Does anyone else think it's strange that Apple is not pushing this technology more than it is? Only 1 port, and only on the PM's and the 17" ALBook. FW400 and FW800 are backwards compatiable, so why do they still include FW400? I know it's a different connector, but just include two FW800 to FW 400 converters for the time being. I'm sure it's going to take very little time for 3rd party companies to release FW800 products, I think Lacie might even already have something out, or soon. What's everyone's thought? Two FW800 ports would certainly be cheaper than one FW800 port and two FW400 ports, or atleast the same price.
Fw 800 ... ?
- Thread starter bjurusik
- Start date
As Apple says, FW800 is more Pro use, and 400 is fine for consumer grade models, which is what the iMac is. I think you will see it down the road in consumer versions, but to keep the price low, I think I could live without it. I'd like to see (2) ports, but you can chain then up, so no biggy.
jeb1138
Carioca
Yeah I thought it was weird that they didn't include it on the new iMacs. Like someone else here said, seems to suggest that there won't be a FW800 iPod coming after all. But then again, the iPod HD's probably couldn't dish out more than FW400 could take, could they?
Maybe this is a way for Apple to try to make sure that their pro customers go for the pro machines instead of opting for an iMac or iBook. I'm sure that once harddrives greatly surpass FW400's capabilities Apple will include it everywhere. FW RAID definitely needs FW800, but consumer-level machines probably won't be utilizing RAID.
I wish Apple would try to turn FW800 into a end-all solution though. TCP/IP over FW800 (with its longer cable lengths than FW400) could let FW carry most of the wired signals you could want right now -- USB 2, FW400 & Ethernet. Then bluetooth for ex-USB 1 peripherals. I guess Apple must have other things up its sleeves for FW800 though. Maybe they don't want to make things incompatible with the PC world or something.
Maybe this is a way for Apple to try to make sure that their pro customers go for the pro machines instead of opting for an iMac or iBook. I'm sure that once harddrives greatly surpass FW400's capabilities Apple will include it everywhere. FW RAID definitely needs FW800, but consumer-level machines probably won't be utilizing RAID.
I wish Apple would try to turn FW800 into a end-all solution though. TCP/IP over FW800 (with its longer cable lengths than FW400) could let FW carry most of the wired signals you could want right now -- USB 2, FW400 & Ethernet. Then bluetooth for ex-USB 1 peripherals. I guess Apple must have other things up its sleeves for FW800 though. Maybe they don't want to make things incompatible with the PC world or something.
stealth
Banned
guys why would u need a Fw800 iPOD> my firewire 400 iPOD is very fast.
and even if a firewire 800 ipod comes out. im sure that can be converted to 400 witha cable for iMac users
as for FW800 products from 3rd party companiesl; i thought i read somewhere that hard disks for example using FW800 will soon be released. am i wrong?
and even if a firewire 800 ipod comes out. im sure that can be converted to 400 witha cable for iMac users
as for FW800 products from 3rd party companiesl; i thought i read somewhere that hard disks for example using FW800 will soon be released. am i wrong?
Maybe it's just me, but saying "FW800 is more for pros than for consumers" to me is the same as saying USB 2.0 is more for pros. So as USB 2.0 catches up to FW400, consumer Macs lose the edge over PCs in that category. I doubt it costs that much more to include FW800. Someone said FW800 devices will be expensive. It's true, they will stay expensive if companies don't include FW800 into the design. The more you release FW800, the more people that buy FW800 equipped computers, the lower the price or devices.
Well, to really take advantage of FW800, you basically need a SET of harddrives. That sounds pro enough to me.
What's up, isn't FW400 cool enough any longer, just because there's FW800 on the PowerMacs? Well, then buy a PowerMac. That's maybe even the main reason for the difference between iMacs and PowerMacs. If you _want_ the more advanced features, you want a pro Mac.
What's up, isn't FW400 cool enough any longer, just because there's FW800 on the PowerMacs? Well, then buy a PowerMac. That's maybe even the main reason for the difference between iMacs and PowerMacs. If you _want_ the more advanced features, you want a pro Mac.
That's what I mean however. For a technology to take off, it must be implemented. Only 2 computers incorporate FW800. I don't know, I just think it's kind of redundant to include 2 FW400 and 1 FW800 ... and on the iMacs none at all. So people that buy an iMac today 6 months from now can see updates with FW800 which had been out since now. I know that upgrading is the name of the game, but ... Apple releases the new iMacs with Airport Extreme, a technology not even fully finalized. That's me 2 cents.
jeb1138
Carioca
I think the problem is that Apple doesn't have any consumer-level applications ready (and won't for some months or more at least) that can take advantage of FW800. I doubt that any 1.8" harddrive is going to be able to saturate FW400's bus, so iPod's can't really use it as far as I can tell.
There are some really cool uses for FW800 already, but most would only be used at the pro level: RAID, multiple non-RAID external harddrives being used simultaneously, long cable lengths, computer-to-computer data transfer, replacing fiber channel, etc. So like fryke said, if you want it for pro purposes you'll get a pro mac. Putting it on an iMac would just hike the price up with no real benefits.
Hopefully harddrives will get faster quickly and hopefully Apple will eventually give us some really cool digital lifestyle devices that do take advantage of FW800 -- I can think of a lot of possible and very cool consumer-level applications.
There are some really cool uses for FW800 already, but most would only be used at the pro level: RAID, multiple non-RAID external harddrives being used simultaneously, long cable lengths, computer-to-computer data transfer, replacing fiber channel, etc. So like fryke said, if you want it for pro purposes you'll get a pro mac. Putting it on an iMac would just hike the price up with no real benefits.
Hopefully harddrives will get faster quickly and hopefully Apple will eventually give us some really cool digital lifestyle devices that do take advantage of FW800 -- I can think of a lot of possible and very cool consumer-level applications.