Sidebar Sidebar
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

Adey said:
I have two M-Audio Firewire ProjectMix I/O's and M-Audio still can't get the firewire to behave. Crashing when hot-swapping (so don't), crackles when turning on a second firewire device. M-Audio are very good at what they do but yes, they made a mistake going with firewire. It's worse than useless.
Click to expand...
That's strange...my band uses a Firewire Digi 002 with a 2003 PowerBook at live shows - around 30 a year - and not once has has it let us down....rock solid reliability.

In fact the only time I had problems with a Firewire interface was when I was recording with a Digi 002 through an upgraded 1.4GHz Sawtooth G4 with 1.25 GB of ram...running 20 tracks with 26 plug ins in Panther...and recording onto a Firewire hard drive. But that was more a CPU load issue than Firewire.

Also... my band's recent EP was recorded at Smart Studios in Madison, WI, you know, where little gems like Nirvana's Nevermind and Smashing Pumpkins' Gish are on the resume...and our entire session was recorded direct to a $100 Western Digital Firewire drive.

But yeah, worse than useless.
 
About firewire..

Since USB 3.0 is coming, and it is expected to be faster than firewire 800, they wether try to kill firewire (USB is much more popular) or they are going to bring a new one: either a faster firewire or another port?

Consider the fact that firewire in ipods has been replaced with USB many years now..
 
C.N.B said:
Since USB 3.0 is coming, and it is expected to be faster than firewire 800, they wether try to kill firewire (USB is much more popular) or they are going to bring a new one: either a faster firewire or another port?

Consider the fact that firewire in ipods has been replaced with USB many years now..
Click to expand...

USB 2.0 was also expected to be 'faster' than FW400, and certainly wasn't. i don't know if 3.0 will be able to live up to the expectations that people have for it. the only reason its more widespread is that its cheaper.
 
They had another meeting quite recently…

lame.jpg
 
C.N.B said:
Since USB 3.0 is coming, and it is expected to be faster than firewire 800, they wether try to kill firewire (USB is much more popular) or they are going to bring a new one: either a faster firewire or another port?
Click to expand...

I'll ignore the popular comment (Windowners is more popular).

USB 3 is a new connector (that will stuff things up on the Windowners side), but FireWire S1600 and S3200 use the same connector as FireWire 800.

Even so, eSATA is an existing 3 Gbit/s technology. S1600, S3200 & USB 3 are proposed technologies, >2010. We could do worse than have eSATA on Macs, except for the small problem of compatibility for FireWire 800 devices, I guess.

Are there any Audio interfaces with eSATA ?
 
albusseverus said:
Are there any Audio interfaces with eSATA ?
Click to expand...

I doubt there are. It seems it's more directed for storage and not much else. Also, if I remember correctly, the voltages are pretty low, lower than USB 2 and therefore much lower than the 11-25volts given out by Firewire.
This of course means that when connecting external devices they can't be selfpowered unless they use very little power. You either have to have a wal wart or tak up another port (firewire or USB) or two to get the proper power.


I do like esata, I just think they're "all that" on a portable computer.
 
albusseverus said:
I'll ignore the popular comment (Windowners is more popular).

USB 3 is a new connector (that will stuff things up on the Windowners side), but FireWire S1600 and S3200 use the same connector as FireWire 800.
Click to expand...

USB3 A is dimensionally the same as USB2 A, but the contacts are relocated. USB3 B is a different connecter, though.
 
C.N.B said:
Since USB 3.0 is coming, and it is expected to be faster than firewire 800, they wether try to kill firewire (USB is much more popular) or they are going to bring a new one: either a faster firewire or another port?

Consider the fact that firewire in ipods has been replaced with USB many years now..
Click to expand...

Do you think the world of audio and video production should come to a screeching stop while everyone waits on the future technology of USB3 (in late-2009 at the earliest) and then wait more months or years before any USB3 devices are available to actually use in the real world? :rolleyes:
 
Yep, all FireWire from 400 to 3200 is backwards and forwards compatible (although you will need an adaptor cable when using 400 with 800/1600/3200). The devices will run at the speed of the lowest item. So, for example a computer with FireWire 400 can run an 800 device at 400 speeds.
 
iEdd said:
Yep, all FireWire from 400 to 3200 is backwards and forwards compatible (although you will need an adaptor cable when using 400 with 800/1600/3200). The devices will run at the speed of the lowest item. So, for example a computer with FireWire 400 can run an 800 device at 400 speeds.
Click to expand...

Nice... What kind of speeds are expected with 1600/3200? I really hope this is adopted. I've got all kinds of money invested in FW800 stuff.

----Nevermind, I'm an idiot. And it's late.
 
scottness said:
Nice... What kind of speeds are expected with 1600/3200? I really hope this is adopted. I've got all kinds of money invested in FW800 stuff.

----Nevermind, I'm an idiot. And it's late.
Click to expand...

LOL, realised that there were a direct correlation between the numbers and the speeds, eh? :D
 
C.N.B said:
Since USB 3.0 is coming, and it is expected to be faster than firewire 800, they wether try to kill firewire (USB is much more popular) or they are going to bring a new one: either a faster firewire or another port?
Click to expand...
FW1600 and 3200 are being developed. They both use the same connector as FW800.

USB traditionally has a fast burst rate then slows down quite a bit for continuous file transfer. That's why FW400 is much faster than USB 2.0 (480Mbps) for sustained file transfer. With the equipment that I have, FW400 is almost twice as fast.

scottness said:
Would that mean I can use my existing FW800 peripherals with S1600 or S3200?
Click to expand...
Yes. You will be limited to the slowed device on the bus.

scottness said:
Nice... What kind of speeds are expected with 1600/3200? I really hope this is adopted. I've got all kinds of money invested in FW800 stuff.

----Nevermind, I'm an idiot. And it's late.
Click to expand...
No worries. We've all been there a time or two. :)
 
sushi said:
With the equipment that I have, FW400 is almost twice as fast.
Click to expand...

Is that on OSX or Windows?

Some people have claimed that the USB performance on some Apple systems is weak, compared to booting Windows on the same system.

For disk transfers, I usually see that 1394 is about 10% faster than USB 2. (A disk that reads 32 MB/sec on USB will read about 35 MB/sec on 1394. These are dual-interface drives, so the disk is identical.)
 
AidenShaw said:
Is that on OSX or Windows?

Some people have claimed that the USB performance on some Apple systems is weak, compared to booting Windows on the same system.

For disk transfers, I usually see that 1394 is about 10% faster than USB 2. (A disk that reads 32 MB/sec on USB will read about 35 MB/sec on 1394. These are dual-interface drives, so the disk is identical.)
Click to expand...
USB is also more CPU dependent so it will be affected to a greater degree by what else is going on in the computer than FW. 10% is also about average for me but I can see it go as high as 50% faster or more (relative to USB) if I am doing something CPU intensive. The other thing to note is that there is usually only 1 FW device operating at a time while there may be 2 or 3 USB devices, some of which may be 1.1, on the same channel.
 
Sony HVR-Z7 only with FireWire

Sony has many pro-camera's in the market today that only have FireWire. So does mine, a HVR-Z7. Moreover, besides recording on DV-tapes it can also record on compact flash-cards in the M2T-format. But... Apple's Final Cut Express does not support the M2T-format for 'log and transfer' so I cannot use this very handy feature of my brandnew camera. Bad marketing from Apple on both accounts.
 
Concertpix said:
....it can also record on compact flash-cards in the M2T-format. But... Apple's Final Cut Express does not support the M2T-format ....
Click to expand...

I thoroughly recommend ClipWrap for all your m2t to QuickTime needs, length limited trial free to download.

I'm now shooting AVCHD onto flash cards, but I also have a bunch of tapes in shoe-boxes, however, the removal of FireWire on the MacBook Alu inspired me to finally 'online' that footage onto the now cheap Tb externals you can buy.

I used iMovie for all my DV footage, as it imports native .dv files. '09 nicely names the clips 'clip-yyyy-mm-dd hh;mm;ss.dv', and simply places them in a subdirectory of the Event name for those clips.

I wanted a 'native' archive of my HDV as well, that means .m2t files. Unfortunately, iMovie transcodes into (unbelievably large) AIC .mov's, so instead I jumped through some hoops:

I used Vegas Platinum (via Bootcamp/WinXP) to import entire tapes as .m2t files, HDVSplit (again, WinXP) to then create date/time named .m2t clips - the same naming as iMovie, and then used ClipWrap (Mac) to convert those to quicktime - when imported into iMovie, with that naming convention - it fits into the calender in the right place in the Events browser.

100 hours, and 1.2Tb later, I now don't need a firewire port anymore :D

I keep the m2t's (and so should you) as a 'camera native archive' version of the footage.

I would love it if Apple video software not only supported .m2t, but would capture in it too, like vegas and premiere do. Its the most 'tape native' format for the original footage. With FCP, it wraps HDV in Quicktime, using a 'Apple HDV' codec you can only get if you install FCP - can't be taken anywhere else (e.g. to the PC, or even another non FCP mac), and its my footage dammit!

I believe FCE and iMovie use the AIC transcoding, which creates huge files, they also do that for AVCHD from flash cards. Vegas will use the native .m2t of HDV and .mts of AVCHD, its a huge shame iMovie and FCE/FCP can't.
 
Bonsai71 said:
I thoroughly recommend ClipWrap for all your m2t to QuickTime needs, length limited trial free to download.

I'm now shooting AVCHD onto flash cards, but I also have a bunch of tapes in shoe-boxes, however, the removal of FireWire on the MacBook Alu inspired me to finally 'online' that footage onto the now cheap Tb externals you can buy.

I used iMovie for all my DV footage, as it imports native .dv files. '09 nicely names the clips 'clip-yyyy-mm-dd hh;mm;ss.dv', and simply places them in a subdirectory of the Event name for those clips.

I wanted a 'native' archive of my HDV as well, that means .m2t files. Unfortunately, iMovie transcodes into (unbelievably large) AIC .mov's, so instead I jumped through some hoops:

I used Vegas Platinum (via Bootcamp/WinXP) to import entire tapes as .m2t files, HDVSplit (again, WinXP) to then create date/time named .m2t clips - the same naming as iMovie, and then used ClipWrap (Mac) to convert those to quicktime - when imported into iMovie, with that naming convention - it fits into the calender in the right place in the Events browser.

100 hours, and 1.2Tb later, I now don't need a firewire port anymore :D

I keep the m2t's (and so should you) as a 'camera native archive' version of the footage.




I would love it if Apple video software not only supported .m2t, but would capture in it too, like vegas and premiere do. Its the most 'tape native' format for the original footage. With FCP, it wraps HDV in Quicktime, using a 'Apple HDV' codec you can only get if you install FCP - can't be taken anywhere else (e.g. to the PC, or even another non FCP mac), and its my footage dammit!

I believe FCE and iMovie use the AIC transcoding, which creates huge files, they also do that for AVCHD from flash cards. Vegas will use the native .m2t of HDV and .mts of AVCHD, its a huge shame iMovie and FCE/FCP can't.
Click to expand...

Gee, all that rooting around so you don't have to worry about FireWire. Sure hope you don't discover a lost box of tapes in a few years time.

Considering camera video was Mr Jobs poster child for the elimination of FireWire - not much of an advertisement.
 
I edit a lot of videos so I'm one of the people bummed about the no firewire, but I'll live.
 
Bonsai71 said:
I thoroughly recommend ClipWrap for all your m2t to QuickTime needs, length limited trial free to download.


I keep the m2t's (and so should you) as a 'camera native archive' version of the footage.

I would love it if Apple video software not only supported .m2t, but would capture in it too, like vegas and premiere do. Its the most 'tape native' format for the original footage. With FCP, it wraps HDV in Quicktime, using a 'Apple HDV' codec you can only get if you install FCP - can't be taken anywhere else (e.g. to the PC, or even another non FCP mac), and its my footage dammit!

I believe FCE and iMovie use the AIC transcoding, which creates huge files, they also do that for AVCHD from flash cards. Vegas will use the native .m2t of HDV and .mts of AVCHD, its a huge shame iMovie and FCE/FCP can't.
Click to expand...

Yep, I helped a friend yesterday with transferring AVCHD and 3 minutes of clips took more than 20 minutes of transcoding. What a shame.
It would indeed be much more logical and timesaving if FCE and FCP would use native M2T.

Anyway, I don't want to go back to PC and Adobe Première and Pinnacle, because i was really fed up with all the aggravation these Winddowns based apps caused me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back