No, Apple did not switch to USB-C on its new MacBook Pros to profit from dongle & adapter sales

12357

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 127
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 2,602member
    mac_128 said:
    avon b7 said:
    nht said:
    avon b7 said:
    I agree. When I complained about the price of the new MBPs as I literally couldn't afford one, someone here said the solution was to simply hold off buying and save more. Some high end TVs (in similar price ranges to the MBPs) have moved many of the inputs off the back and sides of the tv into stylish breakout boxes. Apple could have provided the same elegant solution. Instead users were sent to dongle hell.
    "Dongle hell" looks like this:



    Got it.

    Oh, if there is something you want but can't afford right away then saving longer is the right answer.  
    If Apple made such a device and shipped it as part of the package, I wouldn't complain about it.

    'Saving longer' isn't the right answer. It is one of the possible answers. There are others.
    As a shareholder, I would mind. I think Apple has taken the correct approach here, as they always have, and I'm a guy who went through 3 major transitions from a PowerBook Duo, to a PowerBook G3 FireWire, to the first MacBook, MBP, to a Retina MBP. I'm very much a power user, but rarely use my external ports for more than external drives, for which I'd much rather slap a $4 adapter on the end of my existing USB cables, or replace them, than buy a dongle or dock. And while I do tend to use the Ethenet dongle a fair amount at work, I would hate to lug around a breakout box just to get that access. If Apple included a dock in the box, it would be lost on me, and I suspect many of their MBP customers -- data Apple surely has -- unlike the headphone jack on the iPhone which they felt necessitated including an adapter (something I also consider a mistake). Would it be nice to have? Sure. But Apple used to include a video breakout cable with their iBooks, and I told my friend to keep it, but she never needed it; and when she eventually had a need for it so she could hook up to her TV to run a slideshow of vacation pictures, she discovered she had thrown it out, and she had to buy a new one anyway. I would argue this is far more typical the case with the average Apple customer than those who need all the ports Apple is eliminating. 
    I see your point and it's valid. There are other users (shareholders no doubt amongst them) that do use more ports though, and their complaints about losing them and having to get dongles are also valid. 

    Whichever way you look at it, it is difficult to believe this situation wasn't discussed at different levels at Apple.

    With that in mind, the decision to go all USB-C now and not a little later, was taken knowingly. The decision to not slip gradually into USB-C only was ruled out for one reason or another. 

    Personally, I think a true transition (current port spread plus USB-C TB) would have been wiser. Why the rush if a transitional machine would have both the present and the future? From the perspective of port availability, adding USB-C made far more sense for the almost entire Mac user base who already have many devices that use those ports.


    Well, one clear reason is size and weight, but that has nothing to do with dongles in the context I just mentioned. The obsession with making things thinner and lighter obligated the need for hubs or dongles.

    Perhaps the easiest route would have been to release a late 2016 architecture MBP with a full port spread alongside the just released machines. Basically the stealth bomber alongside the stealth fighter if the speculation ia to be believed.

    That decision would have set us up for a head on clash between the two systems. Win /Win for Apple as they would be selling both machines but which machine would sell more?

    The thinner and lighter version or the thicker and heavier option?

    As you say, you'd no doubt go for the thinner version but would the majority do the same?

    Would they be able to put more battery in the thicker version? Who knows?

    As things stand with just one option (thin 13" or thin 15"), including a hub might have served a little to quell the negative mood and maybe even tip a sale.
  • Reply 82 of 127
    nhtnht Posts: 4,190member
    avon b7 said:
    nht said:
    "Dongle hell" looks like this:



    Got it.

    Oh, if there is something you want but can't afford right away then saving longer is the right answer.  
    If Apple made such a device and shipped it as part of the package, I wouldn't complain about it.

    'Saving longer' isn't the right answer. It is one of the possible answers. There are others.
    Apple doesn't have to ship it because they picked an industry standard port with many solutions.

    Your past posting history over the last 10 years indicates that even if they did ship a hub you would have found something else to turn into an issue.

    Saving longer or going without are the two answers.  What you are doing is the same as complaining that you can't afford a BMW and therefore they are overpriced and should be cheaper.

    Nobody owes you a product you can afford.  If you cant afford it then either save longer or go without and buy a cheaper alternative. 
    edited December 2016 SolichiaStrangeDays
  • Reply 83 of 127
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,594member
    avon b7 said:
    mac_128 said:
    avon b7 said:
    nht said:
    avon b7 said:
    I agree. When I complained about the price of the new MBPs as I literally couldn't afford one, someone here said the solution was to simply hold off buying and save more. Some high end TVs (in similar price ranges to the MBPs) have moved many of the inputs off the back and sides of the tv into stylish breakout boxes. Apple could have provided the same elegant solution. Instead users were sent to dongle hell.
    "Dongle hell" looks like this:



    Got it.

    Oh, if there is something you want but can't afford right away then saving longer is the right answer.  
    If Apple made such a device and shipped it as part of the package, I wouldn't complain about it.

    'Saving longer' isn't the right answer. It is one of the possible answers. There are others.
    As a shareholder, I would mind. I think Apple has taken the correct approach here, as they always have, and I'm a guy who went through 3 major transitions from a PowerBook Duo, to a PowerBook G3 FireWire, to the first MacBook, MBP, to a Retina MBP. I'm very much a power user, but rarely use my external ports for more than external drives, for which I'd much rather slap a $4 adapter on the end of my existing USB cables, or replace them, than buy a dongle or dock. And while I do tend to use the Ethenet dongle a fair amount at work, I would hate to lug around a breakout box just to get that access. If Apple included a dock in the box, it would be lost on me, and I suspect many of their MBP customers -- data Apple surely has -- unlike the headphone jack on the iPhone which they felt necessitated including an adapter (something I also consider a mistake). Would it be nice to have? Sure. But Apple used to include a video breakout cable with their iBooks, and I told my friend to keep it, but she never needed it; and when she eventually had a need for it so she could hook up to her TV to run a slideshow of vacation pictures, she discovered she had thrown it out, and she had to buy a new one anyway. I would argue this is far more typical the case with the average Apple customer than those who need all the ports Apple is eliminating. 
    I see your point and it's valid. There are other users (shareholders no doubt amongst them) that do use more ports though, and their complaints about losing them and having to get dongles are also valid. 
    Yes, BUT: The nature of "pro" work is that all of us need different ports

    I need Firewire, 3.5mm audio, MADI, Thunderbolt, and USB-A. External monitor and other needs are taken care of via a Thunderbolt Dock and wi-fi/Bluetooth. 

    You probably need very different jacks.

    Some people can't live without Ethernet. 

    Which ports/adapters should Apple include to satisfy some users and avoid pissing off others? 

    I say: none. There will always be unhappy campers. Apple still sells the 2015 model just for them.
    StrangeDaysstompy
  • Reply 84 of 127
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 2,602member
    nht said:
    avon b7 said:
    nht said:
    "Dongle hell" looks like this:



    Got it.

    Oh, if there is something you want but can't afford right away then saving longer is the right answer.  
    If Apple made such a device and shipped it as part of the package, I wouldn't complain about it.

    'Saving longer' isn't the right answer. It is one of the possible answers. There are others.
    Apple doesn't have to ship it because they picked an industry standard port with many solutions.

    Your past posting history over the last 10 years indicates that even if they did ship a hub you would have found something else to turn into an issue.

    Saving longer or going without are the two answers.  What you are doing is the same as complaining that you can't afford a BMW and therefore they are overpriced and should be cheaper.

    Nobody owes you a product you can afford.  If you cant afford it then either save longer or go without and buy a cheaper alternative. 
    And here we go yet again: My posts in this thread have been centred on the dongles and profit but you wade in again with a poor largely off topic reply.

    'nobody owes me'?

    What are you saying? Of course nobody owes me! I'm not saying anybody owes me. Where did you get that from?

    If they did ship a hub (yes. On topic!) I probably wouldn't get one. Hey, you are right, but you don't need to review 10 years of my posts to reach that conclusion. The reasons are varied and I have made them absolutely clear in the last two months after the release of these new MacBook Pros. Dongles is one of them but not the only one.

    Apple 'doesn't have to ship it because they chose an industry standard port'? First, at the moment, it is industry standard but not widespread, much less in configurations that have only USB-C. Second, and directly related to point one, most manufacturers included the other ports users need today. Third, Apple couldn't include them physically as the machines are too thin for them. Fourth, the backlash they are seeing is directly related to this (dongles) and other issues (yes, one of them being price). 

    As far as 'saving' or 'going without' being the two options (so you admit that 'saving longer' wasn't the only one), you forget 'financing', waiting for refurbished options, buying second hand... 

    Going into more depth would take this off topic and your comparison to BMW, which is absurd in the extreme, would take it even further off topic so I won't even bother dismantling it.

  • Reply 85 of 127
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 2,602member
    nht said:
    I have to disagree with you in the need for USB ports.
    I do a lot of travelling and often the internet connection is poor or even non existent. It is often expensive to use.
    So I take at least 1 USB drive with me, usually two. These are USB-3 drives. 1TB or 2TB in size.
    I can put three weeks of photography on them while I'm away on the boonies (or on an island that has no internet apart from via Satellite).
    I can also put a number of VM's on them. Are you really being serious to suggest that I would upload a VM of some 140Gb in size to a cloud provider and then download it when I wanted to use it? (This is a real world VM. It replicates the systems used to run a petro-chemical plant)

    In the words of John McEnroe, 'You can't be serious'.
    Then there is the 4TB drive I use for my TimeMachine Backups. That is USB-3. Where do you suggest that I connect it then? To a ghost?

    all of these are USB-A connections. Useless on the new MacBooks. So I'll have to fork out for a few dongles if I do buy one of the new MacBooks.

    Oh, and I forgot. As a dinosaur. I prefer wired (ie USB) keyboards and mice when I'm using the MacBook in my office when it is connected to two 4k screens.
    See, I have a very good use case for keeping USB ports.  I know that I'm not alone
    You are whining about a $35 USB-C hub from amazon that includes a SD card reader.

    http://a.co/bIR2ppi

    $20 for ones without.

    A TB-3 docking station costs more but gives you a single cable attachment for everything including monitors.  That's the last docking station you likely need to buy for the next decade as USB-C/TB3+ is standard for Apple, Dell, HP, etc.

    You have a dumb assed use case for putting USB-A on the MBP.
    Why can't you just accept his opinion for what it is and, if you disagree, give your counter opinion without accusing him of 'whining' or having a 'dumb assed' use case?

    Your defence of 'I'm tired of reading constant whining and this is an Apple enthusiast site' doesn't excuse you from labelling people as trolls, whiners, idiots etc. Those labels, often misused, show a lack of respect for other posters.
  • Reply 86 of 127
    chiachia Posts: 681member
    It's funny and ironic how so much of the grumbling about the Thunderbolt 3 ports here mirror the arguments made against the first iMac, a Mac which eschewed most previous Mac connectors to debut the first USB ports for the Mac, USB-A ports with connectors that are over 20 years old in design.  It's one of the few connectors in computing (alongside the Ethernet RJ45 and yes, audio jack) still in use after such a long time.

    The USB-C connector is however superior in every way to the USB-A connector. Just as by 2002 the USB-A was in ubiquitous use on PCs and Macs, the USB C connector will be everywhere by 2022.  Just as in 2002, people will look back and wonder why some wanted to be tied to the inefficiency of the past.

    I have zombie ports on my current MacBook that I hardly, if ever use.  The beauty of the latest MacBook Pro design is having total flexibility in what the port is used for, be it power, data, display or indeed all three combined.

    It should also be noted that like the very first iMac, the latest MacBook Pros aren't the first to ship with Thunderbolt 3 ports.
    It's highly likely though that like the first iMac, they will greatly advance their popularity.

    Once again Apple helps to propel the entire industry forward.
    edited December 2016 nhtDaekwanStrangeDaysstompy
  • Reply 87 of 127
    nhtnht Posts: 4,190member
    avon b7 said:
    nht said:
    You are whining about a $35 USB-C hub from amazon that includes a SD card reader.

    http://a.co/bIR2ppi

    $20 for ones without.

    A TB-3 docking station costs more but gives you a single cable attachment for everything including monitors.  That's the last docking station you likely need to buy for the next decade as USB-C/TB3+ is standard for Apple, Dell, HP, etc.

    You have a dumb assed use case for putting USB-A on the MBP.
    Why can't you just accept his opinion for what it is and, if you disagree, give your counter opinion without accusing him of 'whining' or having a 'dumb assed' use case?

    Your defence of 'I'm tired of reading constant whining and this is an Apple enthusiast site' doesn't excuse you from labelling people as trolls, whiners, idiots etc. Those labels, often misused, show a lack of respect for other posters.
    It is whining and his use cases are indeed dumb.  For photography there are many options (including the mentioned hub) to transfer the contents of a SD card to a SSD with or without a computer. For VMs you can put an instance of the VM in the cloud and run it there without the need for any download or chewing up local resources. For office use any of the hubs are MUCH better than plugging two USB-A cables for mouse and keyboard which would have left him without additional ports (or only one if his keyboard has a port for the mouse) for his drives.

    Everyone docking a lot of peripherals already has a hub because there simply isn't enough anyway because the ports on the older MBP were all single use: power, TB, USB, SD card.  There was never more than 2 of anything. 4 USB-C is far superior to what we had and far superior to 2 USB-C and 2 USB-A.

    The issues and objections are idiotic and the behavior is whining. I did not label HIM anything. I do label you a concern troll which is based on your posting history which you would like folks to ignore.  Sorry, but no.
    chia
  • Reply 88 of 127
    nhtnht Posts: 4,190member
    chia said:
    It's funny and ironic how so much of the grumbling about the Thunderbolt 3 ports here mirror the arguments made against the first iMac with its USB ports, USB-A ports with connectors that are over 20 years old in design.  It's one of the few connectors in computing (alongside the Ethernet RJ45 and yes, audio jack) still in use after such a long time.

    The USB-C connector is however superior in every way to the USB-A connector. Just as by 2002 the USB-A was in ubiquitous use on PCs and Macs, the USB C connector will be everywhere by 2022.  Just as in 2002, people will look back and wonder why some wanted to be tied to the inefficiency of the past.

    I have zombie ports on my current MacBook that I hardly, if ever use.  The beauty of the latest MacBook Pro design is having total flexibility in what the port is used for, be it power, data, display or indeed all three combined.
    Yes, the only point I disagree with is the 2022 date. USB-3 adoption rate was fast enough that 2-3 years after the initial release (2009) it was everywhere.  Call it by 2012.  USB-C appeared in 2015.  Following the same trend it will be dominant by 2018.

    With phones, windows PCs and Macs going USB-C I expect the adoption rate to be just as fast.
    Daekwanchia
  • Reply 89 of 127
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 2,602member
    chia said:
    It's funny and ironic how so much of the grumbling about the Thunderbolt 3 ports here mirror the arguments made against the first iMac with its USB ports, USB-A ports with connectors that are over 20 years old in design.  It's one of the few connectors in computing (alongside the Ethernet RJ45 and yes, audio jack) still in use after such a long time.

    The USB-C connector is however superior in every way to the USB-A connector. Just as by 2002 the USB-A was in ubiquitous use on PCs and Macs, the USB C connector will be everywhere by 2022.  Just as in 2002, people will look back and wonder why some wanted to be tied to the inefficiency of the past.

    I have zombie ports on my current MacBook that I hardly, if ever use.  The beauty of the latest MacBook Pro design is having total flexibility in what the port is used for, be it power, data, display or indeed all three combined.
    USB-C and it's advantages are not the issue. I haven't seen a single post against it.

    The original Apple switch to USB was the cause of a lot of pain and expense because dongles often weren't the solution.

    This switch is only comparable in the sense that it is wholesale.

    The zombie ports on your Mac might not be zombie ports for others.
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 90 of 127
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 2,602member
    nht said:
    avon b7 said:
    nht said:
    You are whining about a $35 USB-C hub from amazon that includes a SD card reader.

    http://a.co/bIR2ppi

    $20 for ones without.

    A TB-3 docking station costs more but gives you a single cable attachment for everything including monitors.  That's the last docking station you likely need to buy for the next decade as USB-C/TB3+ is standard for Apple, Dell, HP, etc.

    You have a dumb assed use case for putting USB-A on the MBP.
    Why can't you just accept his opinion for what it is and, if you disagree, give your counter opinion without accusing him of 'whining' or having a 'dumb assed' use case?

    Your defence of 'I'm tired of reading constant whining and this is an Apple enthusiast site' doesn't excuse you from labelling people as trolls, whiners, idiots etc. Those labels, often misused, show a lack of respect for other posters.
    It is whining and his use cases are indeed dumb.  For photography there are many options (including the mentioned hub) to transfer the contents of a SD card to a SSD with or without a computer. For VMs you can put an instance of the VM in the cloud and run it there without the need for any download or chewing up local resources. For office use any of the hubs are MUCH better than plugging two USB-A cables for mouse and keyboard which would have left him without additional ports (or only one if his keyboard has a port for the mouse) for his drives.

    Everyone docking a lot of peripherals already has a hub because there simply isn't enough anyway because the ports on the older MBP were all single use: power, TB, USB, SD card.  There was never more than 2 of anything. 4 USB-C is far superior to what we had and far superior to 2 USB-C and 2 USB-A.

    The issues and objections are idiotic and the behavior is whining. I did not label HIM anything. I do label you a concern troll which is based on your posting history which you would like folks to ignore.  Sorry, but no.
    It is whining, idiotic and dumb assed for you.

    That doesn't mean he actually is whining, putting forward dumb aased or idiotic proposals. It's just your interpretation of his post and yes, of course you are labelling him.

    To not take this off topic so won't even bother to counter your baseless personal attacks..

  • Reply 91 of 127
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,899member
    AI_lias said:
    "Simply put, the number of people buying iPhones vastly outnumbers the number of customers who purchase new Macs"

    Why didn't they just throw on in each laptop box, not with each iPhone?
    I haven't used any wired connection from my phone to any Mac in my house for 2 years. That's the reason why and I believe most iPhone users don't either.
  • Reply 92 of 127
    chiachia Posts: 681member
    avon b7 said:
    chia said:
    It's funny and ironic how so much of the grumbling about the Thunderbolt 3 ports here mirror the arguments made against the first iMac with its USB ports, USB-A ports with connectors that are over 20 years old in design.  It's one of the few connectors in computing (alongside the Ethernet RJ45 and yes, audio jack) still in use after such a long time.

    The USB-C connector is however superior in every way to the USB-A connector. Just as by 2002 the USB-A was in ubiquitous use on PCs and Macs, the USB C connector will be everywhere by 2022.  Just as in 2002, people will look back and wonder why some wanted to be tied to the inefficiency of the past.
    USB-C and it's advantages are not the issue. I haven't seen a single post against it.

    The original Apple switch to USB was the cause of a lot of pain and expense because dongles often weren't the solution.

    This switch is only comparable in the sense that it is wholesale.

    The zombie ports on your Mac might not be zombie ports for others.

    Some people argued ad nauseum that they needed to have a portable computer with a built-in optical drive to do their work.
    Why should I be lumbered with the extra weight, expense and redundancy of something I don't need?
    Why should most Mac users be lumbered with features only a tiny proportion need?

    Where should we draw the line?
    Maybe we should add two VGA ports for those who wish to drive two legacy VGA displays?
    Maybe we should add eSATA ports for those who want fast storage but dislike dongles and Thunderbolt?
    Maybe we should add RS232 ports for those who need to connect their computers to legacy industrial devices?
    Maybe we should add ExpressCard slots for those with ExpressCard modems?
    then you end up with a 6 kilo, $7000 monstrosity that 99 percent of the people lug around whilst using only 1 percent of the ports and having ten percent of a slimmer computer's battery life.

    The Thunderbolt 3 with the USB-C connector truly puts the UNIVERSAL into USB.  All of the above functions, if needed, can be served by the right adaptor.
    It actually gives greater flexibility than building legacy ports into the machine.
    Want to connect four RS-232 devices to the laptop at the machine shop but plug two extra displays when at the office?  No problem!  Trickier to do on an older laptop with one USB port, one VGA port and one serial port.

    Study the Mac line up launched between 1998 to 2000:
    May 1998 iMac with USB replacing ADB and serial ports.

    May/Sep 1998 PowerBook G3  series with legacy ADB and serial ports, NO USB

    Jan 1999 Power Mac G3  Blue and white with ADB and USB  - NO SERIAL

    May 1999 Power Mac G4
    USB - NO ADB, NO SERIAL ports
    PowerBook G3  USB - NO ADB NO SERIAL ports
    previous PowerBook G3 discontinued

    Sep 1999Power Mac G3 (Blue and White) discontinued,the last Mac with ADB and serial ports.

    Apple eliminated its legacy ports within 12-18 months of introducing USB and Firewire on the Mac.

    You are entitled to your argument and opinion avonb7 but accept that Apple has moved into Thunderbolt 3/USB-C today; it's extremely doubtful they'll move backward.
    I've also underlined above that Steve Jobs made a similarly rapid transition, there was no transitional Mac laptop with legacy ADB and serial connectors.
    I vaguely recall the only reason ADB made it onto the Blue and White G3 was to support some ADB software protection dongles.
    edited December 2016 Solispheric
  • Reply 93 of 127
    nhtnht Posts: 4,190member
    avon b7 said:
    It is whining, idiotic and dumb assed for you.

    That doesn't mean he actually is whining, putting forward dumb aased or idiotic proposals. It's just your interpretation of his post and yes, of course you are labelling him.

    To not take this off topic so won't even bother to counter your baseless personal attacks..

    1) of course it's my opinion
    2) I am labeling his behavior.  I deliberately did not call him a whiner or dumb.  He may or may not be a troll. Time will tell.
    3) Obviously your posting history is the basis of why you are labeled a troll so the accusation is not "baseless" and a matter of record.  Anyone can peruse your posting history and make their own determination if the labeling is accurate.
  • Reply 94 of 127
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 2,602member
    nht said:
    avon b7 said:
    It is whining, idiotic and dumb assed for you.

    That doesn't mean he actually is whining, putting forward dumb aased or idiotic proposals. It's just your interpretation of his post and yes, of course you are labelling him.

    To not take this off topic so won't even bother to counter your baseless personal attacks..

    1) of course it's my opinion
    2) I am labeling his behavior.  I deliberately did not call him a whiner or dumb.  He may or may not be a troll. Time will tell.
    3) Obviously your posting history is the basis of why you are labeled a troll so the accusation is not "baseless" and a matter of record.  Anyone can peruse your posting history and make their own determination if the labeling is accurate.
    Are you saying that my 'behaviour' over 10 years makes me a 'concern troll' (whatever that is) but the fact that you refer to his 'behaviour only', means that you are not calling him a whiner?

    Isn't it precisely behaviour that leads you to label people this way or that?

    Maybe I've had too much bubbly but I'm not seeing much sense in that.

    But anyway, saying people are whining or have dumbass use cases (whether your real intention is to label them as whiners, idiots etc) at the drop of a hat isn't very fair and definitely shows a lacks of respect even if it was unintentional. That was my main point.
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 95 of 127
    nhtnht Posts: 4,190member
    avon b7 said:
    nht said:
    1) of course it's my opinion
    2) I am labeling his behavior.  I deliberately did not call him a whiner or dumb.  He may or may not be a troll. Time will tell.
    3) Obviously your posting history is the basis of why you are labeled a troll so the accusation is not "baseless" and a matter of record.  Anyone can peruse your posting history and make their own determination if the labeling is accurate.
    Are you saying that my 'behaviour' over 10 years makes me a 'concern troll' (whatever that is) but the fact that you refer to his 'behaviour only', means that you are not calling him a whiner?

    Isn't it precisely behaviour that leads you to label people this way or that?
    Everyone whines from time to time. Everyone says idiotic things from time to time. It is repeated behavior that determines whether you are a whiner or idiot or not.

    Precocious 4 year olds and most people above the age of 10 have figured this out.
    Maybe I've had too much bubbly but I'm not seeing much sense in that.
    Not very surprising.
    But anyway, saying people are whining or have dumbass use cases (whether your real intention is to label them as whiners, idiots etc) at the drop of a hat isn't very fair and definitely shows a lacks of respect even if it was unintentional. That was my main point.
    The lack of respect for his opinion on "donglegate" is most definitely intentional.  There is no intention to label him a whiner or idiot unless he repeatedly whines and makes dumb statements and if so then the label would be very fair.

    There are reasonable objections to the MBP.  "Dongles" aren't one of them.
    Soli
  • Reply 96 of 127
    lewchenko said:
    I think it must be a fact that Apple is profiting from the situation, whether they intentionally made it that way or not. 

    They price their dongles absurdly high. I recently had to buy 2 dongles after purchasing a MacBook. Not impressed really. And whilst both were "discounted" they were still a rip off. One was £25! ... for a cable!

    It would definitely put me off buying the new MacBook Pro (amongst its other issues).

    i think they should offer them for cost price. 
     But USB-C isn't an Apple owned port, you can buy them from anyone. Thus it cannot be a strategy to sell adapters. 
    Solichiaspheric
  • Reply 97 of 127
    avon b7 said:
    chia said:
    It's funny and ironic how so much of the grumbling about the Thunderbolt 3 ports here mirror the arguments made against the first iMac with its USB ports, USB-A ports with connectors that are over 20 years old in design.  It's one of the few connectors in computing (alongside the Ethernet RJ45 and yes, audio jack) still in use after such a long time.

    The USB-C connector is however superior in every way to the USB-A connector. Just as by 2002 the USB-A was in ubiquitous use on PCs and Macs, the USB C connector will be everywhere by 2022.  Just as in 2002, people will look back and wonder why some wanted to be tied to the inefficiency of the past.

    I have zombie ports on my current MacBook that I hardly, if ever use.  The beauty of the latest MacBook Pro design is having total flexibility in what the port is used for, be it power, data, display or indeed all three combined.
    USB-C and it's advantages are not the issue. I haven't seen a single post against it.

    The original Apple switch to USB was the cause of a lot of pain and expense because dongles often weren't the solution.

    This switch is only comparable in the sense that it is wholesale.

    The zombie ports on your Mac might not be zombie ports for others
    .
    Which is absolutely no reason to include them for everyone. Since everybody is different it makes much more sense to provide standard ports and let users customize as their use cases require. Case in point as a software developer I have no need for ethernet, firewire, SD, etc.. Id rather have a machine that uses less power providing controllers to stuff i don't need, is more future proof, etc. 
    edited December 2016 Soli
  • Reply 98 of 127
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,594member
    avon b7 said:
    chia said:
    It's funny and ironic how so much of the grumbling about the Thunderbolt 3 ports here mirror the arguments made against the first iMac with its USB ports, USB-A ports with connectors that are over 20 years old in design.  It's one of the few connectors in computing (alongside the Ethernet RJ45 and yes, audio jack) still in use after such a long time.

    The USB-C connector is however superior in every way to the USB-A connector. Just as by 2002 the USB-A was in ubiquitous use on PCs and Macs, the USB C connector will be everywhere by 2022.  Just as in 2002, people will look back and wonder why some wanted to be tied to the inefficiency of the past.

    I have zombie ports on my current MacBook that I hardly, if ever use.  The beauty of the latest MacBook Pro design is having total flexibility in what the port is used for, be it power, data, display or indeed all three combined.
    USB-C and it's advantages are not the issue. I haven't seen a single post against it.

    The original Apple switch to USB was the cause of a lot of pain and expense because dongles often weren't the solution.

    This switch is only comparable in the sense that it is wholesale.

    The zombie ports on your Mac might not be zombie ports for others
    .
    Which is absolutely no reason to include them for everyone. Since everybody is different it makes much more sense to provide standard ports and let users customize as their use cases require. Case in point as a software developer I have no need for ethernet, firewire, SD, etc.. Id rather have a machine that uses less power providing controllers to stuff i don't need, is more future proof, etc. 
    Word. 

    The machines Apple is now shipping have *only* ports that are useful to *everyone*, and no zombie ports at all, for anyone.

    What's so ridiculous about this discussion is that absolutely nobody disagrees about the direction in which Apple is going being the right thing.

    All the disagreement about ports is merely about a situation that will be irrelevant two years from now — at which point the newly-released design will still be in use, and still feel "current", while the legacy models can then be safely phased out.
    stompy
  • Reply 99 of 127
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 2,602member
    avon b7 said:
    chia said:
    It's funny and ironic how so much of the grumbling about the Thunderbolt 3 ports here mirror the arguments made against the first iMac with its USB ports, USB-A ports with connectors that are over 20 years old in design.  It's one of the few connectors in computing (alongside the Ethernet RJ45 and yes, audio jack) still in use after such a long time.

    The USB-C connector is however superior in every way to the USB-A connector. Just as by 2002 the USB-A was in ubiquitous use on PCs and Macs, the USB C connector will be everywhere by 2022.  Just as in 2002, people will look back and wonder why some wanted to be tied to the inefficiency of the past.

    I have zombie ports on my current MacBook that I hardly, if ever use.  The beauty of the latest MacBook Pro design is having total flexibility in what the port is used for, be it power, data, display or indeed all three combined.
    USB-C and it's advantages are not the issue. I haven't seen a single post against it.

    The original Apple switch to USB was the cause of a lot of pain and expense because dongles often weren't the solution.

    This switch is only comparable in the sense that it is wholesale.

    The zombie ports on your Mac might not be zombie ports for others
    .
    Which is absolutely no reason to include them for everyone. Since everybody is different it makes much more sense to provide standard ports and let users customize as their use cases require. Case in point as a software developer I have no need for ethernet, firewire, SD, etc.. Id rather have a machine that uses less power providing controllers to stuff i don't need, is more future proof, etc. 
    I've already given my opinion on this. Stealth bomber and stealth fighter. Let the users decide. 

    It was curious to read Tim Cook's casual reference to the iMac needing more I/O options than the MBP. Are we to suppose that the iMac will not follow the MBP into dongle hell?
  • Reply 100 of 127
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 2,602member
    spheric said:
    avon b7 said:
    chia said:
    It's funny and ironic how so much of the grumbling about the Thunderbolt 3 ports here mirror the arguments made against the first iMac with its USB ports, USB-A ports with connectors that are over 20 years old in design.  It's one of the few connectors in computing (alongside the Ethernet RJ45 and yes, audio jack) still in use after such a long time.

    The USB-C connector is however superior in every way to the USB-A connector. Just as by 2002 the USB-A was in ubiquitous use on PCs and Macs, the USB C connector will be everywhere by 2022.  Just as in 2002, people will look back and wonder why some wanted to be tied to the inefficiency of the past.

    I have zombie ports on my current MacBook that I hardly, if ever use.  The beauty of the latest MacBook Pro design is having total flexibility in what the port is used for, be it power, data, display or indeed all three combined.
    USB-C and it's advantages are not the issue. I haven't seen a single post against it.

    The original Apple switch to USB was the cause of a lot of pain and expense because dongles often weren't the solution.

    This switch is only comparable in the sense that it is wholesale.

    The zombie ports on your Mac might not be zombie ports for others
    .
    Which is absolutely no reason to include them for everyone. Since everybody is different it makes much more sense to provide standard ports and let users customize as their use cases require. Case in point as a software developer I have no need for ethernet, firewire, SD, etc.. Id rather have a machine that uses less power providing controllers to stuff i don't need, is more future proof, etc. 
    Word. 

    The machines Apple is now shipping have *only* ports that are useful to *everyone*, and no zombie ports at all, for anyone.

    What's so ridiculous about this discussion is that absolutely nobody disagrees about the direction in which Apple is going being the right thing.

    All the disagreement about ports is merely about a situation that will be irrelevant two years from now — at which point the newly-released design will still be in use, and still feel "current", while the legacy models can then be safely phased out.
    Exactly. So why not be in this position (USB-C only) in two years instead of now when people still have current ports and just add USB-C (for which there are still proportionally far less devices)? That would make a lot of sense. The root problem in the current setup, in so far as ports, is thinness and the oobsession to shave off mm no matter the compromises involved.

    So you are right on almost every count but your conclusions differ from many others. Hence this backlash of gigantic proportions.

    Some say you can't please everyone and sometimes that is the case but not in this one. Apple would have saved itself a lot of anguish by releasing two new models, one which incorporated the new architecture plus the current port spread (and perhaps minus the Touchbar) and with the 'old' screen. The other would be the new MBP just as it is.

    But, as I have said, in that scenario the new MBP might flop when pitted against its sibling and Apple has moved into the ultra premium tier on Macs and is only seeing dollar signs. Even if they sell them by the bucketload they will not have sold as many as they could, simply because many people can't afford them. Apple is focussed on iDevices.
Sign In or Register to comment.