There's nowhere to plug it so it doesn't help at all? Hence it's completely useless and doesn't help in the situation, so why even ask?
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
There's nowhere to plug it so it doesn't help at all? Hence it's completely useless and doesn't help in the situation, so why even ask?
I never had a heart surgery, and neither did my parents. All we had was just the flu. Imo it won't make a difference for most ppl? Even my bro has never found any use for a heart surgery yet...
Therefore let the poor bastards with a heart problem just die!
There's nowhere to plug it so it doesn't help at all? Hence it's completely useless and doesn't help in the situation, so why even ask?
No, no nooooo...I was talking about the 15" and 17" MacBook PROs with one FireWire 800 port. Someone was getting pissy about the removal of FireWire 400 from those models...that's why I mentioned the adapter.
No, no nooooo...I was talking about the 15" and 17" MacBook PROs with one FireWire 800 port. Someone was getting pissy about the removal of FireWire 400 from those models...that's why I mentioned the adapter.
Especially with the 17" MBP, I don't understand why they didn't include a second FireWire 800 port, it is not like they are lacking space, and in any case, who wants to daisy chain all the time. I don't.
No, no nooooo...I was talking about the 15" and 17" MacBook PROs with one FireWire 800 port. Someone was getting pissy about the removal of FireWire 400 from those models...that's why I mentioned the adapter.
Sorry, my bad. Someone a couple of pages back thought that adaptor would solve the macbook problem and I mistook you for a newb.
No, no nooooo...I was talking about the 15" and 17" MacBook PROs with one FireWire 800 port. Someone was getting pissy about the removal of FireWire 400 from those models...that's why I mentioned the adapter.
If you're editing digital video, it would be nice to be able to plug in an external harddrive. DV cameras and HDs don't like daisy chaining, so that's out. Imagine trying to edit uncompressed HD footage using only local storage?
Daisy chaining also reduces overall speed across all devices... would be much nicer if they would simply include two ports.
I tried to bring up that very issue a while back and got shot down saying that Firewire doesn't work that way, and that daisy chaining works great for editing using cameras and hard drives together on one port. We'll see what kind of responses you get.
Editing uncompressed HD on a FW drive isn't going to be much better than trying to edit it on an internal drive. A fast eSATA RAID will get you some uncompressed HD performance in the field but you'd need to pony up for an eXpress card.
Both ports are on the same bus though so the two devices will still be fighting over a single lane of bandwidth and the bus will only be as fast as the slowest device so if you plug in one FW400 device and one FW800 device they both will run at FW400 speeds. That's only a bit better than daisy chaining.
At least the MBP has an expansion slot. The MB is the one that really got screwed over.
Lethal
From what I have read though Firewire cards don't seem to work in the expansion slot on the new MBP.
Now finally, the entry-level MB has been updated with the new NVidia graphic card. It still has FW, it still costs 999, and now comes standard with 2 GB of RAM.
In other site somone posted: "... someone who wanted better graphics with FireWire but doesn't need a Pro has a viable option now..."
I agree.
Let's all the complaining about how the faster graphics performance meant loss of firewire end. Now only the ones with "aesthetic needs" will complain. All the people that needed a FW capable machine with a low footprint can have their choice now.
In other site somone posted: "... someone who wanted better graphics with FireWire but doesn't need a Pro has a viable option now..."
I agree.
Let's all the complaining about how the faster graphics performance meant loss of firewire end. Now only the ones with "aesthetic needs" will complain. All the people that needed a FW capable machine with a low footprint can have their choice now.
Not anymore, unless you have to have aluminum... then, complain and whine away....
Actually, I do that all the time. When importing video, my setup is basically the following:
Mac <-> External 2.5" HD <-> miniDV Cam
Since my external HD is a 2.5" enclosure, it needs no external power supply. So this is a very portable setup.
Now finally, the entry-level MB has been updated with the new NVidia graphic card. It still has FW, it still costs 999, and now comes standard with 2 GB of RAM.
In other site somone posted: "... someone who wanted better graphics with FireWire but doesn't need a Pro has a viable option now..."
I agree.
Let's all the complaining about how the faster graphics performance meant loss of firewire end. Now only the ones with "aesthetic needs" will complain. All the people that needed a FW capable machine with a low footprint can have their choice now.
Not anymore, unless you have to have aluminum... then, complain and whine away....
I don't care about the enclosure, never did. But when I'm buying two new notebooks I want the latest, not warmed-up leftovers. The white MB doesn't offer the 2.4 ghz processor and it uses slower ram.
Nice try, but no cigar.
History repeating itself?
The arbitrary "pro" Macbook designation on the 15" and the removal of FW from the 13" sound mighty familiar:
(saw this in a nice piece on the Apple III http://www.netherworld.com/~mgabrys/clock/weak5.html )
"n the case of the Apple III there were other mistakes. We had artificially decided that it would be a professional machine, which meant that the Apple II was unsuitable for high-level work. We even gave the Apple III a hard disk with what was at that time a large capacity, and in order to protect the III we decided not to do the same thing for the Apple II."
Has history repeated itself at Apple?
The arbitrary "pro" Macbook designation on the 15" and the removal of FW from the 13" sound mighty familiar:
(saw this in a nice piece on the Apple III http://www.netherworld.com/~mgabrys/clock/weak5.html )
"n the case of the Apple III there were other mistakes. We had artificially decided that it would be a professional machine, which meant that the Apple II was unsuitable for high-level work. We even gave the Apple III a hard disk with what was at that time a large capacity, and in order to protect the III we decided not to do the same thing for the Apple II."
Has history repeated itself at Apple?
This is my understanding as well. The only way you're going to really benefit from additional ports with FW is if they're on separate buses, which they're not. It's like having a 16-port ethernet switch vs. a 24-port ethernet switch attached to the same T1; the 24 port isn't giving you more bandwidth, it's just giving you more connectivity without daisy-chaining.
Yup, I understand that with the MBPs and PB G4s too. Sorry to go off on a tangent, but does anyone know if the Powermac G5 FireWire 400 ports (front and back) and back FireWire 800 port are on 3 separate buses or not? Just deciding whether there is a difference between using the front one or daisychaining.
According to this web page:
http://developer.apple.com/DOCUMENT...rMacG5/3Input-Output/chapter_4_section_3.html :
Sadly.
Maybe one day, in the configurations of AU$3300-$30000, Apple will offer a professional computer.
I just read the developer notes from Apple and they (all the FW ports) are all on the same FW bus. How on earth can they call the Mac Pro, "Pro"? This is something that I would have expected on an iMac or mini and not on a desktop PRO model. Makes me wonder if OSX is really worth the extra $2-3K that Macs cost.