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

12346

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 127
    anomeanome Posts: 1,094member
    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.
    But that statement indicates they are zombie ports for some people. Why should you get the ports you want, and I not get the ports I want? Or should we put all the ports in and hope for the best?

    What I think a lot of people are missing is that each single purpose port is a restricted use case. An RJ-45 is restricted to Ethernet. A FW800 port is restricted to FireWire. Even USB-A is restricted to just the USB protocol. And so on. The idea of Thunderbolt, and especially now TB3/USB-C, is that it can basically be used for anything.

    Sure, you need a dongle, but if I needed to connect the previous model MBP to Ethernet, I needed a dongle. And if I wanted to connect an external monitor, I needed a dongle (or at least a mini-Display Port to DVI/VGA/Display Port/HDMI/Whatever cable). If I wanted to connect a FireWire Audio interface for professional audio production, I needed a dongle. So the complaint seems to be not so much that people need dongles, but that people need *different* dongles to the ones they already have.
    sphericstompy
  • Reply 102 of 127
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,612member
    avon b7 said:
    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 way they've done it now, that's exactly where they'll be two years from now, and all of us who've bought the new machine will be there two years from now, as well. 

    Do it the way you want, and they'll have to redesign the case again two years from now (it's too thin to accommodate USB-A, let alone HDMI), and we'll be sitting there with a two-year-old design that feels outdated. 

    As it stands, our machine design will still feel up-to-date and "worth it" three years from today, and those who need a machine but want to opt for outdated-but-sensible can buy just that, right from the start. No bullshit, just straightforward options. 
    edited December 2016
  • Reply 103 of 127
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 2,641member
    spheric said:
    avon b7 said:
    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 way they've done it now, that's exactly where they'll be two years from now, and all of us who've bought the new machine will be there two years from now, as well. 

    Do it the way you want, and they'll have to redesign the case again two years from now (it's too thin to accommodate USB-A, let alone HDMI), and we'll be sitting there with a two-year-old design that feels outdated. 

    As it stands, our machine design will still feel up-to-date and "worth it" three years from today, and those who need a machine but want to opt for outdated-but-sensible can buy just that, right from the start. No bullshit, just straightforward options. 
    Two years is a long time. They could have kept the existing design with small exterior tweaks and very probably provided longer battery life than the current new MBPs. We all know that the overriding reason for excluding the present port spread was thinness. There are more than sufficient differentiating factors between a potential stealth bomber and stealth fighter to justify both options. In fact, if the rumours are to be believed, there are teams in Apple that supported the idea of a stealth bomber and not without reason. The backlash we have seen bears that out completely. So, who at Apple do you think tipped the balance in favour of a Stealth fighter?
     
  • Reply 104 of 127
    avon b7 said:
    spheric said:
    avon b7 said:
    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 way they've done it now, that's exactly where they'll be two years from now, and all of us who've bought the new machine will be there two years from now, as well. 

    Do it the way you want, and they'll have to redesign the case again two years from now (it's too thin to accommodate USB-A, let alone HDMI), and we'll be sitting there with a two-year-old design that feels outdated. 

    As it stands, our machine design will still feel up-to-date and "worth it" three years from today, and those who need a machine but want to opt for outdated-but-sensible can buy just that, right from the start. No bullshit, just straightforward options. 
    Two years is a long time. They could have kept the existing design with small exterior tweaks and very probably provided longer battery life than the current new MBPs. We all know that the overriding reason for excluding the present port spread was thinness. There are more than sufficient differentiating factors between a potential stealth bomber and stealth fighter to justify both options. In fact, if the rumours are to be believed, there are teams in Apple that supported the idea of a stealth bomber and not without reason. The backlash we have seen bears that out completely. So, who at Apple do you think tipped the balance in favour of a Stealth fighter?
     
    Had Apple stock a USB-C to USB-A adapter in the box there would be a lot less grumbling. Even though Apple removed the headphone jack the width of the 7 is exactly the same as the 6 so clearly it wasn't removed to make the 7 thinner. I also don't think USB-A was removed from the new rMBP because of thinness. I think Apple wants to push USB-C and feels it would be more difficult to do so if USB-A is part of the product. But during this transition (and since the iPhone 7 shipped with USB-A) the right thing to do would have been to include an adapter in the box like they did with the 3.5mm headphone jack.
  • Reply 105 of 127
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,612member
    avon b7 said:
    spheric said:
    avon b7 said:
    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 way they've done it now, that's exactly where they'll be two years from now, and all of us who've bought the new machine will be there two years from now, as well. 

    Do it the way you want, and they'll have to redesign the case again two years from now (it's too thin to accommodate USB-A, let alone HDMI), and we'll be sitting there with a two-year-old design that feels outdated. 

    As it stands, our machine design will still feel up-to-date and "worth it" three years from today, and those who need a machine but want to opt for outdated-but-sensible can buy just that, right from the start. No bullshit, just straightforward options. 
    Two years is a long time. They could have kept the existing design with small exterior tweaks and very probably provided longer battery life than the current new MBPs. We all know that the overriding reason for excluding the present port spread was thinness. There are more than sufficient differentiating factors between a potential stealth bomber and stealth fighter to justify both options. In fact, if the rumours are to be believed, there are teams in Apple that supported the idea of a stealth bomber and not without reason. The backlash we have seen bears that out completely. So, who at Apple do you think tipped the balance in favour of a Stealth fighter?
     
    Had Apple stock a USB-C to USB-A adapter in the box there would be a lot less grumbling. Even though Apple removed the headphone jack the width of the 7 is exactly the same as the 6 so clearly it wasn't removed to make the 7 thinner. I also don't think USB-A was removed from the new rMBP because of thinness. I think Apple wants to push USB-C and feels it would be more difficult to do so if USB-A is part of the product. But during this transition (and since the iPhone 7 shipped with USB-A) the right thing to do would have been to include an adapter in the box like they did with the 3.5mm headphone jack.
    I think we need to let go of the thought that iOS devices are still shipping with USB-A cables. It doesn't matter. 

    They're a completely different market, and one where USB plays a completely different role: it's primarily a charging standard there. 

    I have no hard numbers, but I'd be extremely surprised if anything beyond a small minority of users ever connect their iOS device to a computer at all — I can probably count on one hand the number of instances I have, in the last year or so. 

    One of those was just a few days ago, though, because I've misplaced my iPad charger, and hooking it up to my 2016 MacBook Pro charged it WAY faster than the iPhone power supply would.
    I used my USB-C to Lightning cable for that, though. smiley 
    edited December 2016 chia
  • Reply 106 of 127
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,526member
    ppartekim said:
    How long has Apple tried pushing the industry to use one cable for almost everything and yet it ended up only on Apple computers. This time the industry is behind it and USB-C will be the "one cable" to rule them all (USB,Thunderbolt,Video,Power,etc)... :)
    Perhaps worth pointing out that while there's one connector, and the cables are (mostly) interchangeable, Thunderbolt 3 and USB 3 are not the same thing, and Thunderholt 3 devices won't work if plugged into USB 3 ports, though the reverse will work.

    So close!  ;)
  • Reply 107 of 127
    The fact that Apple has made the full jump to USB-C with MB and MBP will actually drive the rest of the market to switch over more quickly. This then will make the transition less painful for consumers, because peripheral devices will more rapidly adopt the standard, both for the connectors and the increased data speed.

    Consider this: if the FCC had not drawn a line in the sand and declared a drop-dead date for for a conversion to widescreen digital TV, there would still be hordes of CRT analog TVs out there, many TV stations and networks still would be broadcasting in SD analog, and even those who had tried to make the conversion would still be wasting the left and right ends of the picture in order to accommodate all those old TVs out there. There would also be a lot less bandwidth available for cellular data, because analog TV signals would still be using the frequencies.

    Another few years of MBP models with a variety of ports would only drag out the transition period. Sometimes somebody big enough to drive the change needs to make the call and go for it.
  • Reply 108 of 127
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,231member
    crowley said:
    ppartekim said:
    How long has Apple tried pushing the industry to use one cable for almost everything and yet it ended up only on Apple computers. This time the industry is behind it and USB-C will be the "one cable" to rule them all (USB,Thunderbolt,Video,Power,etc)... :)
    Perhaps worth pointing out that while there's one connector, and the cables are (mostly) interchangeable, Thunderbolt 3 and USB 3 are not the same thing, and Thunderholt 3 devices won't work if plugged into USB 3 ports, though the reverse will work.

    So close!  ;)
    And then you have cables with USB-C connectors that could still only support USB 2.0 speeds or just power. Still, USB-C is a beatiful thing and I can't wait until the rest of the world catches up so that Apple's other devices can ship with only a USB-C cable.
  • Reply 109 of 127
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,526member
    Soli said:
    crowley said:
    ppartekim said:
    How long has Apple tried pushing the industry to use one cable for almost everything and yet it ended up only on Apple computers. This time the industry is behind it and USB-C will be the "one cable" to rule them all (USB,Thunderbolt,Video,Power,etc)... :)
    Perhaps worth pointing out that while there's one connector, and the cables are (mostly) interchangeable, Thunderbolt 3 and USB 3 are not the same thing, and Thunderholt 3 devices won't work if plugged into USB 3 ports, though the reverse will work.

    So close!  ;)
    And then you have cables with USB-C connectors that could still only support USB 2.0 speeds or just power. 
    I think they'll be pretty rare. USB 3.1 type C cables seem to be just as cheap, so I'm not sure that's there's much/any reason for anyone to make a variant cable that only operates at 2.0 speeds.

    Of course, I would've said there's no obvious reason for anyone to make a device with USB 2.0 type C ports too, but then that LG monitor came out, so what do I know...
  • Reply 110 of 127
    The part I am not clear about is - whats the future solution for people who do not want to go wireless on headphones and do not wish to use dongles or adaptors either? 
    For instance - A wired headphone with lighting connector will only work on iOS devices and will require an adaptor of some sort to work with other devices? Meaning, I am always stuck with a adaptor of some sort. Needing an adaptor/dongle is not clean, not Apple like. 

    Going all wireless sounds cool but it comes with own challenges, first and foremost - I have now added another device on my list of devices that requires charging. 

    Unless Apple transitions to a (an imaginary, yet to be conceived) USB-? connector that is thin enough to meet the form factor requirements of an iOS device (and abandons the lighting connector) which is also an open standard so that rest of the industry and headphone/earphone makers adopt, I don't see it happening. 

    edited December 2016
  • Reply 111 of 127
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 2,641member
    anome 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.
    But that statement indicates they are zombie ports for some people. Why should you get the ports you want, and I not get the ports I want? Or should we put all the ports in and hope for the best?

    What I think a lot of people are missing is that each single purpose port is a restricted use case. An RJ-45 is restricted to Ethernet. A FW800 port is restricted to FireWire. Even USB-A is restricted to just the USB protocol. And so on. The idea of Thunderbolt, and especially now TB3/USB-C, is that it can basically be used for anything.

    Sure, you need a dongle, but if I needed to connect the previous model MBP to Ethernet, I needed a dongle. And if I wanted to connect an external monitor, I needed a dongle (or at least a mini-Display Port to DVI/VGA/Display Port/HDMI/Whatever cable). If I wanted to connect a FireWire Audio interface for professional audio production, I needed a dongle. So the complaint seems to be not so much that people need dongles, but that people need *different* dongles to the ones they already have.
    Well, The point isn't really if there are zombie ports or not. We could have had a simple transition, in an orderly fashion to USB-C. A  machine that accommodated the current user base and added USB-C. This isn't some alien idea. It now seems that this basic, orderly transition was actually favoured by some teams within Apple itself. As tensions seemingly run high in some areas of Apple, I'm sure the speculation (pure and wild or planned and leaked) will continue.

    The real point is that these machines make a lot of compromises that have riled some people. Some people are happy with them and others are not. So many, so as to create a backlash on a scale that I'm sure even Apple didn't quite expect.

    You can't isolate the switch to only USB-C as the single reason people aren't pleased, and the the ports themselves aren't the problem. It's more a question of timing, how the decisions were taken and the consequences of them.

    We now have a new thinner, non-upgradeable, non-user accesible machine that must be maxed to your lifetime needs of the unit at time of purchase and on top of that, requires dongles to connect to much of users hardware.  Add to that that your data may be lost in case of repair (a repair that will be expensive by design if out of warranty). Those are facts. Now add in things that are more subjective like the keyboard, touchbar etc. There is no new 'entry level priced' MBP. Some people are happy with this. That's fine, but people are howling about a big collection of issues rather than just one.

    What is evident, and should be worrying Apple deeply, is that much of the criticism, ridicule and parody is coming from its own users. These are not the so-called Apple haters, trolls, idiots, whiners etc that some people here refer to, they are Apple users. Watch the videos, read the blogs, look at the comments. They are often Mac users.



  • Reply 112 of 127
    'If Apple truly sought to "lock in" users to its own manufactured or licensed cables and ports, it would have designed an entirely new port to compete with USB-C.' When will the haters realize that Apple has been about interface (including ports and cables) standards since the introduction of USB 1.0 to its desktops with the original iMac 18 years ago? All the third-party crap that fails to plug and play? Every time, it turns out to be others not following standards. The only exception I know of is some early FireWire 400 ports that were not properly grounded in (iirc) some iBooks or Powerbooks. Does Apple participate in the industry bodies that publish the standards? You bet, so they can make certain the final standards are workable, just like all the other corporate participants. Apple led the way with FireWire 800 and Thunderbolt 1 and 2, and I've benefited from all three. They're slightly behind the curve with Thunderbolt 3, but maybe that means there'll finally be standards-compliant Thunderbolt 3 peripherals, something not at all assured when PC laptops started implementing Thunderbolt 3 early last year.
  • Reply 113 of 127
    calmclearcalmclear Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    Apple did not create USB-C
    The USB-C connector was created by the USB Implementers Forum, a nonprofit organization that has overseen the Universal Serial Bus since 1995.

    While Apple is a member of the USB-IF, it isn't even a part of the organization's top-level brass. Instead, the USB-IF Board of Directors is comprised of personnel from companies like HP, Intel, Microsoft, and chipmaker STMicroelectronics.

    Actually Apple DID create USB-C. It co-developed it along the lightning port. It then "gifted" the spec it chose not to use for the iPhone to the USB Consortium. This isn't common knowledge, but it is common knowledge amount hardware engineers at Apple. It ended up going with lighting port and thought usb-c reversible port would be a good standard for next generation desktops and computers. Apple is all in on wireless and this includes power, display, and anything you might connect to a computer. USB-C will be the port it offers, and as iOS devices become more powerful it will switch them to USB starting with it's iPads.

    I don't think the author of this post could know this, but it's true.
  • Reply 114 of 127
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,231member
    calmclear said:
    Apple did not create USB-C
    The USB-C connector was created by the USB Implementers Forum, a nonprofit organization that has overseen the Universal Serial Bus since 1995.

    While Apple is a member of the USB-IF, it isn't even a part of the organization's top-level brass. Instead, the USB-IF Board of Directors is comprised of personnel from companies like HP, Intel, Microsoft, and chipmaker STMicroelectronics.

    Actually Apple DID create USB-C. It co-developed it along the lightning port. It then "gifted" the spec it chose not to use for the iPhone to the USB Consortium. This isn't common knowledge, but it is common knowledge amount hardware engineers at Apple. It ended up going with lighting port and thought usb-c reversible port would be a good standard for next generation desktops and computers. Apple is all in on wireless and this includes power, display, and anything you might connect to a computer. USB-C will be the port it offers, and as iOS devices become more powerful it will switch them to USB starting with it's iPads.

    I don't think the author of this post could know this, but it's true.
    If Apple created a design that they then "gifted" to a consortium I can't imagine there wouldn't be any knowledge of this, just like there's an easy to follow trail that leads mini-DisplayPort to VESA adopting the standard which Apple "gifted" and allows for use with a zero-cost license, and then its adoption by Intel for Thunderbolt after being shutout by the USB-IF when Intel tried to piggy back on USB.
  • Reply 115 of 127
    anomeanome Posts: 1,094member
    avon b7 said:
    anome 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.
    But that statement indicates they are zombie ports for some people. Why should you get the ports you want, and I not get the ports I want? Or should we put all the ports in and hope for the best?

    What I think a lot of people are missing is that each single purpose port is a restricted use case. An RJ-45 is restricted to Ethernet. A FW800 port is restricted to FireWire. Even USB-A is restricted to just the USB protocol. And so on. The idea of Thunderbolt, and especially now TB3/USB-C, is that it can basically be used for anything.

    Sure, you need a dongle, but if I needed to connect the previous model MBP to Ethernet, I needed a dongle. And if I wanted to connect an external monitor, I needed a dongle (or at least a mini-Display Port to DVI/VGA/Display Port/HDMI/Whatever cable). If I wanted to connect a FireWire Audio interface for professional audio production, I needed a dongle. So the complaint seems to be not so much that people need dongles, but that people need *different* dongles to the ones they already have.
    Well, The point isn't really if there are zombie ports or not. We could have had a simple transition, in an orderly fashion to USB-C. A  machine that accommodated the current user base and added USB-C. This isn't some alien idea. It now seems that this basic, orderly transition was actually favoured by some teams within Apple itself. As tensions seemingly run high in some areas of Apple, I'm sure the speculation (pure and wild or planned and leaked) will continue.

    The real point is that these machines make a lot of compromises that have riled some people. Some people are happy with them and others are not. So many, so as to create a backlash on a scale that I'm sure even Apple didn't quite expect.

    You can't isolate the switch to only USB-C as the single reason people aren't pleased, and the the ports themselves aren't the problem. It's more a question of timing, how the decisions were taken and the consequences of them.

    It may not be the only reason people aren't pleased, but it's the reason being discussed. Specifically, the idea some people are putting about that Apple's main interest is in making money by selling dongles.


    We now have a new thinner, non-upgradeable, non-user accesible machine that must be maxed to your lifetime needs of the unit at time of purchase and on top of that, requires dongles to connect to much of users hardware.

    None of which has changed since the previous iteration of the MacBook Pro. The only change is the types of dongle needed.

     Add to that that your data may be lost in case of repair (a repair that will be expensive by design if out of warranty).

    When you say "by design", do you mean that Apple's intention was to make it *expensive* to repair an out of warranty MBP, or that it *is* expensive to repair *because* of the design? The former implies that Apple's main motivation in designing the MBP is to generate revenue streams from Out of Warranty repair, while the latter implies that the expense is merely a consequence of their approach to designing the MBP. The phrasing you've used suggests the former is your intent, but that would be a hard position to defend.


    Those are facts. Now add in things that are more subjective like the keyboard, touchbar etc. There is no new 'entry level priced' MBP. Some people are happy with this. That's fine, but people are howling about a big collection of issues rather than just one.

    Again, I will point out that the article this thread is responding to is addressing one specific complaint. There is plenty of discussion about the complaints about the new MBP on other threads.


    What is evident, and should be worrying Apple deeply, is that much of the criticism, ridicule and parody is coming from its own users. These are not the so-called Apple haters, trolls, idiots, whiners etc that some people here refer to, they are Apple users. Watch the videos, read the blogs, look at the comments. They are often Mac users.

    Or so they claim.

    A lot of people who complained about removing the headphone jack were iPhone users. A lot of people who complained about the Mac Pro were Mac users. A lot (probably all) of the people who complained about the shift to Intel from PowerPC were Mac users. I don't think this is anything new, and I doubt it means Apple is any real trouble, or has lost its way.
  • Reply 116 of 127
    anome said:
    A lot of people who complained about removing the headphone jack were iPhone users. A lot of people who complained about the Mac Pro were Mac users. A lot (probably all) of the people who complained about the shift to Intel from PowerPC were Mac users. I don't think this is anything new, and I doubt it means Apple is any real trouble, or has lost its way.
    How can anyone at this point be stuck in denial mode? Apple decided to cut pricing on dongles and monitors by 25% just 5 days after launch. 25% on new products! Apple realized the late delivery, price, and specs of tMBP alienated (what used to be) core users. We have seen reports that Apple employees are worried about the future of the Mac to the point where Tim Cook had to say "Believe me"... 

    Media in general have ridiculed the tMBP based on performance and cost. MacWorld released their "Apple products that left us in 2016" list and included the desktop Mac. CNet did the same - telling readers how to create a Hackintosh now that Apple hasn't updated their desktop computers for years.

    For now the Mac is stuck with the 15 year old AluThin design language, few upgrades, and lack of OS innovation. The swift discounts indicate that Apple is still interested in the Mac users. I do hope Apple will address this in early 2017.
    edited December 2016 avon b7
  • Reply 117 of 127
    anomeanome Posts: 1,094member
    nubus said:
    anome said:
    A lot of people who complained about removing the headphone jack were iPhone users. A lot of people who complained about the Mac Pro were Mac users. A lot (probably all) of the people who complained about the shift to Intel from PowerPC were Mac users. I don't think this is anything new, and I doubt it means Apple is any real trouble, or has lost its way.
    How can anyone at this point be stuck in denial mode? Apple decided to cut pricing on dongles and monitors by 25% just 5 days after launch. 25% on new products! Apple realized the late delivery, price, and specs of tMBP alienated (what used to be) core users. We have seen reports that Apple employees are worried about the future of the Mac to the point where Tim Cook had to say "Believe me"... 

    Media in general have ridiculed the tMBP based on performance and cost. MacWorld released their "Apple products that left us in 2016" list and included the desktop Mac. CNet did the same - telling readers how to create a Hackintosh now that Apple hasn't updated their desktop computers for years.

    For now the Mac is stuck with the 15 year old AluThin design language, few upgrades, and lack of OS innovation. The swift discounts indicate that Apple is still interested in the Mac users. I do hope Apple will address this in early 2017.
    I'm trying to work out what I'm supposed to be in denial of. Do I think Apple have left it too long between updates on their desktops? Yes. The fact they haven't updated the Mac mini or Pro in ages, and the iMac in over a year is a concern. I expect there are reasons for it other than Apple has abandoned the Mac in any way. (I'd even go further and say that the fact they didn't speed bump the MBP earlier in the year when they updated the MacBook and bumped the Air, and then didn't release the new MBPs for another 6 months suggests they had problems getting them ready. Anecdotal evidence suggests they were supposed to be released at WWDC, but weren't ready yet.) Time was, when Apple didn't update a product for a long time, a major new redesign was coming, now it seems to be read as "Apple has abandoned Product X."

    Performance of the new MBP? Can't say I've had any problems with mine running multiple VMs to emulate a multiple server configuration as part of some testing I'm doing for work. Battery life remains to be seen, I haven't done a proper test yet, since I usually keep it plugged in, but it hasn't concerned me as yet.

    As to Apple's performance, they still seem to be shifting units, and making money, despite 41 years of Apple being on Deathwatch.
    nubus
  • Reply 118 of 127
    croprcropr Posts: 826member
    fallenjt said:
    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.
    For most professional use, like iOS app development, the wired solution is the only possibility 
  • Reply 119 of 127
    GaprilGapril Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    I access my USB-A and USB-B devices with the software - temporary solution till I'll change the devices for those with USB-C port. If it helps - http://www.flexihub.com/lack-of-usbs-on-macbook-pro-is-solved.html
  • Reply 120 of 127
    pawesumpawesum Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    Usb is the new universal standard. One cable for everything. This is a great thing. No more landfills of specialized cables. Next is wireless charging/ no cables. Be happy.
Sign In or Register to comment.