Forums | MacLife

TheMouthOfSauron · 2005-10-18 12:12 pm

Some1 wrote:
Still, IMO firewire is better than USB, it carries more current...

I think thats a point that is often overlooked in Firewire vs. USB debates. I can run two bus-powered hard drives on one FW port, USB won't even power one.

mediocresau · 2005-10-18 12:12 pm

The thing that hits me the hardest is knowing that although iPods started the portable FireWire HD revolution, it ended with assimilation into the USB 2 revolution.

And what kills me is that there was no real talk about how the end of the era happened. Jobs barely made mention that "by the way, iPods no longer use FireWire."

That being said, the lack of a FireWire OPTION is the hardest hit. Because even when iPods were still FireWire they gave the OPTION of USB 2.

No option. Com'on Jobs, how wrong is FireWire? sad

macnuke · 2005-10-18 2:18 pm

as said before, mass market.. one for all and that crap.
the nano and shuffle require USB.
the Firewire cable can be bought from Apple for 19.95 US bucks and will operate just fine on any iPod other than the two mentioned.
it's just crappy they don't include it with a mini and up iPod.
yes, even the new vPod can use the firewire.

mediocresau · 2005-10-18 3:36 pm

macnuke wrote:
yes, even the new vPod can use the firewire.

Wait, are you sure? To sync with my Mac? Are you serious? Sorry for sounding doubtful, but I was under the impression that the new iPod only syncs via USB 2.0 and 1.1. confused

macnuke · 2005-10-18 5:33 pm

mediocresau wrote:
macnuke wrote:
yes, even the new vPod can use the firewire.
Wait, are you sure? To sync with my Mac? Are you serious? Sorry for sounding doubtful, but I was under the impression that the new iPod only syncs via USB 2.0 and 1.1.

you are right.
applestore updated and stated the firewire cable works for listed iPods... there was no list when I posted that, other than it worked on all iPods except the Nano and Shuffle.
current updated page lists the Mini thru the Color.
so it seems the color is as high as it goes.

bummer

MacPhyle · 2005-10-27 1:06 am

macnuke wrote:
mediocresau wrote:
macnuke wrote:
yes, even the new vPod can use the firewire.
Wait, are you sure? To sync with my Mac? Are you serious? Sorry for sounding doubtful, but I was under the impression that the new iPod only syncs via USB 2.0 and 1.1.
you are right.
applestore updated and stated the firewire cable works for listed iPods... there was no list when I posted that, other than it worked on all iPods except the Nano and Shuffle.
current updated page lists the Mini thru the Color.
so it seems the color is as high as it goes.

bummer

hmm yes, it does work --- you can sync, but you can't charge. That's what they mean by firewire incompatibility.

Phydeaux · 2005-10-27 1:16 am

MacPhyle wrote:
macnuke wrote:
mediocresau wrote:

Wait, are you sure? To sync with my Mac? Are you serious? Sorry for sounding doubtful, but I was under the impression that the new iPod only syncs via USB 2.0 and 1.1.
you are right.
applestore updated and stated the firewire cable works for listed iPods... there was no list when I posted that, other than it worked on all iPods except the Nano and Shuffle.
current updated page lists the Mini thru the Color.
so it seems the color is as high as it goes.

bummer
yes, it does work --- you can sync, but you can't charge. That's what they mean by firewire incompatibility.

Uh, reverse that.

SchmoBurger · 2005-10-27 1:17 am

WOOAAAAHH!!! this thread has lost me big time now! eek

So which one of these is true?

A) Firewire doesn't work full stop.

B) Firewire can be used to CHARGE, but not sync.

C) Firewire can be used to SYNC, but not charge.

or

D) Firewire can be used to charge AND sync.

I can't make heads or tails now! confused

Phydeaux · 2005-10-27 1:19 am

From everything that I've seen and what's been told to me, correct answer is "B".

SchmoBurger · 2005-10-27 1:27 am

THANK YOU FIDO!!! love

A definite sounding answer!!!

And if ANYONE DARES challenge it, I swear I'll flip out and kill someone!!! twisted

mahakali · 2005-10-27 1:35 am

D!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Try to do search on "Apple iPod Dock Connector to FireWire Cable" at apple store and read the description.

mahakali · 2005-10-27 1:38 am

But it still makes me sad. sad

SchmoBurger · 2005-10-27 1:38 am

AAARGH!!! dagnammit! bang

jb · 2005-10-27 1:54 am

iBubba wrote:
I'm thinking if the worst thing you have to bitch about is iPods going USB 2.0 with no FireWire, then you really need to find something better to do with your energies.

Nobody said this was the worst thing they had to bitch about.
You're assuming people only bitch about the worst element of their lives.
And rather than say that's a bad thing as you did, I'd say that having the worst facet of my life being an iPod's connectivity would be a good thing.

MacPhyle · 2005-10-27 2:32 am

Phydeaux wrote:
MacPhyle wrote:
macnuke wrote:

you are right.
applestore updated and stated the firewire cable works for listed iPods... there was no list when I posted that, other than it worked on all iPods except the Nano and Shuffle.
current updated page lists the Mini thru the Color.
so it seems the color is as high as it goes.

bummer
yes, it does work --- you can sync, but you can't charge. That's what they mean by firewire incompatibility.
Uh, reverse that.

I just realized... yep, you're right. blush

nannyandnutro · 2005-10-27 7:34 am

Everyone knows that FireWire causes cancer. Sheesh.

imikus55 · 2005-10-28 2:30 am

It's all about the mulah. In this case macnuke is right on the money. As much as I like firewire, myself and other pro-firewire users are a minority. Even if you include the zillions of firewire ipods sold, we are still a minority. If I had to guesstimate, somebody at Apple HQ saw a graph of the ratios of firewire ipods being sold to the number of USB 2.0 computers being produced and sold and it was probably a very one-sided chart. To be honest I don't think they wanted to exclude firewire but somewhere along the line when they were designing the new ipod a decision had to be made. Firewire may have been the only hurdle in keeping the new ipod from being that thin. Because Apple is apparently the only computer company that wants to innovate anything anymore. The design challenges coupled with the sales figures is what probably killed off firewire for the ipod. I have know idea what it takes to make a ipod firewire capable but it seems logical. That's the only way I can see why Apple changed what is essentially the worlds best selling external storage device.

Last edited by imikus55 (2005-10-28 2:31 am)

Bilbo Baggins · 2005-12-29 2:14 pm

iBubba wrote:
I'm thinking if the worst thing you have to bitch about is iPods going USB 2.0 with no FireWire, then you really need to find something better to do with your energies.

You may be right... but me thinks you misses bigger points
1.perhaps meaning the end, soon, of
Firewire support altogether (think about all those
external drives)
(plus, some believe Firewire is hardly supported now...only an afterthought...think UrgentThird Party Firmware updates)

2.google the net... perhaps Macs are on their phase out.
(don't laugh)
(o.k. giggle a little bit but don't get too complacent)

Apple the iPod Company (AiPCo) on the NASDAQ

mahakali · 2005-12-29 2:37 pm

nannyandnutro wrote:
Everyone knows that FireWire causes cancer. Sheesh.

Only if you smoke it!

SonicSamurai · 2005-12-29 4:02 pm

Im still not sold that FW is better that USB2.
Also, I think we'll all just have to move on. Classic is gone and now FireWire is, too.

Yeah, I said it!

mahakali · 2005-12-29 4:09 pm

First of all: http://www.barefeats.com/usb2.html

Secondly, FW is daisy-cahinable (up to 63 devices, iirc).

mahakali · 2005-12-29 4:14 pm

Also, USB2 is 'shared', meaning if you have 4 devices connected via a hub, the speed (�480 Mbps) will be shared among those devices. Using FW, all devices will get �400 Mbps.

XYZ · 2005-12-30 3:04 am

It was done purely to appeal to the PC market

Not really. The dual-port models appeal to the "PC market" because they support USB 2. But, the reality is that FireWire is pretty common in the "PC Market", especially among enthusiasts who have better systems than a Dell Dimension. Even Dell has FireWire, although the company has a history of screwing customers with ridiculous prices for FireWire cards. Many "PC" motherboards have FireWire built-in, and custom cases like Lian Li have FireWire ports on the front of the case. The Shuttle I built has two rear FireWire ports and one on the front. They're all bus-powered. The camera I got, a Sigma SD-9, is a FireWire model. You can get a FireWire PCI card for less than $10.00.

The reason Apple switched to USB-2 exclusively is likely a combination of the Intel deal and cost-cutting. This is reminiscent of the Microsoft deal. In exchange for Office development and a little bit of money, Mac users were given IE as the default browser. Now, for the Intel deal, FireWire is being displaced like Netscape was.

Last edited by XYZ (2005-12-30 3:05 am)

Orion · 2005-12-30 7:14 am

Is there some sort of adapter that would allow you to plug the USB cable into it and then a Firewire cable from it to your computer? Could something be made to do that? Or are the two different enough to make that impossible? There are SCSI to Firewire adapters, so what about a USB 2.0 to Firewire adapter? shrug

yilb · 2006-06-05 2:36 am

Nonsense.
My gen 2 ipod has firewire simplex. no dock no weird plug, just a good old firewire hole.
Why this vanished is, um, stupid?
A rip to make people buy more cables?
I say to the inferno with it.
Let the windoze fools buy a firewire card.
USB2 cause we wouldn't figure out how to use something that was refered to by a word rather than letters.
It would be different if USB2 was better. It simply isn't.

Forums | MacLife

#26 2005-10-18 12:12 pm

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

Some1 wrote:

#27 2005-10-18 12:12 pm

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#28 2005-10-18 2:18 pm

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#29 2005-10-18 3:36 pm

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

macnuke wrote:

#30 2005-10-18 5:33 pm

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

mediocresau wrote:

macnuke wrote:

#31 2005-10-27 1:06 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

macnuke wrote:

mediocresau wrote:

macnuke wrote:

#32 2005-10-27 1:16 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

MacPhyle wrote:

macnuke wrote:

mediocresau wrote:

#33 2005-10-27 1:17 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#34 2005-10-27 1:19 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#35 2005-10-27 1:27 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#36 2005-10-27 1:35 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#37 2005-10-27 1:38 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#38 2005-10-27 1:38 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#39 2005-10-27 1:54 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

iBubba wrote:

#40 2005-10-27 2:32 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

Phydeaux wrote:

MacPhyle wrote:

macnuke wrote:

#41 2005-10-27 7:34 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#42 2005-10-28 2:30 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#43 2005-12-29 2:14 pm

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

iBubba wrote:

#44 2005-12-29 2:37 pm

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

nannyandnutro wrote:

#45 2005-12-29 4:02 pm

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#46 2005-12-29 4:09 pm

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#47 2005-12-29 4:14 pm

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#48 2005-12-30 3:04 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#49 2005-12-30 7:14 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

#50 2006-06-05 2:36 am

Re: What is so wrong with FireWire, Steve Jobs?

Board footer