Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Why is Firewire so special?

hayduke said:
...Apple stopped supplying Firewire cables with iPods. It seems that would only help obviate the use of Firewire.
Click to expand...

Apple went beyond that, completely removing support for Firewire transfers.
:mad:
 
aquajet said:
Apple went beyond that, completely removing support for Firewire transfers.
:mad:
Click to expand...
In which really pisses me off, as I bought a FireWire cable for one of my old iPods and this one won't work with the new iPods :mad:
 
While I do agree it's too bad the iPod is moving away from FW, I think this is strictly to help market share with Windows. Windows does not have the out-of-the-box FW support that Mac's do. If Apple wants the iPod to truely dominate, this must be done. Having both could raise costs more than people would want to pay. I've seen no reason to believe Apple is dumping FW beyond the iPod.
 
onemacmini said:
they done this to reduce the size other wise we will still have thicker ipods
Click to expand...

That's too bad. I would've taken a slightly thicker iPod in exchange for superior technology.
 
firewire really is something special, I was saddened deeply by its removal from the newest iPods. everyday I'm amazed at the speed of my Firewire 800 external drive, which is just as fast as my internal for virtually everything
 
The article largely seems to deal with Firewire 800, when the standard is still 400Mbps. Few devices currently utilise the 9-pin, 800Mbps version, but will come over time. As long as camcorders still prefer dv, Firewire will remain. I can even see it becoming more popular and Apple reintroducing it to iPods or PDAs further along the line. Once more have it, they can afford to ignore USB in favour of it, and there will be a time when more have it.

However, with Wireless USB not far off, USB could still attempt to crush Firewire, with more devices coming with USB/Wireless USB support built in. It just may be cheaper in the long run and manufacturers also go for costs unless they know they can charge the consumer a premium for something they demand.
 
slimflem said:
While I do agree it's too bad the iPod is moving away from FW, I think this is strictly to help market share with Windows. Windows does not have the out-of-the-box FW support that Mac's do. If Apple wants the iPod to truely dominate, this must be done. Having both could raise costs more than people would want to pay. I've seen no reason to believe Apple is dumping FW beyond the iPod.
Click to expand...

Yes, since HP was really the only one supporting 6 wire FW ports and Sony was the only other one supporting FW on a consistent basis, Apple's decision makes sense.

Actually, FireWire is going into more video equipment toward the high end and several HD t.v. sets seem to be supporting the technology. Higher end digital cameras tend to have FW connections as well. If Apple would reduce the royalty payments on it again, FW would be a lot more places in consumer equipment.
 
Plymouthbreezer said:
Yes, especially for those of us who don't have USB 2.0, but we do have Firewire.
Click to expand...
No, I mean $20 more expensive for everyone, including the 60-80% of iPod buyers who don't have or don't need Firewire. I think Apple looked at the price points and decided that their losses from disgruntled pre-USB2 Mac owners would be far less than the losses in sales from the higher price.
 
I've been seeing FireWire showing up on a lot of other, lower end computers lately. I'd guess it's mainly because all the computer companies are starting to catch on to what Apple did 6 years ago with iMovie and DV editing. They're playing up the video editing capabilities of their computers. Firewire is a technology of the future, and will, eventually make its way into more and more computers, as USB remains lower data rate, and Firewire can support the extreme data speeds of the future.
 
ll350 said:
I saw a roadmap a while back that showed firewire going faster than 800Mb/s in the future, anybody seen it recently?
Click to expand...


Yeah, there's a Firewire 1600 in the works.

But as for USB being slow and obsolete-to-be, I don't agree - it's not like they stopped USB development after USB2. There will be a USB3, and I'd bet my heart and right leg it'll be be faster than USB2.
 
Raven VII said:
Yeah, there's a Firewire 1600 in the works.

But as for USB being slow and obsolete-to-be, I don't agree - it's not like they stopped USB development after USB2. There will be a USB3, and I'd bet my heart and right leg it'll be be faster than USB2.
Click to expand...

Gigawire has been in the works quite a long time. It would be available now, if there was an actual, immediate application. The slow adoption of FW800 has cooled FW's chances for the future, except in high end markets.
 
bousozoku said:
Gigawire has been in the works quite a long time. It would be available now, if there was an actual, immediate application. The slow adoption of FW800 has cooled FW's chances for the future, except in high end markets.
Click to expand...

FW 1600 or GigaWire, whatever you want to call it is actually used to network. Its supposed to be a superior option over ethernet and cheaper too (not sure on the cheaper option). Its main application is for Studios that deal with Video, Broadcast, etc...

I had read this late last year around Oct 2004. Hope that helps. :)

Chances are quite slim that you will ever see a consumer needing it. Its great for servers though. :D
 
It would seem that Apple has taken some of the air out of the Firewire sails with its recent moves in the iPod. Seems like it's never a good sign when a given technology is given reduced market share, no matter how good it is.

I just bought a peripheral HD for use with my iMac G4. After some consideration of the Firewire/USB issues, I bought a drive with both FW and USB 2 interfaces. I knew I needed FW for now because I wanted to make and maintain a bootable clone for backup of my internal HD. But I also have a feeling in the back of my mind that Apple may use the Intel Macs to continue a move toward USB and possibly USB booting. Anyway, I didn't want to be left out in the cold in case the "Fire" goes out.
 
I agree the whole FW support leaving the iPods really blows!!!:mad: I for one have an aging computer with USB1.1. I got the last iPod with FW support a couple of month ago, but would have liked to have a Nano and it is not possible now. I guess it is wise for Apple to part with FW for iPods to increase their market share since definitely PC and Windows never got with the program :mad:

Apple could have taken a hint from MOTU though. They have an audio interface called the 828 MKII that was a FW interface, now it is USB2 but at least they left the FW one available too, at least for now anyway....:confused:
 
aquajet said:
Thicker and maybe a thinner margin for Apple. :D
Click to expand...
Amen!

I read the article..I was disappointed. It's an outdated story that doesn't compare FW to USB. Instead, it simply boasts about FW's ability. There's no evidance to support FW over USB in the story. booo!:(
 
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