Yeah that one looks nice but the problem is it just doesn't have all the features the new ones do.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPod Who Wants FireWire Again?
- Thread starter Techguy172
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Firewire Support was dropped with the 5G and the nano. All 4G and photos have Firewire support.
TEG
Here's the minimum requirements chart for all ipods of all time. So you can see exactly which models did and did not support firewire syncing.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=60971
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=60971
Thanks that was pretty helpful, but actually it seems that apple supported it for quite a while and while they don't do syncing now they still charge. But it couldn't be that hard to allow it sync could it they must just have to add an additional chip.
You're welcome.
Well yes, all it would mainly require is an additional chip, but you make it sound like there's no monetary or functional cost to doing that. Adding 1 extra firewire chip would raise the cost by a significant degree as firewire controller chips are reputed to be, as well as increase the size of the device since they are reportedly quite large relatively, and it might shorten battery life and increase heat output, and it would lead to more hardware failures that are inherently increased with any bit of extra complexity added, etc.
So adding just 1 firewire controller chip in addition to the existing USB controller chip would have significant downsides.
I was looking for this page yesterday (I remembered it from someplace and liked how it worked at a glance), but I gave up when I couldn't find it and ended up settling for comparing iPod specs individually on EveryMac.com
Thanks for posting it! I'll bookmark it this time...
I wish Apple could find a way to put the Firewire controller chips inside a iPod dock connector cable. That way if you want the Firewire connection, it's a simple upgrade while keeping costs down for the majority of iPod users.
Bootable
Many people like to enable disk mode (me included) and use the ipod as a portable drive this is when daily large transfers shine in FW. Otherwise the ipod is also bootable and you can run your maintenance etc from it. Does Leopard now allow USB 2 drives as start up disks ? Anyhow i'm sure a lot of the PC users now have macs so it could be time to offer it as an option at least after all that was the idea of the halo effect ? WE ALL NEED SOME FIREWIRE GOODNESS
Many people like to enable disk mode (me included) and use the ipod as a portable drive this is when daily large transfers shine in FW. Otherwise the ipod is also bootable and you can run your maintenance etc from it. Does Leopard now allow USB 2 drives as start up disks ? Anyhow i'm sure a lot of the PC users now have macs so it could be time to offer it as an option at least after all that was the idea of the halo effect ? WE ALL NEED SOME FIREWIRE GOODNESS
You're welcome.
Well yes, all it would mainly require is an additional chip, but you make it sound like there's no monetary or functional cost to doing that. Adding 1 extra firewire chip would raise the cost by a significant degree as firewire controller chips are reputed to be, as well as increase the size of the device since they are reportedly quite large relatively, and it might shorten battery life and increase heat output, and it would lead to more hardware failures that are inherently increased with any bit of extra complexity added, etc.
So adding just 1 firewire controller chip in addition to the existing USB controller chip would have significant downsides.
I realize there could be problems but was their lot's of problems with the 4th gen and FireWire issues? I wouldn't care if it was thicker or it shortened battery life I mean look at how thin the classic is now and look at how much battery life it gets. Even if it did take a hit it wouldn't matter as it already is fantastic in both areas. The Price also isn't a big deal to me either what if the 160GB got it?
The Thing is FireWire seems to be making more and more sense with all the digital content that the iTunes store is getting Movies TV shows HD Podcasts those are all large files movies being the largest at over 1GB. Some people say they don't mind waiting for one of two things but what happens when you decide to get a whole bunch? Then it becomes quite slow. Apple could well in the tech world if people knew it had FireWire.
Hmm... why would anyone want firewire, it's slower than USB...
USB 2.0 480MBit/s
vs
Firewire 400MBit/s
Unless you put in Firewire 800 into the iPod, then of course it would be faster, but only if you have a Mac (or PC) with FW 800.
Congrats on not actually having any idea what you're talking about. Hope that works out for you.
iChat already supports USB cameras that conform to the UVC (USB Video Class) specification, like the Xbox 360 Live Vision camera.
Hmm... why would anyone want firewire, it's slower than USB...
USB 2.0 480MBit/s
vs
Firewire 400MBit/s
Unless you put in Firewire 800 into the iPod, then of course it would be faster, but only if you have a Mac (or PC) with FW 800.
Try again. FW 400 can sustain close to 400. USB 2.0 can only burst to 280 and sustains significantly less. Additionally, as other posters have pointed out the CPU impact of FW is drastically reduced compared to USB in general.
Might try knowing what you are talking about before rolling your eyes next time.
While Firewire may be superior, most people are not transferring large amounts of data on a regular basis. The first time you sync your iPod you may havce large amounts of data, which would benefit from Firewire, but on a daily basis you may be transferring an album or some podcast. Like it or not, USB is good enough for most people.
You are if you are transferring Movies, Video podcasts, etc. All of these things benefit from firewire. Firewire ports are also more likely to be open on your mac too. Seems like there alot of other devices competing for the USB ports...
I can understand why they left firewire out for cost reasons, but it was a nice to have firewire available as an option...
Well if it didn't mean additional cost/bulk then I'd be for it, otherwise I don't really care. I don't add that much music onto my iPod at once, and USB is fast enough for me. The only times FireWire might be preferable for me is when I get a new iPod, or if I want to completely wipe out the iPod and retransfer all my music.
I didn't think of that -- that's a very good point, and definitely true on my system. I regularly find myself juggling what's plugged into the USB ports.
I didn't think of that -- that's a very good point, and definitely true on my system. I regularly find myself juggling what's plugged into the USB ports.
While this may be true, this reason is one of those "excuse justifications", i.e. saying it's ok by trying to show why it's not that bad, even though the current solution to Firewire is inferior in just about every way.
But the real reason is obviously due to USB's smaller footprint, cost, and the more universal adoption of USB 2.0 by PC manufacturers.
I think its the main reason for the lack of FW.
If every PC (like every Mac) had FW, Apple would have never introduced USB to iPods...
Already happened in Tiger http://www.tuaw.com/2007/03/18/10-4-9-adds-usb-camera-support-for-ichat-xbox-camera-works/.
This thread is making me wonder if I should grab a Firewire cable on eBay for my iPod Color? But like people said already I basically transfer a few songs at a time, and USB 2 is fast enough for me.
Earlier in this thread it was noted that ipods would need to be thicker to house firewire. I am assuming this was only in relation to the first model ipod that had a dedicated direct firewire cable input.
All firewire ones previoulsy have had the dock connector, same input as usb etc, so I hardly see that was an issue.
I am currently debating what ipod to next get, as my 4th gen 20gb is no good for long term use and needs to be charged almost daily for regular use. I was surprised to learn that the 'classic' ones with their amount of space do not support FW anymore. Especially given that was the first key selling point Apple put out with why Ipods are revolutionary.
Kind of sucks. I don't think it's that difficult to imbed this. Sure you might want to only upload your music library once, but if you want to constantly change and upload movies, videos, televisions shows etc.... kind of a ****ing pain to wait so long.
Bring it back I say (knowing calls will likely go unanswered).
All firewire ones previoulsy have had the dock connector, same input as usb etc, so I hardly see that was an issue.
I am currently debating what ipod to next get, as my 4th gen 20gb is no good for long term use and needs to be charged almost daily for regular use. I was surprised to learn that the 'classic' ones with their amount of space do not support FW anymore. Especially given that was the first key selling point Apple put out with why Ipods are revolutionary.
Kind of sucks. I don't think it's that difficult to imbed this. Sure you might want to only upload your music library once, but if you want to constantly change and upload movies, videos, televisions shows etc.... kind of a ****ing pain to wait so long.
Bring it back I say (knowing calls will likely go unanswered).
To me it just seems to make more sense to have it now it would be a nice option. Especially with apple selling movies I mean when you rent a movie you want it fast so you also want it fast on your iPod and it would be extremely beneficial to add FireWire.
I would like firewire back just because it will save a USB port on my iMac. Between my keyboard, printer, external harddrive, iPod, and occasionally the camera, something always has to be unplugged. Not so with my firewire port. Nothing connected in it.