With the latest iPods, Apple is no longer including a FireWire cable in the box. The music players will still work with FireWire, if a cord is purchased separately, but only a USB 2.0 cable comes with the device. What’s the problem, you ask? Well, Mac users who have machines that are less than a year or two old have Macs that do not have USB 2.0. They do have FireWire.
MDN reader “macnut222” has suggested an interesting solution to this issue in a thread to a related article:
What Apple should have done is put the FireWire+USB Combo cable in the iPod mini/photo’s box. It retails for $19 – the same price as the individual FW and USB cables. This way, Apple only has to provide one cable, but no one is left out.
Apple’s website features the cable:
Use an extra iPod Dock Connector to FireWire and USB 2.0 Cable for charging and syncing your iPod or iPod photo to your Mac or Windows PC. Compatible with iPod photo. Price – $19.00. The iPod Dock Connector to FireWire and USB 2.0 Cable offers up to 480Mbps data transfer for quickly loading an entire music library on iPod or iPod mini. Connect the FireWire cable up to the iPod or iPod mini power adapter to charge while syncing. Compatible with iPod with Click Wheel, iPod mini and iPod with Dock Connector.
MacDailyNews Take: Why isn’t this cable in the iPod boxes instead of just a USB 2.0 cable, Apple? You already have the cable. Are there margin issues? Does it cost a few pennies more per cable? Was this just an oversight, a tiny miscalculation? Wouldn’t this cable be a better solution for your Mac users? You do care about your Mac-using iPod owners, right, Apple?
If you want to switch iPod over to USB 2.0, that’s fine, but perhaps you should wait until the majority of Mac owners have realistically had a chance to acquire USB 2.0 capable Macs? After all, it was Apple that just recently started adding USB 2.0 to their Mac computer lines. We know Apple likes to move fast, but this “USB 2.0 included/pay if you want FireWire” move was made a bit too soon. Apple should put the combo cable in the boxes now and do the move to USB 2.0 only in 6-12 months, if that’s what they want to do. What could be the harm in that?
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple disrespects its own Mac users with iPod’s FireWire fiasco – February 24, 2005
Griffin debuts Dock400 FireWire cable for Apple iPods – February 24, 2005
Petition to Apple for iPod FireWire support posted online – February 23, 2005
Apple knifing its own FireWire baby by pushing USB 2.0 as iPod’s primary connectivity option – February 23, 2005
Twenty Benson,
It’s not the price that’s the issue. But you already knew that, you’re just ignoring it for some reason.
I have to say the FireWire cable just produces a better experience than the USB2. I’ve yet to have a USB2 cable hit its high transfer rate of 480Mbps, and a serious number of computers DON’T have USB2, which means those users are transferring files at insanely slow speeds, and asking questions in forums or complaining in their weblogs that iTunes/iPod combination isn’t as great as everyone says it is.
But on the Mac side, FireWire just makes more sense. It’s faster, more reliable, and has been available on most Macs for sometime. Mac users with 3rd generation iMacs have FireWire and USB slots, not USB2. So basically, if only a USB2 cable comes in the box, those users get to transfer files at 12Mbps. Sure that’s the way to treat your core audience. If its that big of deal to box both cables, then just go back to offering two different boxes, FireWire or USB.
I agree with more and more PC users using the iPod, USB will outsell FireWire by a large margin, but why relegate Mac users to second class citizens. This is Apple, we’re talking about, not Adobe or Macromedia.
I do agree with the person who said Apple would never ship the combo cable. I can’t see it happening, they’re practical but ugly, and distracting from the user experience. I’d rather go back to the select your box stage–do you want the box with USB2 or FireWire.
Your argument only makes sense if Apple has offered USB 2.0 on their machines for longer than 18 months.
This is the single largest problem with the Mac “faithful.” No timeframe is ever long enough to justify a move like Apple made with this silly cable, or with dropping floppy support, etc.
They’ve offered USB 2.0 for a year and a half. The Firewire cable (needed by the minority of iPod consumers) is a measley $20 extra. Every Mac manufactured today has USB 2.0 ports standard.
Apple isn’t oblighated to cater to everybody unwilling to upgrade their aging computer systems. That’s microsoft territory.
raise your hand if you have posted in more than two threads on this topic. I’ll go first.
rageous-
“aging” one year old emacs?
“Do you want the box with USB2 or FireWire?” The problem with that is that a lot of people (PC users mainly) have no idea which box to pick. They don’t know USB or FireWire from their arsehole. It opens up a whole can of worms where a Combo wire doesn’t. Only one plug will fit in the proper connector, USB or FireWire – even a Gateway user could figure it out.
hand
An 18 month old Mac can hardly be described as an “aging computer system.” Any Mac user knows this to be the case. I have 3, 4 and 5 year old Macs working very productively today. Apple went a bit to fast on this, even for Apple. Apple can make a mistake and be called on it, you know?
Peter….
Sum Yung Gai was making a joke….
not to be taken quite so seriously !!
Sometimes, it seems, that some people cant recognize sarcasm !
And, given the outcries resulting from this one issue… methinks a little retrospective sarcasm might be just what the doctor ordered !!
Dont worry fellow Mac heads…. His Steveness will make it right !!
Keep the faith !!
b –
that’s right. Apple needs to focus on making products that mesh well, first and foremost, for today and the future. Not yesterday. Yesterday must be the second consideration for Apple to remain innovative, competitive, and continually successful.
If Apple spent as much time worrying about one year old and older machinesn as some of you people, OS X would have gone the route of Longhorn. Consider that.
People complain that MDN is a fan site and then when they legitimately criticize Apple, people complain that they’re criticizing Apple. Guess what? Apple is wrong on this issue and MDN is right to point it out.
My Mac is not old. I should not have to pay Apple for proper connectivity when a Gateway owner gets connectivity free in the box. Period. And the price is meaningless to me, it’s the principle.
OK, I think the only way this argument is going to end is if Apple hurries up with its wireless capabilities. Maybe not as fast of a transfer rate, but a lot easier and no cables is a lot prettier.
If I was a billionaire like Steve Jobs, I’d probably be out of touch, too, and expect everyone to be able to buy a new Mac every 6 months in order to keep up with whatever connectivity standards they feel like using today. Watch it, Apple. We Mac users are watching how you respond to this issue and how you treat us in the future.
What good is having a Mac’s longevity if Apple’s going to diminish its value with stupid decisions?
But Mike – Apple hasn’t made a mistake – the company is simply removing a redundant bit of kit from the iPod package – redundant to 98% of its market. Where’s the mistake in that? I admire Apple – they’ve been running a very tight ship, cutting away all the wasteful fat and – unfortunately for you – a firewire cable in a box which sells in huge quantities to a market which doesn’t even know what Firewire is… is wasteful. Even more wasteful would be for Apple to package two boxed versions of its products. This is a healthy move by Apple.
My Mac is not old. I should not have to pay Apple for proper connectivity when a Gateway owner gets connectivity free in the box. Period. And the price is meaningless to me, it’s the principle.
Yes, but between Gateway and Apple, who now offers the broadest compatibility out of the box? Before yesterday, it was Gateway.
What good is having a Mac’s longevity if Apple’s going to diminish its value with stupid decisions?
Now there’s a suminabitchin’ good question!
rageous,
Apple had a transition period for OS X. And OS X 10.1 was released September 2001, the minimum requirement was a G3. Then the 3 year old original iMac (released August 1998 – 3 years earlier) satisfied the requirements.
Uh, it seems pretty obvious that Apple really should include a combo FireWire and USB 2.0 cable in every iPod box for the time being. At least include such a cable solution until an Apple Mac without USB 2.0 can actually realistically be considered somewhat “middle aged,” at the very least. I’m with MDN on this one. Apple could fix this easily, too.
This is a good thread. The best thread I’ve read on this subject. I came in here thinking, what’s the big deal about a $20 cable and realized that Apple has messed up a little bit here. Recent Mac buyers, Apple customers, are being left out by Apple. Where’s the sense in that?
“…Recent Mac buyers, Apple customers, are being left out by Apple.” – Ed
All “recent” Macs have USB 2.0. They are clearly not being left out.
recent mac buyers have USB 2.0
Apple customers aren’t ebing left out because FireWire connectivity is still available. If Apple dropped FireWire connectivity all together, I’d be with you folks 100%
The only place I do agree here is that you should have the option of which cable you want when buying online direct from Apple. Otherwise, I support Apple’s decision here and it was the right decision.
I guess it depends totally on your definition of “recent,” but doesn’t Apple tout the Mac’s longevity? So, what’s the value of a Mac’s longevity if Apple expects you to buy a new one every 18 or less months to “keep up?”
I await your answers with bated breath.
Apple doesn’t expect everyone to keep up with their purchases. Got a Mac with FireWire and no USB 2.0? Simply prefer FireWire? Buy the FireWire cable. You’re covered.
Apple has 2 choices here:
1) Make the majority of the iPod consumers, the people without FireWire, pay an additional $20 to downgrade their cable to make their iPod useable.
2) Make the minority of the iPod consumers, the people without USB 2.0, pay to upgrade their cable to make the iPod work as fast as possible.
Anyone with any business sense knows which choice is the correct choice.
Only Mac users would whine that a reduction in price (regardless of whether you have to buy a cable) and an increase in features and functionality, and a lengthening of operation between recharges is affront, a ‘dis”, a “knifing of the baby”.
You know what? When you buy your new iPod, ask to replace the USB cable for a FireWire one.
I do wish it were made-to-order option to swap it out (as I did state in one of my earliest posts on the first of these innane articles.
I think if MCN hadn’t put it such black-and-white, I’m-right-you’re-wrong language, we’d be yawning. It only took MDN four article posts to get to the combo-cable idea. It’s not like they presented that as an alternative in the beginning. Don’t give MDN too much credit.
“…expects you to buy a new one every 18 or less months to “keep up?” – Ed
Huh? Is USB 3.0 coming out soon? What the hell does that mean?
If you want to use Firewire, go ahead. If you don’t have a Fw cable, then buy one.
Why the hell are people whining so much? I have a couple of extra iPod Fw cables laying around, so if you can’t afford the $19 it costs to pick one up then let me know and I’ll send you one.