I plug in the USB, it takes the images off my memory stick in the camera and puts them on the computer. I need to know how to do this with tapes though, cause the USB doesn't work. The handycam is a sony dcr-hc30E.
I also have the older white plastic Macbook which I believe has the firewall, but I don't have a DVD burner on that computer. Is it possible to download the film onto the white MacBook and transfer it onto the silver Macbook?
Thanks
Hi,
I am new to using firewall - in fact I only discovered it yesterday when looking at my sony handycam and trying to work out how I could download the tapes onto the computer as I have collected quite a few from various holidays, and I want to send a copy to my parents on DVD so they can watch them.
I have just bought the silver macbook, and have now found out I can't use firewall, but is there any other way to download tapes onto the computer. If I plug in the USB, it takes the images off my memory stick in the camera and puts them on the computer. I need to know how to do this with tapes though, cause the USB doesn't work. The handycam is a sony dcr-hc30E.
I also have the older white plastic Macbook which I believe has the firewall, but I don't have a DVD burner on that computer. Is it possible to download the film onto the white MacBook and transfer it onto the silver Macbook?
Thanks
It's "FireWire", not "FireWall", and you're not "downloading" anything – you're "transferring", "copying", or - even better - "importing" the movies.
With the terms in place, though: Yes, it's possible.
Since there's no firewire on the glassbooks, I can't tell you to put the old one in target mode, because you'd need firewire on the newer one to acces what is now a huge firewire-drive.
But use an external USB-drive to connect to the old one, then connect the camera via firewire to the external drive. Afterwards, disconnect everything, and connect the usb-drive to the newer glassbook, and either use "as is", or transfer the movie to the internal glassbook-harddrive. Lots of copying and lots of waiting. Quite the "jump forward" technology-wise, huh?
Anyway, hope it's clear enough
I do agree with what else you said in that post, but I really do feel that that's just a tad bit narrow definition.
I work in broadcast, and although I still have to write for the web and most of what I do is also available via the web (for a while), that definition takes most of what I do and defines it as "non-contents", i.e. "form", ads or something else.
None of my work is "software based", though – unless you mean that "it was made with software", but I read it like the work itself have to do with programming?
Hell, even a photographer (be it print or broadcast) aren't then considered "providing contents".
Thanks I told you I was new to this, don't even have correct terms LOL!!!
Ok, I am sort of understanding it, but what do you mean by an external USB-drive? Is that an external hard drive? If I connect the camera to that, does it mean it won't copy onto my plastic Macbook? am I able to just copy it straight to my new note book rather than plug it into my old one? Or am I connecting the camera to my old Macbook and importing it onto the external USB drive? Maybe this is too confusing!! Thanks for helping!
He he, yeah, that's why I figured I'd try to help you
No problem.
I meant the latter. You cannot get to the video by the means of USB. No matter what.
This is what I meant:
a) connect a USB drive to your old macbook.
b) in the app you use to import the movie, select the external hdd (the usb-drive) as the place to import it to.
c) connect your camera via FW.
d) import the movie.
e) when it's imported, disconnect everything.
And then when you have connected the USB drive to your glassbook, either:
f1) use the USB-drive "as is" as a place to store your movies on, as a scratch disk (when editing you use a "scratch disk" for temporary sstuff (edits/undos et al)) so your internal can be used for apps and final documents/files.
OR
f2) transfer the videofile to your internal harddrive in your glassbook so you will have it with you at all times.
I'd actually suggest you do the "f1" and then when you have edited it to a final version, you can put that version and only that version on the internal harddrive on your glassbook.
I'm not sure I get your point. There are a lot of creative activities that don't involve providing content for the Internet, producing CD-ROMs or software.
There are indeed. I do a blog and record a podcast, I guess that makes me a content provider. I can do both without firewire
by the way.There are indeed. I do a blog and record a podcast, I guess that makes me a content provider. I can do both without firewire
Of course you can. You can do that with a netbook or a pda with external keyboard
I quoted that definition because I believe the "everyone creates content" angle is a real stretch. Sure, grandma might write several emails a day, telling her family members "the latest news", etc., but arguing that she's a member of "the press" or identifying her as a "writer" on a resume simply because she writes emails her family finds "interesting" would be something most reasonably minded people would dismiss.
I remember "content provider" as a term coined late in the last century to describe the "new media", e.g. media distribution channels that made use of software based distribution methods as opposed to the methods used by traditional media, e.g. print, broadcast, etc.
The Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system puts newspapers in a "manufacturer" category but places generally places most photography related activities in its "service" section. And the SIC has yet to deal with the whole topic of digital mediums, so a news portal like news.yahoo.com would probably end up in the "Not Elsewhere Classified" (NEC) "service" category.
The SIC system needs an update to bring it into the 21st Century, and its lack of suitable classifications for new and different methods or mediums is what causes terms like "content provider" to come into general use within a given industry.
But I don't see a "content provider" (the distributor of content) to be the same thing as a "content creator" (the author of original content). Arguably, anyone that creates an original work eligible for copyright protection could be considered a "content creator". However, unless that person is deriving at least some significant percentage of their total income via the sale and/or distribution of their original works I think most people would regard that activity as a hobby.
Writing an email is akin to writing a letter. We're talking "mass media" here, not personal letter or adverts.
As I said, I disagree that one should define it so narrowly in this day and age.
There's quite the difference between the media itself and the actul people producing the contents. It's as if you're mixing the actual printing up with the production of the things which goes to print.
So wait: First you want to use their classification to differentiate, yet in the next paragraph they haven't even thought about digital media?
Er, that's quite a statement. Most people couldn't care less about how an industrial classification system categorizes things. Least of all things like this.
We also use the term "creatives" – talk about poorly defined term.
Language-wise, the notion that we should exclude people that as a matter-of-fact produce contents (i.e. I'm NOT talking about that email from granny) from the term "contents-providers" is nonsensical at best.
Edit (you seem to have added):
Yet you seem to confuse "the media", "the channel" with the people who make that contents.
No, because in order to be considered "contents", it would have to be placed somewhere for it to ACT like "contents".
So, you're saying that two people - A and B - both get the same money for the same work, but since A has the work as a sole income he is a contents provider, but B, which happen to be a rich heir, does NOT provide contents, simply because the moeny he gets from doing it is a drop in the ocean or he's doing it pro bono.
In short: How much money one makes from a given thing has no bearing on the function or description of the work.
Get back on topic, guys. It really, really doesn't matter whose definition of content creator is better. That's probably the lamest argument on this site in a while.
Relax. What I'm saying is that the overuse of any given nebulous term can turn any discussion into meaningless babble, which is one reason why most contracts prepared by a lawyer will go to great lengths to clearly define the terms, conditions, etc. of the contract in a level of detail that can be understood by the parties...
If one wants to argue what is (or isn't) a "content creator" it would be very helpful for all parties to attempt to explain the term (as they would define it) in more detail and provide some degree of clarification regarding the subject rather than just simply using the term and claiming "everyone knows what that is -- and you know what -- everyone is one!"
LOL, you go "relax", only to argue why it's important to have things defined. Talk about not knowing which way to go
Did I not do that? That was exactly what I did, whereas you merely tried to define everything by using rigid nonsensical categories from an industrial category system. Instead of using common sense and deduction you resorted to use a categorization which has little bearing on real life.
For what's it worth, for some reason the tax department at one time wanted me to be categorised as "artist". The reason? Well, I made a "special" kind of radio feature. Yup.
My point is that if you think it's clever or necessary to exclude a whole lot of people based on idiotic bureaucratic and/or industrial systems all the while acknowledging they're decades behind just means that the mere idea that one can use those things instead of common sense, knowledge and so on, is nonsensical from the get-go and no amount of introducing further parameters like your income-argument will make the basic premise any more valid.
Yes, I am blond!!
Well, the good news is I totally understand what I am meant to be doing now, thanks very much.
The bad news is that I have never "imported" (not downloaded - hehe) a movie onto my computer besides dragging it across from my memory stick (when it's connected via USB) and placing it on my desktop! And they are videos lasting about 1 or 2 minutes. I have connected my camera via FW and I just assumed an icon would pop up like it does when using my USB port and it would all be sweet. Hasn't happened!!
I see you wrote that I need an application to import the movie (so I am going to google this and see what it comes up with), but thought I might ask what application you would recommend. I am assuming when I get the application I will figure out how to import a movie from my camcorder using the firewire - or at least I hope.
Well, the good news is I totally understand what I am meant to be doing now, thanks very much.
The bad news is that I have never "imported" (not downloaded - hehe) a movie onto my computer besides dragging it across from my memory stick (when it's connected via USB) and placing it on my desktop! And they are videos lasting about 1 or 2 minutes. I have connected my camera via FW and I just assumed an icon would pop up like it does when using my USB port and it would all be sweet. Hasn't happened
!!I see you wrote that I need an application to import the movie (so I am going to google this and see what it comes up with), but thought I might ask what application you would recommend. I am assuming when I get the application I will figure out how to import a movie from my camcorder using the firewire - or at least I hope.
Well, the good news is I totally understand what I am meant to be doing now, thanks very much.
The bad news is that I have never "imported" (not downloaded - hehe) a movie onto my computer besides dragging it across from my memory stick (when it's connected via USB) and placing it on my desktop! And they are videos lasting about 1 or 2 minutes. I have connected my camera via FW and I just assumed an icon would pop up like it does when using my USB port and it would all be sweet. Hasn't happened
I see you wrote that I need an application to import the movie (so I am going to google this and see what it comes up with), but thought I might ask what application you would recommend. I am assuming when I get the application I will figure out how to import a movie from my camcorder using the firewire - or at least I hope.
You can use iMovie 08 or better yet: iMovie 06 (personally, I use some other apps for this sort of thing, but iMovie ought to be exactly what you need).
I really have no idea what you're upset about since I've not insulted you or personally attacked you in any way. I've simply stated my opinion and offered supporting information and provided some detailed reasoning for my position. If you think my posts have "too much information" then no one is forcing you to read them.
You're apparently seeing my general statements about the subject as some personal slap in your face. Again, I really have no idea why you're upset...
Just guessing, you seem to indicate you really hate "systems" and "rules". Personally, in general I don't like them all that much but I do admit that some forms of systems and rules are necessary in most modern societies.
Well, apparently you're upset about the SIC because of some personal dispute you had with the tax dept. That's not my problem and I certainly didn't cause that problem for you and I didn't write or create the SIC system. Regardless of whether or not you "agree" with the SIC it's still a part of the "real world", and most people will end up using it if they wish to register a business in the U.S.
I didn't say anyone or anything was "decades behind", other than saying the SIC system was very much out of date. Any that would seem to be something you would seem likely agree with! (But I guess not?)
Try reading what I actually say rather than what you think I might be saying. Most reasonable people ask for clarification (about what someone has said) before flying off the handle. Just calm down.
I am not upset at all. I am pointing out discrepencies in your argumentation. I find it rather ironic you on one hand write off argumentation and are unwilling to go beyond what an industrial index says and at the same time tries to argue that legal contracts are long because the words have to be defined.
Where on earth do I describe your posts as having "too much information"? You must be kidding. There's not much information in there at all, except that you would like to rely on CIS definitions.
Absolutely not. On the other hand you seem intend on making believe such a thing – My guess would be it's pure projection.
You continual claim that I must be "upset" does not make it so. From the looks of it you have never met anyone with an opinion, but see opinion expressed in arguments as "He must take this as a personal slap in the face". Get out some more.
Wow, is it possible for you to be more wrong about anything? My argument is that you take a system used to caterogize AA and try to apply it to GG.
- And apparently the system to override them all is some (by your own admission) outdated categorization.
No I don't. It was an example of categorization being awkward, rigid and certainly not truthful to the real world.
That's the crux of your misunderstanding: I'm not a US-citizen, never had to deal with the US SIC, nor the US tax department, nor did it get me any troubles – on the contrary, I didn't even have to oay VAT every three months – only once a year did I have to do anything. Quite the treat. But as I said, it was an EXAMPLE of categorization not adapting to the real world.
No, I said that. You said that it didn't take the "digital media" into account – In my world that means it at least 15 years back – meaning at least 15 years - more like 20 years out of date.
Er, sorry, but there is nowhere were I misinterpret you, nor misrepresent what you say. On the contrary, there's plenty where you do. Projection again?
Wait, so you want me to "ask for clarification"? I'm sorry, but I don't need "clarification" to tell that your claim that we should all follow what an unupdated INDUSTRIAL categorisation system says is utter nonsense.
Do you have anything to say about firewire?
