Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FireWire 2 Coming Soon?

Posted by pudge on from the oops dept.

Twirlip of the Mists writes "Looks like SmartDisk pulled a Time Canada. IT World reports, 'Several hours after announcing that it is introducing desktop hard drives that connect to Apple Computer Inc. computers using the new high-speed 800M bps (bits per second) FireWire standard, SmartDisk Corp. asked that the news be 'killed due to premature release.'" Sweet.

53 of 97 comments (clear)

  1. Thats MacWorld San Francisco by destructo666 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Not Las Vegas as the report says

  2. What will be updated? by kuwan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So then the question now is what will be updated to include FireWire 2? Will it be the PowerMacs? (Probably, they're due for an update), the iMacs? (my guess is no), or the notebooks (my guess is no again, they were just updated)? Looks like someone goofed up and stole Steve's thunder. Who thinks Steve's going to come down in his rage and smite this SmartDisk company?

    --
    infested with jello like fishes no melotron wishes
    1. Re:What will be updated? by weave · · Score: 2
      Well, the one thing that confuses me is why Apple's website store still says "new" for ibooks and powerbooks as well as "the new imac." Hmm, even the ipods say "new 20GB."

      If they update the hardware, what will it say next? Really gosh-darn new?

  3. Firewire 2 vs. SATA by HalfFlat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Would it really be that much more expensive to pop firewire control electronics on drives instead of ATA or serial ATA?

    Firewire 2 would offer enough bandwidth to support any currently available hard disk with room to spare, let alone the current crop of ATA drives. The fact that it's a powered interface, supports long cable lengths, has a small cable diameter, is chainable, etc. all seem to be compelling advantages. The command set, which IIRC is SCSI-like, I'm guessing is an improvement over ATA as well.

    I don't really expect to see firewire native drives, but it really does seem that firewire 2 offers a much better solution for connecting disks than SATA - even for internal drives. And having the same connection for internal and external devices would just make everything that much easier.

    1. Re:Firewire 2 vs. SATA by Graymalkin · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Yikes! motherboards in the Blue and White G3s and early model G4s had internal FW ports on the motherboard. IIRC the Sawtooth (AGP motherboard) removed that internal port. I figured FW was going to replace ATA a couple years ago as the internal drive interface. Oh well.

      --
      I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
    2. Re:Firewire 2 vs. SATA by sean23007 · · Score: 2

      Good point, and Apple might be trying to bring back the whole easy-as-plugging-it-in networking thing they had back with Appletalk and System 7.x. I always liked those old Appletalk networks, and with FW2 interconnects they could make another such move.

      But I don't know if I'd count on an FW2 switch being cheap at all.

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
  4. Raises some questions... by thefinite · · Score: 2

    This raises the following questions:
    1. Does this mean there will be hardware updates even though the rumor mill is indicating otherwise?
    2. What are the benefits of it when most applications of FireWire do not use its full capacity now? Does than mean some cool new tech?
    I hope the answers are yes, huge, yes. We'll see tomorrow.

    --
    Boom Shanka
    1. Re:Raises some questions... by usr122122121 · · Score: 2

      One more for the list:
      3) Will "SmartDisk Corp" ever be able to do business in this country again after an angered Steve Jobs beats the crap out of their CEO?

      --

      -braxton
    2. Re:Raises some questions... by WiseWeasel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Apple has already announced that starting in Jan, 2003, all Apple hardware will only boot in OS X. To me, this means a large-scale accross-the-board upgrade for the entire Mac line. This new news only confirms that possibility. On a side note, I give the Mac hacking community three days (after people actually start to receive these things) to find a way to boot into OS 9 anyways.

      --
      "I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
    3. Re:Raises some questions... by rufo · · Score: 2

      Yes. ATI still exists after leaking the existance of the G4 Cube the day before the expo.

      --
      My English teacher once told me that two positives don't make a negative. Two words for her: Yeah, right.
    4. Re:Raises some questions... by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

      Not only that, they also ship the majority of graphics chips in Macs.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    5. Re:Raises some questions... by mrpuffypants · · Score: 2

      however, it still remains to be seen what will happen between them and id software after their wonderful leak of the Doom III alpha.

    6. Re:Raises some questions... by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 2

      They announced that new models introduced after Jan 1, 2003 would only boot into OS X. That doesn't mean they will update the entire line.

  5. The new AppleTalk by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Faster Firewire + Rendezvous means now there is an easy and cheap way to set up a home network of Macs, Printers, Scanners, iPods, and whatever else Apple would like to sell.

    --
    There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
    1. Re:The new AppleTalk by Pfhor · · Score: 2

      While I am not knocking the daisy chainability of firewire, or its networking ability, but ethernet would still be a better way to go. Now if they made firewire devices transparent on the ethernet, it would be cool. (so your ipod is networked throughout your entire house)

    2. Re:The new AppleTalk by jerde · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Firewire is NOT designed to replace networking. It's a short-range peripheral connection system.

      There are a number of different media types that IEEE 1394x can use. But for full-speed of 800Mbps or 1.6Gbps, only STP (short twisted-pair) or expensive multi-mode fiber can be used.

      Yes, there are experiments implementing IP over firewire, but nobody is advocating that it replace any kind of Ethernet solution.

      Now, on the otherhand, Rendezvous could make Ethernet replace Firewire as a way of connecting peripherals. At some point soon, rendezvous-on-a-chip will make it easy for scanner manufacturers, for example, to allow a scanner to merely be plugged in to an ethernet network and use zero-conf IP to move data.

      Think about it:

      State-of-the-art ethernet is at 1Gbps full-duplex, with very flexable (& cheap!) cabling requirements. I'm really surprised that nobody is using this signalling technology for peripherals. 1Gbps is faster than even the 800Mbps that 1394b will advertize.

      It's the complex interplay of different technology layers, and how to get them to work toegether, that makes this tricky. At the signalling level, i.e. bits on copper or glass, you've got various ethernets, usb, firewire.

      Next, how you arrange for multiple devices to share access to the copper or glass; again you've got different methods with ethernets, usb, or firewire.

      And then what protocol arranges the bits together to convey information. Firewire and USB include specifications for time-sensitive bits (isochronous) and bus management that ethernet doesn't provide... instead, in networks other protocol layers take care of device discovery and congestion etc.

      Which combination of layers is best for various applications has yet to be proven. And they're all moving targets, too!

      Once you get up around 1Gbps, the bottleneck is assembling the data to feed to the wire -- if the packets aren't made much bigger, you have to have hefty CPU power to pump that many tiny packets per second and reassemble them...

      and now I'm just rambling. :p

      - Peter

      --
      INsigNIFICANT
    3. Re:The new AppleTalk by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But for full-speed of 800Mbps or 1.6Gbps, only STP (short twisted-pair) or expensive multi-mode fiber can be used.

      For the record, multi-mode fiber optic cable isn't vert expensive any more.

      --

      I write in my journal
    4. Re:The new AppleTalk by norwoodites · · Score: 3, Informative

      The S in STP means shielded, not short. And IPv4 and IPv6 over Firewire are documented in RFCs. Also USB only provided support for isochronous in 1.2.

    5. Re:The new AppleTalk by WatertonMan · · Score: 2
      Rendezvous is one of those technologies that could really give Apple an edge over XP. I believe it is largely opensource though, so at minimum it could be used by Linux/BSD.

      The problem that Apple's face over and over again is having some cool technology that internal politics keeps from turning into a real product that is useful. Anyone remember OpenDoc? QuickdrawGX? Apple keeps trying to encourage other companies to use their technologies that differentiate Apple from the crowd. However Apple is typically the worst. Look at Appleworks. It has been nearly 3 years since OSX was at a level you could do a lot of development for. Yet Appleworks is still a horrible rushed Carbon port. And it makes use of none of the cool technologies.

    6. Re:The new AppleTalk by bnenning · · Score: 2
      Yet Appleworks is still a horrible rushed Carbon port. And it makes use of none of the cool technologies.


      The logical explanation is that they're rewriting it in Cocoa with all sorts of OS X goodies. (At least, that's my favorite explanation).

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    7. Re:The new AppleTalk by WatertonMan · · Score: 3, Insightful
      That's a great excuse. But three years? Sounds like there is Dilbert-styled politics going on. I had a friend who worked for Word Perfect just before they went to hell. The work environment totally sounded like Dilbert. I hope that whatever team is doing that at Apple isn't in that kind of situation.

      I'd love it if the new Appleworks was an Office killer and used all those cool OSX features. I have my doubts, however. That it is taking this long. . . Even a total rewrite shouldn't be that complex - especially if they are using Cocoa.

  6. Wow. by daveschroeder · · Score: 4, Informative

    There's so many things wrong with what you just said.

    1. It's Xserve, not Xserv.

    2. Xserve RAID, the companion storage device you speak of, has been known to have a 2Gbps Fibre Channel interface for some time now.

    3. I don't even know what you mean by throwing Rendezvous (not Rendevous) in, since that doesn't really mean anything in the context of enterprise storage; nor do I know what you mean by saying "maybe it'll work with Windows networks", since Mac OS X Server allows Windows clients to connect just fine (and connects to Windows servers just fine), so obviously, it will work fine with Windows networks, and neither the way storage connects to a server, nor Rendezvous, have anything to do with it.

    4. It's iPod, not IPod.

    1. Re:Wow. by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 5, Funny

      Right on, brother. But you forget to mention that it's Macworld, not MacWorld, and that it's FireWire, not Firewire.

      --

      I write in my journal
    2. Re:Wow. by daveschroeder · · Score: 2

      Nice catches. :P

    3. Re:Wow. by blackmonday · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah I just logged on to appel.com to see your xsirv rayde. Its very cool. Does it run i-movee? How about ifoto(2)?

      Thanks for your help, I like Stebe Jobbs too, but not as much as you.

      Real appel fans listen to radio76.com

  7. *raises hand...* by WiseWeasel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yep, he is probably pretty steamed. This is definitely good support for an entire lineup refresh, which was already sort of announced when SJ said all new hardware in Jan, 2003 would only boot in MacOS X.

    --
    "I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
  8. CES? by ZxCv · · Score: 3, Informative

    My guess is they meant SmartDisk's booth at CES (Consumer Electronics Show, IIRC), which is going on this week in Vegas.

    --

    Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax/ &couldn\'t %get $worse;
  9. Daddy, can I be an analyst too? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

    ...IDC analyst Roger Kay said Monday. Kay is unimpressed with the promise of Firewire2. "I don't know what we need it for. FireWire is really fast already, and data is only as fast as your slowest link -- your PC or your modem or cable line."

    Is this for real? "Umm... faster disks, no, nobody needs faster disks." Followed by, "and 640K is plenty!"?

    Firewire2 is only as fast as ATA/100, which is already being superceded by Serial-ATA. That it can guarantee those transfers on a long-cable daisy-chain or star bus is why it's amazing. If PCI has trouble feeding it, we have a 6.4 GB/s bus on the horizon for this summer. This spec is going to have to last at least 4 years.

    And who's implementing virtual memory over modem lines these days? What is this guy talking about?

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:Daddy, can I be an analyst too? by WatertonMan · · Score: 2
      Maybe Stevie's next announcement is the logical next step in the digital hub: the firewire based TV recorder that also records HDTV and is designed for real high bandwidth video. . .

      OK, probably not. But one can always dream.

      For practical purposes Firewire is good enough. But it is a place that will put Apple ahead of PCs in terms of hardware, even if it is meaningless as compared to the CPU problem. Realistically the new Firewire won't start to be significant for a few years.

    2. Re:Daddy, can I be an analyst too? by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 2

      For practical purposes Firewire is good enough.

      Well, you kinda hit the nail right on the head already. FireWire was designed in part to carry standard-definition video in DV format with the DV, DVCPRO, or DVCAM codecs. These codecs compress the video from 270 Mbps down to 25 Mbps, which can easily fit inside FireWire's 400 Mbps bandwidth.

      Panasonic has a DVCPRO-HD codec that compressed HD from more than 1.3 Gbps down to 100 Mbps. While you could, in theory, do 100 Mbps isochronously over FireWire 400, it'd be a lot easier over FireWire 800.

      People who use FireWire exclusively to talk to external storage devices and iPods (like most of us, including myself) don't need FireWire 800 right now. But people who do video with it most certainly do, and the trickle-down effect will benefit the rest of us, I think.

      --

      I write in my journal
    3. Re:Daddy, can I be an analyst too? by WatertonMan · · Score: 2
      Of course the same folks who are doing HDTV styled video feeds are also the ones who need a lot more processing power than the G4 offers.

      However when the 970 systems come out in late summer it should be rather good for Apple if they already have FireWire 800. (Is that what they are calling it instead of Firewire 2?) Apple might be posed to regrow into the graphics market if they have a dual 970 system for intense graphics. Hopefully Steve won't drop the ball on this one as my friends tell me a *lot* of former Mac folks are leaving due both to cost and speed.

    4. Re:Daddy, can I be an analyst too? by bnenning · · Score: 3, Insightful
      the firewire based TV recorder that also records HDTV and is designed for real high bandwidth video


      That's what I've been wanting ever since Steve went to the "digital hub" strategy. Specifically, a Tivo-like box running OS X that your Mac connects to via Rendezvous and programs with a nice Cocoa app (with a web interface for non-Mac or remote users). It should use a channel guide delivered as part of .mac (which would be worth $100/year by itself) and be able to transfer video to Macs and new MPEG-enabled iPods. The profits should be more than sufficient to cover the flood of lawsuits from MPAA weasels.


      I expect this product to be available shortly after a lasting peace is established in the Middle East.

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    5. Re:Daddy, can I be an analyst too? by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 2

      Of course the same folks who are doing HDTV styled video feeds are also the ones who need a lot more processing power than the G4 offers.

      Nope. The G4 is a great machine to do either off-lining, or finishing of HD material. All you need is video I/O, and FireWire 800 will (hopefully!) provide that in spades.

      --

      I write in my journal
    6. Re:Daddy, can I be an analyst too? by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 2

      you WOULD have a point, excepting that EVERy Tv post environment is based on SIF, and dual link SIF for HD.

      First of all, dual-link is only necessary for 4:4:4, like from a telecine. SMPTE 292 specifies full-bandwidth 4:2:2 HD over a single coaxial connection. That's what people who do HD over SDI use.

      But it's not exactly true that every TV environment is built on SDI. You'd be absolutely amazed how many component analog houses are still going strong.

      And converters that go from SMPTE 259M or SMPTE 292M to FireWire are trivial and inexpensive, and require no real logic whatsoever, unlike PCI video I/O boards. The net result is better software compatibility (because your application only has to talk to FireWire over IOKit, instead of a PCI card with its own driver) and better picture quality (because you're not processing the signal in any way).

      --

      I write in my journal
  10. FW 2 goes up 3.2 Gbps by WiseWeasel · · Score: 2, Informative

    The FireWire 2 specs out at 800 Mbps over copper cables like the current ones, and 3.2 Gbps over fiber optic cable. This is more than enough to compete with Serial-ATA for internal drives.

    --
    "I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
  11. Re:Firewire 2 is for Xraid by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 2

    New Xserve and XRAID with firewire 2, 800Mbps for RAID makes sense.

    XServe RAID is a Fibre Channel device, not FireWire. Fibre Channel is 2 Gbps, which is nothing to sneeze at.

    Video iPod, unlikely.

    Agreed. Video iPod is an incredibly stupid idea.

    Color iPod, maybe.

    Another stupid idea. The iPod doesn't need color.

    I am hoping for an 802.11g Card with built in BlueTooth.

    Why? The Bluetooth adapter is smaller than your thumb, costs $50, and plugs into the USB port on your monitor or keyboard. Because Bluetooth is so incredibly short-range, it doesn't need to have a big antenna like AirPort's. So there's no advantage at all to integrating it into the AirPort card.

    --

    I write in my journal
  12. Re:FIR-USB?? by nosferatu-man · · Score: 3, Informative

    Err, I think that that (poorly written) sentence refers to the SmartDisk drive itself, not the Firewire 800 interface. In other words, the drive will have both USB2 and FW800 interfaces.

    'jfb

    --
    To spur "enterprise Linux," Big Bang, the distributed two-phase commit.
  13. Re:FIR-USB?? by 90XDoubleSide · · Score: 2

    It has been speculated that Apple has been putting off USB2 support until FireWire 2 was ready, so if they are ready to put FW2 in their machines, expect USB2 support as well.

    --
    "Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
  14. Re:Does it matter? by twiztidlojik · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sure, you get a big RAID-0 on the other end of that thing with multiple busses and you'll have it running at full capacity, or it could even be a way to implement an UltraMegaSuperWideFatAndLong SCSI RAID.

    --
    I will now redundantly add my name to the end of my post. You know, in case you forgot me or something.
  15. Re:Firewire 2 is for Xraid by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 2

    a small thumb sticking out of the back of a Powerbook G4, that wont fit in cases unless you take it out, and has a high chance of being broken off.

    First, if you're whacking your laptop around so much that you're afraid the Bluetooth adapter would be broken off, then you've got serious lifestyle issues. Pull the damn thing out and stick it in your pocket!

    But the point was that Bluetooth + AirPort is a dumb idea. Integrating Bluetooth into laptops is a good idea. Integrating Bluetooth into monitors is a good idea. (Dumb to integrate it into G4 towers; they're rarely anywhere near the monitor and keyboard anyway.) Integrating Bluetooth into an AirPort card? Dumb.

    --

    I write in my journal
  16. Re:Firewire 2 is for Xraid by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 2

    Really, what is so "dumb" about integrating two, currently separate technologies, into one simple card?

    Lots of things. First and most importantly, Apple doesn't make AirPort cards. They buy them from (I think) Lucent. Second, pop open an AirPort card and tell me how much space you see. Third, even if you could squeeze the electronics into the PC card form factor, you'd have massive EM interference problems, because AirPort and Bluetooth broadcast in the same frequency band. Fourth, AirPort cards are buried deep inside the computer, so there would have to be some kind of Bluetooth antenna built into the computer anyway, just like the AirPort antenna.

    I could go on, but I imagine that you're getting the idea here.

    Dongles suck dirty goat balls.

    You should be ashamed of yourself.

    --

    I write in my journal
  17. Re:Firewire 2 is for Xraid by Cinematique · · Score: 2

    And it's not like computer components can be and are reduced in size over time... what was I thinking.

  18. Re:Firewire 2 is for Xraid by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 2

    And it's not like computer components can be and are reduced in size over time... what was I thinking.

    Well, actually, yeah. What were you thinking?

    Miniaturization is not the important detail here; it's significant, but not discussion-ending. Bluetooth is neat. AirPort is neat. They don't depend on each other, at all, so there's no reason to build them into the same card. And most importantly, they actually interfere, to a very serious degree, with each other. So putting them together in the same device would be, in a word, dumb.

    --

    I write in my journal
  19. USB 2.0 by PeePeeSee · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I seriously doubt apple will ever use USB 2.0 in any product. Its just a bad idea all together - nothing good about it in any way - Firewire 0wnz j00r b0n3z that is if your name is USB2.0. That and why would they advocate another companies high speed data transfer technology when they have their own better implementaion. Yes I know they jumped onto USB(and made it what it is today) but thats slow speed - they had nothing and intel already did the dirty work.

  20. Internal firewire -- you got it wrong by Paladeen · · Score: 2

    You're getting it wrong. The Blue and White G3s and Yikes machines didn't have an internal firewire port: The Sawtooth did. This port was removed on the dual-processor Gigabit ethernet machines that followed. For confirmation of this, check out http://www.apple-history.com.

  21. Re:Firewire 2 is for Xraid by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 2

    When using both on my Powerbook they don't interfere at all

    The interference problems between Bluetooth and AirPort are well document (try Macintouch) although I haven't experienced them myself either. Putting the electronics on the same PCB would certainly exacerbate the problem.

    Personally I would prefer the bluetooth trinket to be integrated to the computer and not stick out if possible, especially as the back cover is so fragile.

    Sure, integrate away. Just don't put it on the AirPort card.

    --

    I write in my journal
  22. Bits and Bytes by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

    A good hard drive in a Firewire enclosure will IN NO WAY give you full saturation. ATA/100 (or 133) don't run at 100 (or 133) MB/S in real life

    Are you confusing Bits and Bytes? I can reliably pull 40MB/s off of a modern disk. Firewire runs at 400Mb/s. small b. Multiply by 8 and throw in a couple for protocol overhead and you've maxed the Firewire (400) bus.

    Now, add to that the fact that Firewire isn't a point-to-point link like ATA, it's a bus. Every device attached to your computer has to share the bandwidth, be it 400 or 800. So, add a video source and write it to two disks (say an OSX software disk mirror) and you're bumping up over 400Mb/s.

    Now the geek will say, "just add another firewire controller card and multiplex the writes over two busses." But Apple is creating powerful computing solutions for non-geeks.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  23. Rumor Wrapup by williwilli · · Score: 2, Interesting

    be sure to visit this page to read my extensive summary of the current Macworld rumors, and updates/forecasts following the show

  24. FireWrire 800 out now by pressman · · Score: 2

    It's available now!

    --
    Pooty tweet
    1. Re:FireWrire 800 out now by Greedo · · Score: 2

      Yes, there is a FireWire 800 port on the new 17" PowerBooks.

      The 17" also has Airport Extreme (i.e. 802.11g), and the 12" is Extreme-ready.

      Time to borrow the kid's trust fund, I guess.

      --
      Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
  25. 1st post in Safari? by pressman · · Score: 2

    Anyone else posted via Safari yet?

    --
    Pooty tweet
  26. http://www.apple.com/safari/download by pressman · · Score: 2

    http://www.apple.com/safari/download

    Apple's new OPEN SOURCE browser based off KHTML from KDE.

    --
    Pooty tweet
  27. Re:Um, no. by Lars+T. · · Score: 2
    Well, okay, not the majority.

    But when I wrote this, all notebooks had ATI - and were upgraded two months ago - with new ATI chips. And the dual 1 GHz and 1.25 GHz PowerMacs still come with an ATI standard (not BTO). As does the XServe.

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck