MOTUnation.com

I just checked what LowEndMac had to say, and they pretty much recommend to buy the older models at blowout, used, or refurbished. And after comparing specs between old/new MBP's and iMac's, I agree.

In fact, I think even a 15" Penryn MBP with two FW ports, 3 USB ports, and an ExpressCard slot, plus a matte vs. glossy screen, might be a very wise upgrade for those of us who haven't made the Intel leap yet, as it would also be quite serviceable for on-site session work even for people who eventually need a MacPro tower for the studio. This unfortunately cannot be said as easily of the recent MBP "upgrades".

I'm guessing $1100 for a 15" 2.4 GHz Penryn MBP vs. $1700 for the 17" model is worth the savings, as one can always add a larger monitor to the video port.

The move away from DVI towards DisplayCard (if I remember the new term correctly), seems to be stated as a universal goal and not specific to the notebook series. I guess the next MacPro updates will remove DVI then, and that the Apple Cinema line will be upgraded soon to match the new 24" notebook-only LED extender screen.

Firewire over ethernet? Hmmm maybe Apple will implement this with Snow Leo

http://www.powerpage.org/2008/10/apple_ ... opard.html

Hi All

I'm in the market for a new laptop, and am dismayed that there is no firewire on the models I'm looking at.
Much of the gear I have requires firewire.

I'm wondering if there are converters, either cords or hubs, that I can go out of the Macbook USB port and convert to firewire?

Or, out of the Mac Ethernet port and convert to firewire?

Anyone with experience here? Help!

Thanks,

dave

splenny wrote:Hi All

I'm in the market for a new laptop, and am dismayed that there is no firewire on the models I'm looking at.
Much of the gear I have requires firewire.

I'm wondering if there are converters, either cords or hubs, that I can go out of the Macbook USB port and convert to firewire?

Or, out of the Mac Ethernet port and convert to firewire?

Anyone with experience here? Help!

Thanks,

dave

The MacBook Pros have firewire and the white plastic MacBooks have firewire. It's just the new aluminum MacBooks that don't have it and I don't know of any adapters for them as of now.

ghobish wrote:

And, if you want to get FW 800 speed out of your Powerbook, you can't have anything FW 400 plugged into either the Powerbook or the card. You have to plug your FW 800 drive into the FW 800 port and daisy-chain your interface off a dual-interface drive (or use a FW 800 to 400 adapter cable after the drive).

That part is definitely true- if you mix FW400 and FW800 devices on the same bus performance on all devices will drop to FW400.

Not true. If you place the 400 devices at the end of the chain they will not interrupt the 800 devices from communicating at full speed unless one of the 400 devices has been given device control over the bus (which is unlikely is most cases with audio interfaces). You can read all about it in the firewire spec. I think I downloaded it from the Apple Developer site...but Google will be your friend here

I missed that comment the first time around, but as the incorrect statement was presented as a fact originally, I thought it worth chiming in to back up sdemott's rebuttal .

I always heard that the slower device would slow down the whole bus. Either way, I know that as soon as I stopped using firewire for drives and switched to eSata (only using FireWire for my interface) things progressively began to work smoother and smoother.

RecordingArts wrote:I always heard that the slower device would slow down the whole bus.

To an extent that *may* be true where two devices are sharing the same bus. This wouldn't necessarily contradict the idea of a 400 device slowing down an 800 device. It's based more on the common sense that when something is shared, there's less of it to go around (ie: the bus itself)

RecordingArts wrote: Either way, I know that as soon as I stopped using firewire for drives and switched to eSata (only using FireWire for my interface) things progressively began to work smoother and smoother.

Agreed on this end. While I'm quite keen to try out the new fw bus running at PCIe speeds on new towers (which won't be any time soon), I'd pretty much swore off fw for large VI projects. SATA and eSATAII performance is phenomenal.


OT:


Is that a G6120SSL in that photo?

Think if of it this way, when the FW400 device is active and sending/receiving data, it is going to be working at FW400 speeds. This is because the timing specifications for the FW400 device are not going to run at FW800 speeds, so in that sense, it is going to rob bandwidth for the FW800 devices. Granted, when the FW800 device has gone active, in it's time slices it can transfer data at faster speeds, it's still going to suffer only because of the slowness of the FW400 on the bus.

Frodo wrote:

RecordingArts wrote:I always heard that the slower device would slow down the whole bus.

To an extent that *may* be true where two devices are sharing the same bus. This wouldn't necessarily contradict the idea of a 400 device slowing down an 800 device. It's based more on the common sense that when something is shared, there's less of it to go around (ie: the bus itself)

RecordingArts wrote: Either way, I know that as soon as I stopped using firewire for drives and switched to eSata (only using FireWire for my interface) things progressively began to work smoother and smoother.

Agreed on this end. While I'm quite keen to try out the new fw bus running at PCIe speeds on new towers (which won't be any time soon), I'd pretty much swore off fw for large VI projects. SATA and eSATAII performance is phenomenal.


OT:

Is that a G6120SSL in that photo?

More OT: I wish It's my first hollow body, an inexpensive Ibanez Artcore. I have to say for the money I'm really happy with it, and it gave me a new appreciation for China I looked up the G6120SSL and that is a sweet puppy! Maybe someday <Grin>

No argument about eSATA being better than firewire, but the problem is that the new MBP's are either/or, when it comes to setups involving PoCo and a separate data drive and sample drive.

So if you have your sample libraries going via eSATA and your data drive via FW800, you're screwed when it comes to PoCo, which HAS to be on a separate FW port (and preferably on a separate FW bus) -- it CANNOT be daisy-chained.

Oh yeah, the RME Fireface 800 or equivalent interface will be daisy-chained from the data drive.

Can you daisy-chain eSATA drives? In other words, use an ExpressCard eSATA for both the data drive and the sample library drive?

I suppose in that case, one could live with waiting until mix and master time to use PoCo FW (or UAD-2 ExpressCard).

And certainly this is superior to the iMac option, or especially the Mac Mini option. But the previous MBP is still a better deal, and more flexible.

Just to add some confusion...I've always had my Poco Firewire daisy-chained through my 828mk2...never had a problem.Is there something that should be going wrong with this configuration? Am I missing out on some throughput or something?Thanks,Shaun

I don't know; I only went by TC Electronic's official word. As my first unit failed within a week of arriving and had to be replaced, I wasn't willing to take any chances after that. I had never daisy-chained the first unit either, but some of TC's official disclaimers on daisy-chaining lead one to believe that the device itself could fail and require repairs, if you daisy-chain with other firewire devices. See if you can track down their statement; I forget if it was in the little Powercore manual or at their website.

I stopped by an Apple store for about five minutes last night (all that I had time for on my way to rehearsal) and tried the new MBP's. I must say, the feel of the new keyboards is the most pleasant yet in a notebook computer. Easy to touch type, no accidental keystrokes, and no immediate signs of tension. I would have trouble adjusting to an all-in-one trackpad though, but of course one can hook up a mouse or other input device instead.

The screens, however, have way too much glare, and in my view are unusable. No matter the angle, it was impossible to minimise or eliminate glare.