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.

Comments

Backing Away?

[Oculus Habent]

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.

Re:Backing Away?

[flink]

"It's more cost efficient to ship with one cable rather than two, and USB is more broadly supported on both platforms."

Except this is crap. When I bought my 40GB 3G iPod, it came with only a Firewire cable. At the time, I had a PC with only USB, so I went to the Apple store and bought a cable that has both USB and Firewire connectors. For $20! You could even plug the USB part into the PC and the Firewire into the AC adaptor and you could sync and charge at the same time.

Why doesn't Apple just ship all iPods with this cable and make everyone happy?

Re:Backing Away?

[bth]

Sounds to me like "market segmentation" in corporate buzzspeak. Who buys shuffles and IPOD minis? Are they mainly Windows users, users of older Macs (who cannot use USB), or users of newer Macs (who can use USB)? If most are Windows users and new Mac users (and you are trying to cut costs), then you pick USB as the default cable.

This isn't the Apple of old

[Infonaut]

Apple is trying to save money and drop prices at the same time.

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.

Re:This isn't the Apple of old

[Cylix]

It's not like firewire is going away.

At work we have about 15 devices that support firewire and that doesn't count any computers with firewire support.

Mostly, DV Decks, Sony Camcorders, and even a portable drive or two.

Now, I don't particularly love firewire, but it does serve as a cost effective means to get video between our high end equipment and lower end editing computers.

My only annoyance is there is a real lack of deck to deck communication and that in itself is probably the fault of the manufacturers. (varies wildly). I do remember the praises that firewire intelligent devices wouldn't necessarily require a host computer to work with each other. (I believe there are sony dv decks that do this though)

In summary, most of the editing and video stuff is already litered with IEEE1394 interfaces... I'm sure it will die just as soon as beta goes away.

While I normally despie "I call BS" posts ...

[FreeUser]

... I have to agree with you wholeheartedly.

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 ... I'm beginning to think this site is dead and we just don't know it yet.

Anyone know of any decent competitors out there?

Can you boot from the iPod now?

[beathyate]

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?

Apple killed firewire with their $ fees

[steve_l]

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.

Don't forget the other half of that equasion.

[LaminatorX]

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?

Re:Don't forget the other half of that equasion.

[steve_l]

I seem to recall 1394 on the roadmap for Intel's southhubs bak in 1997 - I was working at a bay area PC vendor at the time, so we used to get all the NDA covered books. Firewire would have brought in data fast, which would have generated CPU load for things like DVI editing, which would have generated CPU demand. Intel thrive on CPU demand, above all else.

Where USB is Intel-centric is in the fact that it is hub and spoke, not P2P. There always needs to be a hub in the connection, which is where the PC fits in. 1394 lets you do fun things like hook up two devices and share data, no pc inside.

If 1394b had also taken off in the consumer space, my back-of-TV infrastructure would not be the mess of SCART, SVHS, Analog and SPDIF cabling that I'm scared of. But either apple or the MPAA got in the way; there is only one 1394 port on the DVD-R, and it is input only. We'll have to wait for gigabit ethernet to become common on home AV kit for that universal home network to become real.

Incidentally,

1. WinXP lets you run TCP over firewire at about 30 MBps (for a 100 or 200 mbit card)

2. WinXp does not support any firewire cards built on chipsets that have promiscuous mode. PCs dont ship with firewire cards that enable sniffing, even with other operating systems installed. that really sucks. I do have some of the older cards around, for just such emergencies.