From: Steven Fisher on
In article <LTbpn.43244$sx5.42367(a)newsfe16.iad>,
"OP" <Otto.Philips(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

> Not even for something "magical" and "revolutionary"?

I've racked my brain, but I can't think of a single reason I'd ever want
OR need firewire on an iPad.


Steve
From: nospam on
In article <slrnhqant1.1g29.g.kreme(a)cerebus.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme(a)gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> I wish they'd never moved the iPods off Firewire. My 30GB Firewire ipod
> syncs 20GB of songs much faster than my 40GB USB2 iPod syncs the same
> 20GB of songs.

write speed of flash is the bottleneck, not firewire/usb.

> Yeah yeah, I know they did it for the windoze lusers, but I don't have
> to *like* it.

no, they did it because pixo dropped firewire from their chipset in the
older ipods and apple would have had to add it back and there was not a
good reason to bother. usb is everywhere and is just as good (in this
case).
From: Steve Hix on
In article <200320101611517802%rag(a)nospam.techline.com>,
"Mr. Strat" <rag(a)nospam.techline.com> wrote:

> In article <LTbpn.43244$sx5.42367(a)newsfe16.iad>, OP
> <Otto.Philips(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > "sbt" <dogbreath(a)chaseabone.com.invalid> wrote in message
> > news:200320101508101764%dogbreath(a)chaseabone.com.invalid...
> > > In article <kqbpn.43237$sx5.6395(a)newsfe16.iad>, OP
> > > <Otto.Philips(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I guess Steve Jobs thinks USB is better today.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > Probably for the things it is meant to support...
> > >
> > > Firewire is preferable for tape-driven video cameras (not an input
> > > device for the iPad because it's not meant for editing video), for
> > > external hard-drives (also not an iPad accessory), and external DVD
> > > burners (also not an iPad need).
> > >
> > > Why include another port at an additional cost in space and power
> > > consumption that won't be useful?
> >
> > Not even for something "magical" and "revolutionary"? The only thing we
> > see
> > are the features it lacks, and nothing "revolutionary". And it has a 25
> > watt
> > hour battery!
>
> Then don't buy one.

OP isn't interested in buying anything, just trolling.
From: OP on

"Lewis" <g.kreme(a)gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote in message
news:slrnhqave1.1voi.g.kreme(a)cerebus.local...
> In message <200320101658024580%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>
> nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> In article <slrnhqant1.1g29.g.kreme(a)cerebus.local>, Lewis
>> <g.kreme(a)gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>>> I wish they'd never moved the iPods off Firewire. My 30GB Firewire ipod
>>> syncs 20GB of songs much faster than my 40GB USB2 iPod syncs the same
>>> 20GB of songs.
>
>> write speed of flash is the bottleneck, not firewire/usb.
>
> Both my ipods are HD based.`
>
>>> Yeah yeah, I know they did it for the windoze lusers, but I don't have
>>> to *like* it.
>
>> no, they did it because pixo dropped firewire from their chipset in the
>> older ipods and apple would have had to add it back and there was not a
>> good reason to bother. usb is everywhere and is just as good (in this
>> case).
>
> If by 'just as good' you mean 'significantly slower'

Hard for you to understand plain English?


From: Steven Fisher on
In article <slrnhqant1.1g29.g.kreme(a)cerebus.local>,
Lewis <g.kreme(a)gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> I wish they'd never moved the iPods off Firewire. My 30GB Firewire ipod
> syncs 20GB of songs much faster than my 40GB USB2 iPod syncs the same
> 20GB of songs.

My unibody MacBook doesn't even have firewire. And for something as rare
as a full library sync, it doesn't matter anyway: I'll never be sitting
there waiting for it to complete.

We're not talking an exponential change, we're talking (at most) a few
percentage points. You can make something so much faster that it's like
a new thing, but Firewire vs. USB 2 for an iPhone/iPod/iPad sync isn't a
big enough difference to have that effect.

For a backup drive or something, sure, it makes a difference. Not a big
one, but...


Steve