Slashdot Mirror
Apple Backing Away From FireWire
farmdwg was one of several readers to submit stories about Apple backing away from FireWire. The latest generation of iPods no longer ship with FireWire cables, but instead use USB 2... although FireWire can still be purchased seperately.
Backing away?
Certainly not. FireWire is still integral; it is the standard for communication with a DV camcorder; it is important to the function of iMovie. The iLife suite is a big draw. I know people buying Macs just because of iLife.
Arguments of which standard is better aside, USB 2.0 is more widely available. As the article states, "It's more cost efficient to ship with one cable rather than two, and USB is more broadly supported on both platforms." It's not Apple backing away, it's Apple making a business decision. If they later remove FireWire support from the device, then you can get upset.
Using USB in the Shuffle was key because the, as mentioned, USB 2.0 is more broadly supported, and the connector is built it. Using FireWire on the Shuffle would have prevented it from reaching its target audience.
Apple is trying to save money and drop prices at the same time. Sure it sucks for us FireWire users. I have several FireWire peripherals and will probably spend the extra $20 getting the FireWire cable when I get my next iPod (hopefully soon). But it's a luxury, because I have USB 2.0 anyway.
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
I mean is USB 2 good enough? Or do we need it?
When a Ball Dreams, It Dreams it's a Frisbee.
It makes more sense for PC's sure, but Firewire is ubiquitous on all macs from 1999 on. USB 2.0 is new..
...they fired the fire wire wire!
A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
Why does it seem that the inferior technologies always win? USB 2 FW 400 FW 800.
I was just waiting for this to get posted.
Apple is not "backing away" from FireWire.
What's happening is that the iPod is shipping primarily to Windows PC owners. Many of whom, you know, don't have FireWire. And for the small minority who do, it's anyone's guess whether it's a 4-pin or 6-pin connector.
But they all have USB, and most, USB 2.0.
Apple also isn't shipping some iPods with a dock. Does that mean Apple is also "backing away" from the iPod dock?
What Apple is doing is a cost saving measure, plain and simple. ANYONE on any machine running Mac OS or Windows can use USB for syncing, and most of these customers have USB 2.0. including all recent Macs. And if you really want a FireWire cable, you can get one. I really don't see the problem. The iPod retail boxes are also now not platform-specific, as they were previously.
And far from "backing away" from FireWire, Apple is one of the primary members of the 1394 Trade Association, an Apple employee is the Chairman of the Board of the 1394 TA, an Apple employee has perennially been chair of the IEEE-1394 working group, Apple now allows free licensing of the "FireWire" name and logo for all 1394 products, and Apple is shipping 1394b (FireWire 800) on almost all of its products, save some of the "consumer" oriented products, and ALL Apple computers include FireWire. Many include both FireWire 400 (6-pin) and 800 (9-pin).
FireWire is FAR more robust than USB 2.0, and even FireWire 400 is faster in all benchmarks than USB 2.0. FireWire doesn't require a host as USB 2.0; all devices can be peers of one another. Additionally, the latest iterations of FireWire supports speeds up to 3.2 Gbps. There are wireless FireWire over 802.11x implementations planned. See the FireWire 800 Tech Brief for more information.
Additionally, all digital video cameras and decks, including new HDV cameras and decks, include FireWire as the primary - or only - connectivity. Further, starting 1 July 2005, all cable operators must provide a functional FireWire port on all HD digital set top boxes.
So no, Apple isn't "backing away" from FireWire. It's saving money on the new round of iPods by including a cable that 100% of its purchasers are guaranteed to be able to use, instead of a FireWire cable that the Mac users might be able to use, but the vast majority of PC users won't, and even if they HAVE FireWire, would have a 50/50 chance of being the wrong one. Not to mention that Apple got away from the iPod "for Mac" and iPod "for Windows" delineation and now ships them generically for both platforms.
They are paving the way for firewire 2.00 baby.
Feel the burn.
--AC
Flexibility is a good thing.
OCO is Loco
a little better about USB... it having the backing of a large number of manufacturers and the IEEE involved early on.
They did not include a firewire cable. There is still a firewire connector.
This was a cost savings move and nothing more.
And it makes the front page of /.
Why do I come here anymore?
SteveM
.In todays news Slashdot backed even further away from reporting the truth and instead will focus on poor conjecture and invalid facts
Personal Website
What are the comparative speeds of USB 2.0 vs Firewire? (Side question: Is the Firewire 400 or 800?)
Its important that people not misinterpret this headline... because it can been so easily misinterpreted. Apple is NOT backing away from firewire.
They are simply making a very logical business decision for their iPod line. There are a number of people who may opt to not buy an iPod because they do not have firewire inputs on their machine. Apple has got around this by including adapter cables in the past, but because the bulk of their business goes to Windows users (many of whom don't have firewire)... the cables are an unneded expense now that the iPod can be powered through USB2.
Firewire is still very intregal to Apple... the same way Firewire has become very intregal to the industry at large.
No.
pooptruck
Apple is including USB2 instead of firewire because most windows boxes have USB2 instead of IEEE1394, and when they do have IEEE1394, it tends to be the 4-pin mini version without the power supply. Most of the iPods are bought by windows users (there are a whole lot more of them), so Apple exchanged firewire for USB2. Mac folk aren't hurt because most Macs (and all recent ones) have USB2 on them as well.
It doesn't mean that Apple is "backing away" from Firewire, just that they've done some market research, and are responding to their customers. Don't expect the firewire port to go away any time soon...
Apple was actively pushing the firewire specs back when, and is in part responsible to its widespread proliferation. Further, a LOT of devices in the imaging/video market are dependent on firewire, so this sounds like mental masturbation at best. Firewire is going to be around for a long time...
is like SCSI versus IDE all over again.
Licensing?! Not only did Apple invent FireWire, they [finally] offered the name to the IEEE 1394 spec for free. There is no license fee.
It does require additional components, and I can't speak to the cost or battery consumption thereof. I doubt it adds more than $10 to the manufactured cost... probably less.
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
Another brilliant move by Apple. They know there are far more PC users out there (mostly without FireWire) and Mac users are usually big spenders.
Why not?
Apple stops including a firewire cable stock in the box.
No change in iPods themselves or in functionality or in future functionality as far as anyone can tell. Apple knows most PC users throw the firewire cable in a drawer or leave it in the box.
If you want to use firewire and don't already have an extra cable you'll need to buy one. (Or hit up your PC using friend for their old one.)
Okay... I'm still not seeing the story here.
=tkk
Bill Gates - Creationist?!?
I see no real advantages to using firewire. "Firewire is faster" is a complete non-issue, since the hard drive(s) in the iPod(s) are not fast enough to keep up with either interface. Comparing the theoretical or real world speed of the two is just wasted breath. USB ports are more ubiquitous on most machines, especially since the product is 100% cross platform now. Even on my Macs, I have quite a few more USB ports than firewire ones, which means less swapping when I want to plug my camcorder, iPod, iSight, and hard drive in at the same time. And if it can charge just as well over USB, I could care less that it's not firewire.
My sig is blank, I typed this by hand.
Apple *was* spending a lot of money licensing the FireWire name from...you know...that company that has the rights to the FireWire name.
pooptruck
That's good to know, since purchasing separately can be such a drag.
they are sending the same files to the iPod regardless of the transmission method.
It's either 400MB firewire or 480MB USB2. The sound quality will be exactly the same either way. iPod is basically a big ol' hard drive to the host computer and no audio translation takes place over the wire, just file transfers...
Last I checked, IEEE 1394 had less overhead than USB. What this means is that more of the transmission on IEEE 1394 is your data than some kind of header information, which translates to faster downloads to the device. Think of the cell tax when using ATM-based networks. It's a similar concept.
Besides, VHS may have won the home video tape wars, but that didn't make it better than Betamax.
OCO is Loco
You do realize that when transferring the 1's and 0's that compose the audio files you are downloading to your iPod that the method in which they are transmitted has no impact on the audio quality whatsoever, right?
I mean, you could stand on one hill, and I could stand on the other, and I could turn my flashlight on and off and send you the millions of 1's and 0's that compose the MP3, and when you typed them all into the computer the file would sound just as good.
Digital != Analog.
I use USB 2.0 for transferring songs to the iPod at home and the firewire cable at work for recharging it. The A/C adapter plugs into the iPod only via the firewire cable.
get nemulator
How can this be true ?
Even the charger connects to the iPod through a FireWire cable ! Does this also mean they change the connector on the power charge to match that of the USB cable ?
A million monkeys and this is the best sig they could come up with...
They would have to maintain two SKU of every item (Firewire and USB) and at that point it would probably cost just as much to put both cables in each box.
Also, retailers probably wouldn't stock the Firewire version since there's less of a market need for it.
I'm sure if Apple thought it would sell, they would do it. As it is, Apple cables are $20 and aftermarket cables will probably be even cheaper.
you must be an idiot...
Was firewire a mistake?
Or is this just a case of superior numbers vs superior tech? (a whole win vs mac thing again, eh?).
Heck most of the *ell 650's I've got have F/W and recently USB 2.0 on the newest. Even got a scsi/firewire scanner a while back, and makes me wonder if firewire will suffer the fate of scsi:
Mo' faster, mo' better, but more expensive than the alternative and not as pervasive as the "cheaper" stuff.
TFA mentions that usb 1.1 can't charge the iPod, does usb2.0? Or is there a seperate chager that's not mentioned?
Just asking, because the whole article brings about a "Huh, I'll be darned".
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
That tells it all. Apple is keeping FireWire, of course. The C|Net "oh my God, we're gonna DIE" headline aside, FireWire is still a very important technology for Apple, particularly because of their investment in FireWire for DV. The distinction is in how a more nuanced Apple is handling it. In the old days Apple would have kept FireWire cabling in the box simply because they felt FireWire was a better technology.
These days Apple has a much, much firmer grip on the realities of the consumer electronics and computer markets, and decisions like this bear that out. As Oculus Habent stated, it does suck for FireWire users, but it's not a terrible burden to bear to have to buy a FireWire cable. This is a case of Apple keeping costs down in an effort to stay one step ahead of the competition.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
I really hope you're trolling.
It's *digital*. You can transmit it over bent coat hangers and it won't change the quality. As long as the 1s and 0s get there intact, the result will be the same.
Apple and USB 2 are in a fine restaurant, dining, smiling, laughing....when suddenly there appears at the table a disheveled, wild-eyed FireWire.
"I thought you loved me!", she hisses.
"Who is this?", asks a mildly surprised USB 2.
"Nobody, baby,", stammers Apple while backing stiff-legged away from the table where FireWire stands, quite clearly on the edge of tears, or homocide, or possibly both. "I ain't never seen this bitch before in my life...honest!"
(I'm currently on medication to control these sorts of images...note to self: remind my dealer^H^H^H^H^H^Hphysician to adjust my dosage.)
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
USB2 is good for joysticks, mice, and keyboards, but for my money Firewire is the best choice for quality A/V output hands down. I might as well listen to tape otherwise.
I'm not sure if you knew this or not, but the firewire cable doesn't play the music for you. It's used to send bits of data to the iPod. The bits of data are the same regardless of the cable you use to connect it to the computer.
You mean I didn't need that 8" thick diamond cable I bought for my digital optical transmissions? You can hear the diamonds! Hear them, I tell you!!!
the iPod disks are too slow.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
... in other news, Apple will be replacing the pre-loaded operating system from OS X to Windows 3.11 - good thing i saved my copy of Trumpet Winsock!
cool cursors btw...
Things that Apple did not invent:
GUI
online music store
portable music player
mouse with more than one button
personal computer
UNIX
Things that Apple did invent:
making things easier to use
wrapping things in a shiny plastic shell
While the speed gap is certainly now closer between USB 2.0 and 1394a (regular FireWire, or iLink for those Sony people), it would be nice if the next generation iPods use the 1394b connection instead for those speed demons who want to sync and go quickly.
Though an interesting feature that would be nice for the iPod is a file browser built-in, where you can connect two iPods together and transfer files when you use the iPod like an HD. That would be indeed useful.
Another thing that would be nice is a flip in adaptor for the iPod so you can quickly plug in the iPod like a memory stick, instead of fishing for cables to plug it in. Those little things would be nice.
you are clueless. bits are bits. a file transferred via firewire vs ubs2 will be identical. Unless you are talking about a realtime transfer transmission fidelity is a non-issue.
Uh, isn't that quote in your sig from Yoda not Spock? And wasn't he 'Mr.' Spock? Doctor Spock wrote books about babies. So you can't get the content of your post OR your sig right. Jeez.
Right... and if we did that there would be no Linux and no Mac OS X.
Nope, the standard would be Windows...
IANAL, but I've seen actors play them on TV
Convert from FLAC to lossless WMA with DMC. Then import into iTunes with Lossless Apple Codec selected. Voila. lossless from FLAC>iPod.
Remember in days of yore when you bought a printer and it didn't even come with the necessary print cable?
Does that mean they were stepping away from computers entirely?
tcd004
worse things like this have happened in our very own government... like when the time we replaced Clinton with Bush... that was a great move...
... I have to agree with you wholeheartedly.
/.
... I'm beginning to think this site is dead and we just don't know it yet.
This was a cost savings move and nothing more.
And it makes the front page of
Why do I come here anymore?
I'm starting to wonder the same thing. Slashdot has never been known for its "vetting" of stories, or even much editing of the captions, but the last few weeks it's become really terrible. Stories spinning the broadcast flag and attempted banning of digital HDTV VCR-like hardware as "piracy prevention", pro-ms stories rearing their heads more and more in what is (or was) supposed to be a free software/opensource news and discussion forum, and an ever increasing number of flat-out misleading headlines that misrepresent TFAs, and links to TFAs that are flagrant products of MPAA/RIAA shills
Anyone know of any decent competitors out there?
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Doesn't that make me awesome? I am an authority. It only came with firewire. I din't know what firewire was until I got an iPod. It was pretty fast. I liked the color. It was white like the iPod.
One time I left the wire at a friend's house. Long story, don't ask. It involved making a CD. And then I couldn't use the firewire. I had a conversation on the phone and gave a bunch of reasons why I needed the firewire. My friend thought his house was going to catch on fire and he got very scared.
Long story? NO it is very short. But the key thing is that USB is a bit easier to find at Circuit City. It takes longer to say. Maybe Fire wire can be shortened to FI WI.
Anyway. I love animals. I want to get a iPod Photo so I can keep pictures of deer on it. Does it take USB or FI WI?
THanks you president Washington.
I JUST bought an iPod Photo and it came with both cables.
Sigpilot : I'm in the pipe, 5 by 5.
You're saying that Apple is backing off support of Firewire because they're not including _the cable_ by default in the box.
OK, think about that. Now think about this: A majority of the people buying iPods have Windows PCs. I'm going out on a limb and saying most PCs I've seen do not have Firewire by default. So why include a cable that most people aren't going to use when you can leave it out, save money by leaving it out AND get more money when people have to buy the cable seperately.
Simple economics. So for all you tin-foil hat wearers:
Removing the Firewire cable from the iPod package does not mean they're backing off support for Firewire.
Removing the ability for the iPods to connect via Firewire DOES mean they're backing off support for Firewire.
But the latter has not and probably will not happen. The FW cable being included was just legacy from when iPods were Mac-only since most Macs had FW for sometime and USB1.1 was inadequate for transfering GB to the iPod.
I just wasted your mod points! HA!
Also Firewire has lower and guranteed latencies which USB has not. I.e. for data aquisition purposes USB is more or less unuseable.
I guess you can't boot of the iPod anymore. I know you are not supposed to but it was a nice feature. Or is it still possible with USB2?
They just know that most Mac users already have a drawer full of Firewire cables. And most PCs don't come with Firewire ports, though they might have a crappy no-power iLink port (thanks, Sony), and half the point of using Firewire is to charge the iPod.
--
"Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
"Open source is evil." - Microsoft
I am glad for this, as firewire is less common than USB 2. The sooner we all agree on a single standard the better.
Yeah, but why does it always have to be the one that does not work as well?
While your post was kind of funny, the reaction from the humor impared was funnier.
As mentioned in some posts already, they are simply trying to save money, and not just backing away from Firewire entirely. Most iPod users now are Windows users who don't have firewire.
My guess is they are trying to standardize on USB to cut costs.
USB 2.0 is good enough for simple file transfer for 3-8 MB music files and pictures. Syncing an iPod doesn't copy over all 40 GBs of music files at the same time from one device to the other. Firewire is better for high end device connectivity and that big ass multimedia some Mac users are famous for.
There is a problem though... they are leaving their older mac customers a little cold. Many older macs only have USB 1.0 but have firewire. Macs were unfortunately slow to adopt USB 2.0 compared to windows. Intel was trying to compete with the firewire speeds by getting USB up to a comparable transfer rate. Now in order to buy the same thing a 2 year old windows user can use, they have to buy an extra cable at extra expense.
It could be argued that the company that sells computers considered to be "second class" to the computing world is making second class users out of their Mac/iPod loyalists. Irony doesn't begin to describe it.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Last week you mean , alot still dont come with cables
Please. Anything by Ina Fried regarding Apple is always, and I mean always spun to slam Apple. Even positive articles end with a "but, so and so on a blog says." Seriously. Quotes from blog or forum authors on negative aspects of whatever decision Apple has made. In a "newspiece." Really.
But, don't take my word for it, just notice the next time Ina writes about Apple (or search on Google for previous articles). This really is the epitome of hack writing.
To wit: the "subheading" on the 2nd page of this article is "Who's a niche technology now, huh?" setting up the entire thing as some sort of vindication on the USB v. FireWire wars.
As others have noted, this is a business move to cut costs by not shipping a FW cable. That's it. No cable.
I truly believe Ina does this to draw eyes to CNet.
(also check out Ina's "breaking" news from Microsoft...ever couple of weeks there's an article with the tag "CNet has learned" that wraps a puff piece pushing some new MS technology. "Hi Ina? This is X from Microsoft. Here's a scoop. Oh, and here's the article you're supposed to write. Thanks and nice article on FireWire the other day!")
After reading your post (actually I couldn't get all the way through), all I can say is wow.
Here is a guy who has trained himself well on endless PC-vs-Mac flame wars and has now graduated himself to more esoteric and sophisticated mental masturbations such as USB-vs-Firewire flame fests. Try going outside occassionally, or attempting to speak to someone of the opposite sex.
By the way, everything you say merely confirms that Apple is, indeed, backing away from firewire. WHY they are doing it (saving money, reaching wider audience, etc) is hardly important. The point remains that they are in fact backing away.
IEEE 1394 uses peer to peer to transfer data which is consequently significantly faster than USB 2.0, although when transferring small files this shouldn't matter too much, as for hard drives, external optical drives, etc. firewire is definitely the way to go for iPods, i would say firewire is better but apple's iPod custmors are probably mostly windows users, so they figure it saves them money and shouldnt upset their customers
More likely, this is just because USB is more ubiquitous and it's cheaper to ship one cable than two.
the standard connector for parrallel printers was around long before pcs became the only game in town.
at that time you had to buy a lead to connect your brand of computer to the standard port on your printer (there were a few lower end computers that couldn't work with standard parallell printers but most of the better stuff could)
this stuck around as the norm until printers switched to USB
i remember when we first got a PC we just kept the existing epson RX-80 printer we had from our bbc micro setup and it worked just fine with the windows supplied driver (and yes that included printing grapics).
"it's Apple making a business decision."
Its apple's way of trying to get another $20-30 bucks from people.
I'm not criticizing them, but I hate when people soft-peddle that Apple is only helping the bottom line.
On the other hand, they lowered the cost of the iPod mini by $50, so I'd rather have the $50.
The cool part is the previous generation is now being sold for $180 to clear out inventory, and it does include the cable, so the last generation is definitely the better buy.
Firewire's not going anywhere. It's the only standard right now that handles consistent streaming of video from a camcorder or other video source, and it's a preferred way for connecting external hard drives.
Apple is making a business decision to remove one cable and sell it seperately. This won't affect their video products or the fact that a firewire port will continue to be included on every Mac.
It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
Why bundle your product with two cords, when you can bundle it with just one?
The USB cable is more likely, than the firewire cable, to be what a PC user is looking for. Mac users don't care - all new macs come with both interfaces.
> Besides, VHS may have won the home video tape wars, but that didn't make it better than Betamax.
Ah but it was, at least when it counted. Beta was too slow to respond to VHS, which among other things, had longer playing tapes at a time when people wanted exactly that. Beta caught up, but too late.
So you replaced one idiot with another idiot.
I would bet money there are more Windows iPod users now then Mac. PCs, for the most part, do not have and do not come with firewire. USB is far more common.
Plus they get the 19.99 from people who want firewire cables.
Geez...
this made out to be a big freaking deal.... it's not
now microsoft selling products to protect you from their insecure products... that's disturbing
In the end this allows Apple to sell their products for less and get rid or redundancy. Honestly, how many non- geeks benefit from having the option of a Firewire connection?
The real question: Is Apple backing away from AC adaptors?
The toad can't burp - and for some reason can't fart either, so it swells up and eventually explodes. --Anonymous Coward
When Apple stops including a FireWire port on the iPod, you'll be right. Until then, and as long as FIreWire tech continue to be licensed to Sony and others for DV and HDTV transfer, how has USB2.0 "won" anything but converts such as yourself?
It's not denial. FireWire hasn't lost to USB 2.0. For Digital Video, FireWire is still far better at sustained transfers than USB 2.0. Some of my editing clients have provided me with USB 2.0 harddrives and I have a hard time playing back full resolution Final Cut Pro files from footage on the USB 2.0 drives, It simply hiccups far too often when confronted with a lot of full reoslution video. My FireWire 400 drives can play back for hours on end (literally) with no hiccups whatsoever. In this respect FireWrie is the better protocol. It's simply more stable.
As for the iPod, well, I can see the ubiquity of USB 2.0 being an advantage. Almost all Windows PC's have it. It's fast and it doesn't need to be sending high bandwidth data streams for exceedingly long spurts. In essence, it's perfectly suited to an iPod plus it lets Apple keep a little bit more of their profit margin.
FireWire rocks at what it was designed for. USB 2.0 is pretty good at what it was designed for. There is room for both protocols.
Pooty tweet
I have a current clickwheel iPod, and it shipped with both USB2 and Firewire cables.
Firewire is integral to the whole Mac experience, it is not just a socket you use to hook iPods.
Pedro
----
The Insomniac Coder
Are you for real?
You're talking about _digital_ transmission. It is lossless (as far as audio fidelity). The only way USB vs firewire will make a differance is if you use the cable for your headphones (even then I'm not sure you'd notice).
-nB
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
I looked at prices yesterday, and the FW hard drive enclosure cost 6 dollars more than the USB2. Although you make good points, I disagree with your overall assessment. FW has not failed. It is very succesful in both Macs and PCs for video editing, where it really shines for DV-computer transfer.
I personally prefer FW. It costs 20 bucks (at most) to add it to your desktop, and is much faster than USB2 in real world situations (the specs would make you believe USB2 is more competitive).
Apple made the right choice for Windows users, but have alienated their strongest supporters yet again. I don't fault Apple for growing, but with the profit margins on iPods being so high, I wish they would supply a combo FW-USB2 cord, or just put 2 cords in the box and avoid these headlines. Remember, you can't use a regular FW cable, you need a dock connector on one end.
I am glad for this, as firewire is less common than USB 2. The sooner we all agree on a single standard the better.
Dilbert quote: "Our computers are so simple they only come with one button, and we press it for you before the computer leaves the factory."
Yeah, complexity can be bad, but the simplicity can be even worse.
TW
"We, as dedicated users and supporter of your hardware and software are completely dismayed at your recent decision to discontinue standard FireWire support for the iPod music player line," the petition states, going on to note that "It is very unfortunate that you have left your faithful out in the dark on this one."
"Completely dismayed??" Seriously? Not only do these people apparently have no lives such that the discontinuing of standard firewire support would leave them completely dismayed, but APPLE ISN'T EVEN DISCONTINUING FIREWIRE SUPPORT! They're just not including a cable in the box.
These people are dedicated Mac fans, spending the substantial sums you pay for Mac quality, but they can't bear to pay a little extra to get a firewire cable? Not only that, but if they have a previous iPod with a firewire cable, I'm sure they can continue to use that cable if they upgrade.
Now, I do think it would be nice if Apple gave an option between USB and Firewire, but this is really NOT a big deal.
Thinkin' Lincoln - a web comic of presidential proportions
Are you on glue?
Firewires market is video. Firewire kicks ass at video, and that market isn't likely to be moving to USB any time soon, especially with Firewire 800 on the way.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
With firewire at 800mbps and USB2 at 840mbps, why use firewire at all?
Do you plan on housing more than the max supported items on one USB channel (127 devices)?
Firewire supports only 63 devices...
SO why support a loosing standard?
--E--
This is utter BS. Firewire is the interface of choice for professionals in the audio and video arenas; there's no way in hell Apple's abandoning it.
Um....the standard is Windows....I would consider 98% of the market share to constitute a de facto standard.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
The writing is on the wall for Firewire. USB2 has won.
I'll make a mental note. SiliconEntity says firewire is dying (along with BSD). I think you are wrong, and I seriously doubt you work in consumer electronics or video tech. So all set top boxes are soon to be required to include firewire, and you think computer and camera makers are going to move away from it. Interesting. USB2 has taken off for hard drives it is true, but it also isn't hard to find firewire drives, especially amongst the pro gear. Now find me a USB2 drive I can plug into my digital camera (and that will work for transferring data to it.)
Yes but USB (or USB2) aren't as good for sustained high speed data transfers.
How many dropped frames would you be prepared to suffer in your DV? Or HD-DV?
FireWire is the better high-speed, large-data standard. USB is the better high-speed small-data standard.
Firewire is not dead. It is great.
However, Apple has done as much as anyone can to kill firewire. The fact that is not now the ubiquitous connector should not be a surprise. Why?
Apple put a trademark on the name "firewire" and did not let anyone else use that term without paying them money. So other companies came up with their own names (e.g., i-link) or went for the raw standard's name: IEEE 1394. Confusing!
Not nice when the average consumer does not even know what something is called. USB on the other hand was and is USB everywhere. (USB2 naming fiasco does not rise to the same level.)
Also, USB was cheaper to license. Don't know why that is. This is an onion I have never had the time to peel completely.
Sorta like SONY killing Beta by not letting anyone else use it without paying them outrageous financial tribute.
--- -- - -
Give me LIBERTY, or give me a check.
I'd glad for this because of the mac zelots who push the ibook on you because it has firewire.
I'm not saying the ibook isn't good bang for the buck... i'm saying the mac zelots are bad, bad for not even taking the time to see if the people that preach to would find these extra features useful.
Like bluetooth. Bluetooth is nice but I don't own a single bluetooth device. I use the cheaper alternatives like using the website to sync my phone numbers on my mobile, I use the cheaper wireless keyboards on my pc, and hold the phone to my ear.
Almost all miniDV cameras come with a single USB cable (and no FireWire cable). Does it mean that they are backing away from FW? Hell, no. I just guess that USB cables are cheaper :)
Real life is overrated.
As for USB v FireWire, don't judge "better" in terms of how elegantly engineered each product is. There are obvious parallels to Betamax v VHS. The difference in performance is generally not significant for most people. USB is in markets FireWire isn't interested in, such as low bandwidth applications like keyboards, mice, printers etc, (though to be fair USB has little penetration in the DV market). USB is cheaper. USB has become standard on PCs, largely because it started as a replacement for existing functionality that most people used: the PS/2, serial and parallel ports, while FireWire replaces external SCSI - something comparitively few people use. IMHO, FireWire is just hanging on, right on the edge of being relegated to being solely used in the niche market of DV. It's use in set top boxes might be it's saviour.
I'll buy "backing away from Firewire" when we stop seeing Firewire ports on their desktops. Not until then.
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
If everyone thought like that, we'd still be using DOS, and the Mac never would have been created.
Albuquerque PC
The new Xbox firewire:/ 1349224&tid=211
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/17
But did Netcraft confirm it?
Boy, I couldn't disagree more! USB is great for low-speed connections to peripherals. That's what it was designed for. But I don't want my external hard drive to have to contend with the mouse for bandwidth! I want a separate, high speed connection for storage, which is exactly what Firewire is designed for. Of course, I can't possibly permit either the mouse or the hard drive to affect my refresh rate, so I definitely want a separate, high bandwidth connection for my monitor. And my network connection is sometimes pretty fast, but has severe latency problems, compared to my keyboard, hard drive, or monitor, so I'd like a separate connection for the network.
So lets, see, my Mac has USB for the keyboard and mouse, Firewire for my external hard drives, a VGA port for the monitor and a 10/100/1000 ethernet port for network. Looks just about perfect! Oh, and guess what, my iPod will plug into either the USB or the Firewire ports, how convenient!
"We have nothing in common, your attitude annoys me, and your political views are appalling."
It's a pity that Slashdot moderation doesn't really work. This post should not have been moderated as a "troll." Doing so just feeds the completely wrongheaded idea that it's okay to call anything you disagree with a troll. It's not.
Instead this post should have been moderated down because it's stupid. Unfortunately, there's no "-1, stupid" option.
Nope. For whatever reasons, the Ipod software does not work with USB1. It will not report any error, but it will NOT work. Somewhere deep in the manual it clearly states that USB2 is required.
It's one of those things that makes me (as a PC user) think that the whole Apple=easy thing is a big lie, as setting up that Ipod for my wife was a PITA with USB1 not working, no networking capability, and having to leave CD autorun on.
The FireWire name is trademarked, but anybody can use it or its logo without paying a royalty. While it is true that some people use bizarre names for FireWire, the fault is not Apple's.
Right, which is why all these camcorders have USB 2.0. Oh, wait, they don't ? Ok... more and more do all the time. Are there any that are USB2.0 only yet?
To an extent, you're right. The consumer level is going to USB 2.0. The mid-to-high-end stuff, though, will still support Firewire. It's certainly not going away.
Apple has actually backed both USB and Firewire. Macs were going standard with USB-only serial ports before most PC users even knew what USB was... the only people getting even slightly burned here are ( relatively ) long-time Mac users who are looking to buy new iPods. Even then, heck, they buy an iPod dock, what's the big deal? Yet another non-story on /. is all...
Don't dismiss the notion that USB 2.0 isn't fast enough. Buy an HD camcorder and you'll be wanting Firewire 800 to import that video, I promise... yea, I know, that's fairly high-end... today.
Leave the cable out, and shave some $$$ off the product price, and let the buyer pick a cable up at time of purchase.
BTW, folks interested in getting a full kit for their new ipod photo should check MacNN, there's a link to discounted 'old new stock' ipod photos that have full kits (dock, all cables, carry case, etc) which are really good deals.
Dont forget an error correction method.
My suggestion is audio. "Hey, Frank... was that 001 or 110?"
"I don't know anybody who still drinks the Linux kool aid. It seemed like good stuff back in 1999, but then it went nowhere "
You mean the Linux Desktop went nowhere right? Because by any other measure Linux has about ten times the OS market share of Apple.
"not all nerds buy into the propaganda that hobbyist-made software is better than, or even as good as, professionally-made software."
Err ok. Good thing Apple, a company you apparently worship, didn't do anything stupid like bet the farm and base their OS on "hobbyist-made" software like *BSD and other OSS software. Yep none of that crappy unprofessionaly made OSS stuff in OS X.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
fuck you
you cant hear shit
Dump USB and FireWire, and move entirely to a multi-frequency optic fibre system. You'd get so much more throughput. True, it would cost a little more, but wouldn't it be worth it to download your photographs on your digital camera in three nanoseconds?
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
...is FireWire used as the only standard on all digital and HDV camcorders, professional cameras, and decks and VTRs?
...is FireWire required on all digital HD set top boxes beginning 1 July 2005?
...do all these high end consumer, "prosumer", and professional AV and computing devices ship with FireWire?
FireWire is *far superior* to USB 2.0 - for the things that its used for. We're not talking about keyboards and mice and printers here. We're talking about a high-speed, peer-to-peer (unlike USB, which requires a host) serial connection standard that USB 2.0 simply can't touch for many tasks. Just because you see overlap between them and USB is used for normal desktop peripherals doesn't mean USB "won".
If FireWire lost anywhere, it wasn't in computing. It was in the AV world: there was a chance to have FireWire be the universal connection standard for all AV equipment.
Imagine a cable that not only carries video and audio, but isn't intended for "final output", and also can carry control information between devices, and every device is a peer: picture one, single FireWire cable running between each of your devices, essentially chained off of one another, and each device automatically recognizing any other devices available, and self-configuring to expose the correct settings and options for dealing with those device(s), being completely hot-pluggable and dynamic, and also working seamlessly with your computer.
Yes, that really was the promise of FireWire.
Much of the failure in that realm is due to two things:
- Apple's early insistence to charge $1/port on each device that used FireWire/IEEE-1394 ports, and the requirement to use Apple's old FireWire logo (which included an Apple logo) to use the name "FireWire", which is inarguably the name that would have taken the standard the farthest; now Apple allows free licensing of the FireWire name; and
- Content providers' deathly fear of ALL of your devices - including your computer and recording devices - being able to communicate with each other easily, seamlessly, and digitally
(And, no, NO OTHER CURRENT STANDARD, including HDMI or any USB standard, could do everything FireWire could have done. Oh well.)
Your mistake is thinking of USB and FireWire as competing standards. They really aren't (except in the area of desktop storage device connectivity - see this post for a concise summary). Yes, USB is everywhere. And uh, in case you didn't notice, you have Apple in large part to thank for that with the original iMac, in which Apple included it in 1997, eliminating legacy ports - and the floppy drive - thus creating a burgeoning USB peripheral market that helped the PC world make the transition much easier (that it STILL hasn't really made...)
Nice troll, though!
If Apple sells the same percentage of iPods to Mac/Win owners as the 3%/95% mac/win computer ownership, or even close to those percentages, then chances are Apple is shipping pretty white firewire cables that most users aren't ever unwrapping.
This is just a case of serving your market. New Macs support USB 2.0 and iPod buyers that don't have USB 2.0 can purchase the FireWire cable.
Yeah it stinks that the APPLE owners are the ones to get burned on this deal, but it doesn't make sense to offer a feature most of your users cannot make any use of when an alternative feature exists that most can.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
..commodity computer company that only supports the lowest common denominator. All they do is pay the Chinese to assemble generic 'white' boxes. When was the last time Apple created anything original. They just repackage other people's tech and hire funky marketers.
I drank what? -- Socrates
Gads, I'm annoyed that FireWire can't seem to catch on with PC users. I realize that it's mostly because most PCs castrate FireWire by using the 4-pin version, but I would seriously be after 6-pin firewire in a PC. With how much I travel for work and how much crap I already have, the fact that I can use one less cable for every device that I have which is FireWire rather than USB, combined with not having to carry a hub with me everywhere (daisychaining), and I don't see why FireWire isn't more popular.
Besides, FireWire 800 just kicks ass. I mean, I know that I'm a special case since I have to push tens of gigabytes around on a daily basis, but my god, 800mbit is just so awesome. And I don't even need to buy an expensive Fiber Channel card to do it!
That is true now, but Apple tried to charge royalties and stymied the adoption of Firewire. See this article, amoung many others. Confusion in naming has its genesis in this totally stupid attempted royality grab.
Fact: Firewire is only available in PowerMac and two models of Powerbook (15" and 17"). It is not available in the rest of Apple's products (iBook, iMac, eMac, Mini, iPod, peripherals (e.g. iSight), and software, obviously).
Statement: "FireWire 400 is faster in all benchmarks than USB 2.0"
There are some benchmarks showing that USB2 has higher burst rate than FW400 but I will grant you that FW400 is the better performer overall.
This still does not explain/excuse the poor performance of Apple's implementation. USB2 implementation in windows (~30 MB/s) is nearly twice as fast as Apple's (~18 MB/s)! See Barefeat, a Mac benchmark review site: http://www.barefeats.com/usb2.html.
If they are backing of firewire....Why do they put Firewire 800 on their machines?
Apple's early insistence to charge $1/port on each device that used FireWire/IEEE-1394 ports
Yes, this basically killed Intel's plans to include 1394 as a built-in feature on their chipsets and develop USB2 instead. Had they signed Intel, Firewire would be on at least 70% of the world's PCs. Firewire was never meant to be a specialized AV-Only interface, but that's more or less what it has become.
Apple insistance on $$$ for firewire from Intel was despite the fact that Apple uses all sorts of Intel technology like PCI and USB for free. It's very unfortunate that they were slow in understanding that the IBM-compatible world demands royalty-free standards.
Nice troll, though!
Nice Astroturfing!
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
Wow, you used Mbits/second, MB/s, and Mb/s all in the same post to mean the same thing.
I am glad for this, as firewire is less common than USB 2. The sooner we all agree on a single standard the better.
Ack! If you don't know what you're talking about, please don't talk.
There are many areas in which USB does not compare to Firewire. This isn't a field where we want to get rid of one just because it's less common than the other. Might just as well say we should drop Linux and Macs in favor of a single Microsoft Windows standard, because Windows is much more popular. Go find me a DV camera that has a USB 2.0 port and no Firewire port. USB is good for peripherals like keyboards, mice and printers. Firewire is good for higher bandwidth applications like digital video production and fast external storage drives. The two are not really in conflict, and even if they were, dropping Firewire would be the wrong answer.
That's also why this article is complete and utter FUD, because Apple is doing no such thing. The iPod still has a Firewire port, they are just saving a few bucks and leaving out the Firewire cable because most of the iPod buyers at this point don't use it (since most PCs don't have Firewire). Slashdot should really be ashamed for letting this kind of krud get to their front page. Ha!
To be clear, the "5 million" figure is referenced in a document that is over 2 years old.
The "12 million" figure is from June, 2004 (source: 23:40 of WWDC keynote)
As of January 2005, the figure is now over 14 million. (Source: 5:20 of Macworld Expo San Francisco 2005 keynote)
USB has ZERO penetration in the DV market. Firewire is still the standard connection found on all true DV cams - until that tide changes, Apple isn't going to back away from Firewire. The reason USB isn't found on any DV cameras is that it just isn't as fast or fault tolerant as Firewire. It would be entirely possible to drop frames using USB 2.0 and it certainly never reaches the maximum throughput of Firewire. Anyone who cares about DV definitely cares about these two factors. As long as there are people who care about DV, or a better connection standard is developed(unlikely), Firewire will survive just fine. This story is just ridiculous and completely over-reacting to Apple responding to more PC owners snapping up iPods - this has nothing to do with Apple abandoning Firewire, nor does it indicate such a move on Apple's part.
A USB cable is cheaper then a FW cable.
I love how these articles deliberately "mislead" with their BULLSHIT titles.
FW is here to stay, it is the fastest hot swapable solution available and unlike USB 2.0, it's speeds are not "theoretical bullshit."
Nice Astroturfing!
I don't work for Apple, never have, and am not part of a fake grassroots effort of any kind, nor do I blanket newspapers and/or websites with information that appears to be a "grassroots" effort, when in reality it has a hidden agenda. But thanks for your concern! [1]
A really low user ID, and that makes me cool.
Most USB printers these days don't even come with a USB cable! Are printer manufacturers backing away from connecting their printers to computers? Get over it, folks.
I've got a Mac, never fiddled with an USB iPod. A friend bought an iPod, struggled with it on USB2, got sick of it, bought a FW pc-card (my suggestion), became happy. Although it doesn't provide power to the iPod (neither did USB) he's overwhelmed by FW's speed and reliability (on WinXP). USB is like a Soviet car, feels crap but everyone goes with it because it comes default (anybody wonder why all pc laptops don't provide powered FW? is it an intel diktat?)
Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
The difference isn't that big for the slower (by hard drive standards) drives in iPods. Firewire would get higher speeds with lower CPU usage... but the difference is questionable to anyone with USB 2.0.
Of course, the people that benefit would do well to buy the cable. For example, someone that uses their iPod as a removable hard drive, or someone with USB 1.1.
I imagine it's annoying for Mac users that have machines with USB 1.1, which constitutes the majority of Mac users (including myself)... but I'm not really that annoyed over it.
I have a shuffle with USB 1.1, but the thing that eats up most of the time is transcoding to AAC (128 kbps AAC has worse quality than a high bitrate MP3, but it takes less space/uses less battery and I don't copy the AAC files so there's no generation loss past that one step).
I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
since Firewire cord is too thick and stiff. USB cords are thinner, more common and more flexible. That's all that matters to many consumers.
Actually you do blanket almost every even mildly anti-Apple Slashdot story with Pro-Apple "spin". You've made a half-dozen posts over something as pointless as a firewire cable. It's really too bad (or too sad) you aren't being paid, because you've obviously made it a very important job for yourself.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
As another poster stated, both USB High-Speed (tm) and Firewire (tm) (all speeds) are faster then the mini hard-drives that folks are using so speed just is not an issue.
In this case USB2 High-Speed has a few advantages for small devices:
1. The standard USB MINI connector has power, the mini (4 wire) Firewire does not. So if you want small and don't need the extra speed or p2p nature of Firewire this is a big win.
2. USB2 is master-slave (host-client) which makes the electronics cheaper then Firewire which is peer-to-peer.
3. USB2 is everywhere these days.
Folks also need to remember that USB2 does not mean 480Mb/s.
Devices can be fully USB2.0 compliant and only support a 1.1Mb/s speed.
You must look for the 'USB 2.0 HIGH-SPEED (tm)' (yes they registered it so they could make sure it was used properly) to know that you are getting a 480Mb/s device.
Jorgie
1) the author of the article is idiot
2) the story submitter is idiot
3) slashdot editors are idiot
4) all of above
I admit, I have nothing to add to this, except:
FIRE
WIRE!
p-p-p-...
I find it hard to believe that *not* including a Firewire cable really makes a big difference financially. I mean if you look around on the web, you can easily find Firewire cables for just a couple of bucks. If Apple is selling millions of iPods, and can therefore guarantee a supplier it will order millions of Firewire cables, it should be able to get them for just a dollar or so, or perhaps even less. I like the option of have two different packages--one with a Firewire cable, and the other with a USB2 cable. That way you pick what you want/need, and the "faithful" with old USB v1.1 Macs do not get screwed...
--codguy
I'll remember to follow your rules on when it's ok to comment on something on slashdot in the future. Thanks!
... USB2.0 is acually faster then firewire.
Netcraft confirms it. Firewire is dying. The writing is on the wall. It's in crayon and poop.
*sigh*
I can't be bothered with writing out the full "is dying" troll if the editors can't be bothered with weeding out TROLL ARTICLES from the front page.
My President is a twit.
Unfortunately Apple decided to use USB 1.1 on their "budget" lines until very recently, so the majority of Mac users have 1.1 machines.
I wouldn't want to transfer tens of gigs of music to an iPod with USB 1.1. It can do about 1 mbyte/s, so that's about 3.6 gigs per hour... 5.7 hours for 20 gigs, 8.5 for 30, 16.1 for 60.
'Course, my collection is 11 gigs, the subset I listen to is about 6, and when I transfer stuff to my shuffle the biggest slowdown is from transcoding to AAC (lower quality, but also lower battery usage and smaller files). It doesn't even get close to USB 1.1 speeds.
I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
That's what I said: "FireWire is just hanging on, right on the edge of being relegated to being solely used in the niche market of DV". FireWire as a widely used bus is looking unlikely. USB has all but "won".
The iPod is great and all, but does it have firewire?
It's *only* the iPod minis (and the Shuffle, which is USB-only anyway) that omit the firewire cable. All of the "regular" iPods, including the 20 gig model and both varieties of iPod photo, still come with firewire.
http://www.apple.com/ipod/specs.html/
... Slashdot is dying. Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered nerd community today when recently Slashdot itself confirmed that original stories account for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all postings.
Yeah, okay, that's enough. Time for my nap.
but i don't think it's just going to be a niche market item - it's still better for external drives and the like. as long as DV exists, other peripherals will still take advantage of firewire USB 2.0 sucks for stable data transfer, and vendors know this and will still provide firewire drives because they simply work better. the only reason apple isn't providing firewire cables with new iPods are the statistics - PC owners are purchasing more iPods than Mac owners. Anyone who has a mac probably has an iPod and a firewire cable or dock if they were going to upgrade. Since most PCs don't come with firewire as a standard connection type(purely political) it doesn't make sense for apple to bundle cables that will never get used. firewire is NOT losing any ground, especially because of anything apple is or isn't doing end of story
Have you heard of: "If A = B and B = C, then A = C. Except where void or prohibited by law."? Well, FireWire = 1394 and 1394 = iLink, but FireWire != iLink because it is prohibited by law (it has to do with Trademarks). So I say 1394, will cover both and all of the same thing. That is the only reason, but just for you: FireWire!
If Steve Jobs farted into a paper bag and called that the iFart, there would be a load of gibbering Mac junkies writing about it on internet news boards.
I agree it is sad and stupid.
Know what's fun? Holding your cool the umpteenth time someone on campus with a legacy Mac spots an old parallel printer lying around and thinks "Ooh! Free Printer!" and plugs it into the SCSI port...
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
not when the bottom line is $$$ and PC iPod adopters just don't have firewire. it doesn't make any sense for Apple to try and push PC users to firewire. i think this is especially true when you look at how their pricing is structured, selling improved iPods at the same or lower cost as they were a few months ago they need to make up some of the margins which have been trimmed way down - the shuffle has probably only increased the need for this being that it's dirt cheap for what it is. Apple adopted USB to take advantage of PC hardware manufacturers who refuse to support firewire for political reasons, but could still offer decent equipment Mac owners would like to use. They also use it for things like keyboards and mice - why would they stick with USB 1.0/1.1 when a faster protocol can be added for zero cost. And Apples have ALWAYS had USB, at least as far back as the original iMac - so they're hardly just jumping on the bandwagon. firewire isn't going anywhere - if anything, as more DV cameras are being sold(and the numbers sold have increased every quarter for the past 2 years) firewire will only grab more share. firewire had the market to itself, because Apples were pretty much the only market for external hard drives until recently - using USB 2.0 is a cop out by manufacturers, allowing them to make cheaper, slower and less reliable hardware and sell them for the same price as firewire, or slightly less. firewire is absolutely not losing ground
You also might want to take a look at http://www.resexcellence.com/ for a few tips on Mac hacking.
Blank until
I've seen speeds as low as 1/2 that of firewire 400 in reviews of USB 2.0 hard drives and such.
I've heard that a lot of it depends on what devices you plug into USB. If my understanding's right, if you plug a mouse and a hard drive into the same usb, they each get half of the bandwidth all the time, whereas two firewire drives will share it more intelligently.
There is apparently a lot of overhead in firewire because it ensures that things will be delivered on time. Its part of what makes it good for video transfer. From what I've read, even with that it still out-performs USB 2.0 in most cases by quite a bit.
Of course, as others have noted, the hard drive on the iPod maxes out quite a while before the bus does.
Actually, it's interesting this is brought up - because not too long ago, I recall reading a number of messages on Apple's own message forums from users encountering problems with their iPod syncing properly on Macs via firewire.
After much testing and speculation, folks seemed to pretty much determine it was a problem caused by Apple's iSight firewire camera combined with an iPod on the firewire interface. Apparently, the iSight, when turned on, consumes the majority of the bandwidth on the firewire 400 bus. Trying to xfer large amounts of data to an iPod while it's on can lead to crashes/freezes.
This is probably made even worse when people have an external firewire drive attached and use it as part of this equation.
Considering how often Mac users opt for an iSight camera to go with their system, this seems like an issue worth addressing. I almost wonder if Apple thought about this one too - and figured a migration of iPods to USB might be an easy work-around?
And UDP has less overhead than TCP, so we should use it for everything, right?
http://www.g4tv.com/freshgear/features/39129/USB_2 0_Versus_FireWire_pg3.html
r ewire800-06.html
http://www.barefeats.com/usb2.html"
http://www20.tomshardware.com/storage/20040402/fi
Those last two include FireWire 800 (1394b) and 400 (1394a)
Now: about 1/3
Then: all iPods came with a FireWire cable
Now: they don't.
How is that not losing ground. Explain it to me. For the 95% of the market that is not DV, FireWire is losing ground. As I said, it may recover in the external HD market, or it may not. Frankly, like DV, it's a pretty small segment anyway. It's dwarfed by the digital still camera market and the printer market, both of which are dominated by USB.
You seem to be fixated on DV, Apple, and "political reasons". Guess what? Most people don't care about DV or Apple. They're irrelevant to the largest part of the market we're talking about. Your "political reasons" actually boil down to a lack of demand, and the fact that USB is cheaper to implement. Invocation of conspiracy theories is always a sign of a weak argument.
I was surprised to find that my iPod 20G transfers data from my TiBook MUCH faster using the Firewire cable than the USB one. Don't really know why, I expected them to be pretty close. But once I tried both, I found the Firewire to be something like 5x faster. I didn't benchmark or otherwise diagnose the matter, I just use the Firewire cable.
But if anyone knows why the difference is so dramatic, I'm curious. Could the TiBook for some reason only use USB1?
Buy Text Processing in Python
Goodness if you're going to post on slash dot atleast use your head. It's completly obvious that most of the new iPod uses (4.5 million this christmas season) own PC's. Now tell me when is the last time you have seen a PC with firewire. Ok now tell me when is the last time you saw a mac with USB. That right their should tell you why apple started shipping usb 2 cables with the iPods. USB = 100% Mac and 100% PC Firewire = 100% mac 5% PC Next time please don't be so stupid and give all the other noobs out there some other reason to bash apple.
in soviet russia, you back away from fire wire
I remember when registration started. I thought, "Why would I register to read /.?" I put it off for a while. Then came worthwhile preferences.
$1/port was a rumored price... it never actually existed... the price point was 25 cents per device (regardless of ports)... Intel made its decision to back out of its public statements of intention to include ieee1394 in the PC'99 specs without any consideration to the above... Intel's intention was to mislead the public then only include its own technology and not one which performs much better (compare FireWire 400 to USB 1.1 -- there is a clear winner)... and while davey writes some pretty silly things from time to time, he's no Apple shrill... i'd say the only thing he is beholden to is WARF....
Both USB and IEEE 1394 have some kind of error correction built in along with some form of expected level of service, so they're both like TCP.
OCO is Loco
the problem is the iPod firewire cable has a proprietary connection that goes into the iPod. So you *have* to buy the cable from Apple.
"I keep looking in the want-ads under 'revolutionary' but there don't seem to be any listings.. "
He said A/V output, not output to an iPod/external HDD. When working with real-time A/V stuff, I suspect that USB, using the main CPU and with it's general more overhead, is prone to dragading the quality etc. (even if it's just the occassional blip).
There's a reason why pretty much all video cameras have a Firewire connection rather than USB.
I was gonna write up a post about the absence of FireWire on PCs when I found this article and was surprised to learn that FireWire was once the core of the PC98 specification. Only until Apple tried to charge several dollars per PC and the voltage specifications of the neccesary chips proved to be very high it was dropped from the PC98 spec.
I'd always thought that FireWire was kept out of the standard PC spec because Intel didn't invent it. In a way the rise of USB is ironic because Apple was instrumental in making USB a success. Until the original iMac it was routinely called the Unused Serial Bus.
I also notice that 2 or 3 people seem to have absorbed your misspelling into their posts.
Geez, do many slashdot readers have to read some primer on 'Philosophy for dummies' before posting or something? Perhaps you'd like to throw in 'Occam's razor' too?
He didn't say X (Apple) == Y (OSS), he said X was based on Y, which as it happens is correct, and is an interesting point if you're trying to argue that OSS is good for nothing and of interest to no-one.
Pop-philosophy does not impress, or convince.
oh, BTW, I use OS X.
See, there are these devices called CAMCORDERS. Some of us like transfer the video from them to our COMPUTERS. That typically requires FIREWIRE.
As a result, I don't think Firewire is going away anytime soon... especially on the Mac...
I can't believe someone could pull this sort of sensationalist B.S. out of their nether-regions and wind up on the front page of Slashdot... stupid, stupid, stupid.
The iPod, OS X, and other Apple software products are convincing Windows users to switch platforms. For switchers because of the iPod, the loss of a standard firewire cable would probably assist them in being more comfortable with a new Mac since they would find familiar ports on their machines. Plus, they can make the move without purchasing a new cable for the device that was originally designed on the platform they are now choosing. I don't see how this move is a problem for anyone.
Back in 1997, Firewire was going to be the connector everywhere in PCs, in and out. IDE, SCSI, external -all 1394b. Even laptop docks
But then apple demanded $1 per port, which would mean $5-$10 per PC, plus something for every peripheral.
The result: USB2.0. That's right: USB2 came into existence primarily because of Apple's pricing strategy for 1394 ports.
So it is kind of ironic that they are not shipping firewire on ipods to better serve the PC market. If they hadnt got greedy, there might not be a USB2.
Apple invented FireWire. They can do what they want with it, and they can consider it a bonus that most of the industry (At least with motherboards) have accepted it as a standardized port. I find FireWire to be more reliable than USB, and just generally cooler. Plus there isn't any confusion on whether to have a 2.0 device plugged in to a 1.1 port!
...you'd want fire-wire.
If you look at the information over the last couple of days;
- Apple has started to push the colour iPodPhoto
- iPodPhoto is soon to have support to hook in directly with digital cameras
- Apple release little shiny box (mini mac), that sits nicely beside your tv
- Apple is reported to be looking to buy tvio
The next logical step is an iPodVideo, with tvio as a main part of iVideo, just like iTunes & iPhoto are the hook into iPod & iPodPhoto. Your tvio box is squeezed into the next mini, and with just some movie decoding / playing hardware you've got yourself a little iPod that syncs up with your mini, and allows you to watch last night's shows on the way to work.
Everyone that I know who into video editing uses firewire for speed (ok also the daisy chain ablity also cool). For an iPodVideo I'd want super fast firewire thanks very much.
Wow. 38. That's impressive. That's really impressive.
There's no way I could work up the cash to buy a number that low off eBay.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Substitute "400K floppy disk" for "DVD" in the above post, and you have pretty much captured the feel of working with the original one-floppy-only Macintosh in 1984.
Dictionaries can also be purchased separately.
-Major Kusanagi, Section 9
In that context; yes, his comment sounds about right.
USB2 was Intel's bus of choice from the get-go. They pushed the standard hard to chipset/mobo manufacturers. Why? Firewire controllers have much more integrated logic, aleviating much of the io overhead from the CPU. USB controllers rely on the CPU to a much greater extent to sheperd the data to and fro. Which standard do you think a CPU maker would promote?
Microsoft will halt operating systems development because Longhorn is taking too long.
Apple's Board of Directors will fire Steve Jobs because no one made any noise about his 50th birthday.
The open source community is giving up because it seems like every shop is using C#/.NET.
return;
I would have to disagree like everyone else about mac backing away from FireWire. The reason they are more than likely just going to be shipping USB with the iPod, is because most of the people that are purchasing the iPod have PC's. As most of you PC users know, generally PC's dont come with FireWire. And all Mac users know that every Mac you buy comes with FireWire. So they just decided to not waste the money for the FireWire cable, when most people aren't even using it, because in order to use it on their PC, they would need to install a FireWire PCI card. Why waste the money when you already have USB? And why would Mac waste the money producing the FireWire cables, when they're not even being used? It saves them money (maybe only a few cents, but that few cents adds up). But as for removing FireWire ports from Macs, I don't ever see that happening.
I know that you can hook two firewire camcorders together and copy a video from one to the other. Can you hook two ipods together and swap (non-DRM) songs?
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
I've an idea!
Ditch the Flakey, unreliable USB2.0 cable and bundle a free PCI Firewire Card with the iPod.
I dislike USB 2.0. I've had two PC's with dodgy Chipsets, which resulted in Schizophrenic USB Ports, unable to decide whether to work at 480Mb/s or 12Mb/s. I've had USB 2.0 Hubs which are incompatible with 1Mb/s USB 1.1 Mice.
USB 2.0 is just a Supercharged Hyundai Excel Engine. It may have just as much power as a stock V6, but is unreliable and unpredictable. FireWire is the Ecotec V6, reliable, but still powerful enough for most people. Firewire 800 is the Supercharged Ecotec V6.
And Mac's still don't amount to a significant percentage of the market.
1. Apple just had the highest-revenue, highest-net profit quarterly results in the history of the company. They have extraordinary cash flow, profitable margins, low debt, and have a cultural appeal (the "it" factor) that no other PC manufacturer in the world can claim... nor Microsoft.
2. Porsche, Lamborghini, Maybach Manufaktur, McLaren, Ferrari, Rolls Royce, Bentley, Aston Martin, Rolex, Vacheron Constantin, Patek Phillipe, Longines, Kate Spade, Miller & Kreisel, etc. each don't amount to a "significant percentage" of their respective markets... but I doubt their employees and executives are complaining.
Lastly... as for the actual allegation regarding firewire: Apple is introducing the H.264 codec with Quicktime 7, which will be a key technology in High Definition DVD authoring. They also pioneered the DVCPRO HD firewire protocol with Panasonic. Apple also is the first software manufacturer to provide HDV-spec support. HDV is the new MPEG-2 compressed HD format that will, of course, utilize firewire for transport to editing suites like Final Cut Express HD and Final Cut Pro HD.
I don't see Apple's executive management complaining about the extremely desirable status they've positioned the brand into, or the extraordinarily profitable economy of scale in which they comfortably reside, and it's clear that they aren't backing away from firewire... end of discussion.
Now when writing your next email, you can feel like a disk jockey:
You got me thinking... How cool would it be to have a desktop click wheel? It could even be shaped like a little turntable with an LP. Not sure how the functionality would be mapped to the Finder interface, but it'd look cool.
One man's -1 Flamebait is another man's +5 Funny.
as much as I hate proprietary cables, there isn't enough space for standard cables (and then you'd need two ports, blah blah blah)
Only if both You and Me had the patience and strength to transmit and transcode all those Zero's and One's reliably.
If You're trying to transmit the bits and some bugger keeps interrupting you saying "can you move my cursor to her" (using a USB mouse), either you're going to get pissed off, or I'm going to get bored, and errors will be introduced.
Although we're both Theoretically supposed to not get pissed off, or bored, one or both of us not being 100% in Specifications, will mean that bits will be dropped, or incorrectly transcoded.
flame bait? come on now...it's the truth!!!
Hell froze over when Itunes came out for Windows. Because of that the Ipod market must have blown up stupendously on the PC side. Since PCs don't usually have Firewire, and Apple had to get its cost down, rather than ship 2 wires they got rid of one cable and kept the lowest common denominator, USB. We should keep in mind that these Ipods still have firewire connectabilty, they just don't have the wire. In summation, when hell froze over, the firewire cable froze with it:) CD
I always wonder about things like this. Example: Printers no longer come with USB cables. USB cables displayed right next to the printers cost at least $20.00 and sometimes more than $30.00. This seems like a tacit agreement between an "HP" and a "Best Buy" to let "Best Buy" (put in quotes to merely make examples of printer manufacturers and retailers) make their profit on the printer CABLE rather than the traditionally extremely low margin printer (Notice I did not say printer CARTRIDGES which they make a HUUUUGE margin on).
One of the things that has kept me from buying an iPod is the ridiculous price of its accessories. An Apple iPod mini Armband costs *29.00*. Yesterday my dad bought a little armband mounted FM radio from Best Buy for $21.00. Do the math.
Zero mice have an arbitrary number of buttons.
- a set theorist.