since any new drives should not be USB 3.0 but the new incompatible 3.1
I though 3.1 was backwardly compatible with 3.0 devices.
Yes it is, notwithstanding different connector issues. I assumed and forgot to specify that new drives should be using the newer faster 3.1 and using the future-proof Type-C connector to be the latest and greatest. Sorry about the omission.
As I stated earlier, putting another USB port is not a design problem, the single port simply represents Apple's philosophical perspective on mobile computing. The MB fills a very small gap between the iPad and the MBA. The iPad has only one port too, yet people around here are claiming that it can fulfill the needs of enterprise.
Actually it is a design problem. There is simply not enough room on the rMB to include more than two ports. Apple chose to include an single-function, 1/8" mini-phone jack instead of a second USB-C port. The 1/8" mini-phone jack is actually larger in diameter than the USB-C port is tall, meaning Apple will have to lose it to go much thinner on the rMB.
Having only one port is fine for a mobile device, but for a device like a laptop, having two ports that do the exact same thing is not likely going to be a problem for anyone. Haven't iPad users been clamoring for a second port on the side for years to dock the iPad in landscape mode? Here's the reasons why that second port would have been useful:
1) They got rid of MagSafe, so the potential for the port, or MB, to be damaged (in a manner otherwise prevented by MagSafe) is greater.
2) In the event of a damaged port, provides a redundant port.
3) Allows the device to be charged while using a peripheral device, without purchasing and carrying around a separate hub.
4) Allows the power cord to be lugged into either side.
5) Allows Apple to simplify their lineup by letting the rMB directly replace the 11" MBA, or even both MBAs.
Of course in order to offer the second port, Apple would have had to eliminate the dedicated headphone port, as there's literally no where else to put it. Apple chose to support that than offer a far more useful 2nd port. They could have included the second USB-C port and offered a dongle with an external DAC for use with conventional headphones. Or a simple Lightning adapters for headphones which have been introduced to Apple's new Lightning standards released in December. Or just go wireless as Apple touts in all of their marketing on their website.
I believe that USB-C can work with Thunderbolt cabling, which would provide the ultimate one cable solution (power, high bi-directional throughput, drive & video cabling, etc.).
No, but perhaps Apple's invention of the reversible Lightning port didinfluence the USB committee to redesign their plug.
as USB became so widespread, i suspect each and every committee member, in addition to becoming as frustrated as the rest of us with constantly trying to plug it in upside down, was also considerably embarrassed at such a poor decision.
I believe that USB-C can work with Thunderbolt cabling, which would provide the ultimate one cable solution (power, high bi-directional throughput, drive & video cabling, etc.).
I can see Apple (and Intel) driving this across all of its product line.
yep - but - right now i can't plug my rMB into the thunderbolt (or even mini-display port) monitors we have around the place. thats a little frustrating.
yep - but - right now i can't plug my rMB into the thunderbolt (or even mini-display port) monitors we have around the place. thats a little frustrating.
For the sake of the world Apple should switch from Lightning to USB-C across its iOS and Mac devices. The world needs a single port/connector to rule them all. With the only exception to Apple devices being perhaps an SD-slot.
"For the sake of the world Apple should adopt Android, Windows, and the metric system."
The information available in this thread is absolute crud, Apple's involvement with USB-C is a large factor in its early success.
1. Apple were a huge contributor to the USB-C spec.
2. Apple put the first USB-C device in market, a device that has no other ports - forcing any manufacturer who wants to work natively with this device to create USB-C accessories.
3. Mac OS was the only operating systems that supported USB C, Windows 10 *might* support it now.
4. Firewire still got a good kick from iPods, even though it was dropped long before iPods became massively popular.
5. Lightning is Apple proprietary technology, it's only licensed to accessories manufacturers.
6. The original USB also got a kick from Apple, by its exclusive use in the iMac.
The information available in this thread is absolute crud, Apple's involvement with USB-C is a large factor in its early success.
1. Apple were a huge contributor to the USB-C spec.
2. Apple put the first USB-C device in market.
The Chromebook Pixel may have been the first to market with a USB-C port, two of them in fact. But if so it wasn't by much. The Nokia N-1 tablet and Apple's MacBook were in the same general time-frame.
...and yes Win10 and Android M also support USB-C. Devices incorporating it should be plentiful later this year.
The Chromebook Pixel may have been the first to market with a USB-C port, two of them in fact. But if so it wasn't by much. The Nokia N-1 tablet and Apple's MacBook were in the same general time-frame.
...and yes Win10 and Android M also support USB-C. Devices incorporating it should be plentiful later this year.
The Pixel was announced on March 11, two days after the MacBook.
As you say, though, the dates don't matter much. The MacBook will be remembered as the machine that first pushed wide-spread adoption of the new standard, as was the original iMac.
The Pixel was announced on March 11, two days after the MacBook.
As you say, though, the dates don't matter much. The MacBook will be remembered as the machine that first pushed wide-spread adoption of the new standard, as was the original iMac.
I know the announcements were close together but I think the Pixel began shipping before the MacBook, "first to market". And you're correct, as often is the case the Apple product will be remembered as being first due to their very high profile. They have the power and influence to push the industry in any direction they wish for the most part, Thunderbolt perhaps being an exception.
Actually it is a design problem. There is simply not enough room on the rMB to include more than two ports.
They could have done it if they wanted to. They chose not to. I'm not so sure a second USB-C wouldn't fit right next to fist one with the same thin body. It would be tight, but to me, the single port was an intentional and deliberate design decision.
They could have done it if they wanted to. They chose not to. I'm not so sure a second USB-C wouldn't fit right next to fist one with the same thin body. It would be tight, but to me, the single port was an intentional and deliberate design decision.
Perhaps smarter would be to put one on each side. It's irritating to wrap a charging cord around the opposite side and keep it out of the way. One on each side is the way to go.
Comments
since any new drives should not be USB 3.0 but the new incompatible 3.1
I though 3.1 was backwardly compatible with 3.0 devices.
Yes it is, notwithstanding different connector issues. I assumed and forgot to specify that new drives should be using the newer faster 3.1 and using the future-proof Type-C connector to be the latest and greatest. Sorry about the omission.
Type-C 8.4mm by 2.6mm
Lightning 7.7mm by 1.7mm
iPhone 6 is 6.5mm thickness
iPhone 6+ is 7.1mm
USB-C might fit except for the curved edges of the devices.
You're assuming that Apple will not in any way ever seek to make their devices thinner.
As I stated earlier, putting another USB port is not a design problem, the single port simply represents Apple's philosophical perspective on mobile computing. The MB fills a very small gap between the iPad and the MBA. The iPad has only one port too, yet people around here are claiming that it can fulfill the needs of enterprise.
Actually it is a design problem. There is simply not enough room on the rMB to include more than two ports. Apple chose to include an single-function, 1/8" mini-phone jack instead of a second USB-C port. The 1/8" mini-phone jack is actually larger in diameter than the USB-C port is tall, meaning Apple will have to lose it to go much thinner on the rMB.
Having only one port is fine for a mobile device, but for a device like a laptop, having two ports that do the exact same thing is not likely going to be a problem for anyone. Haven't iPad users been clamoring for a second port on the side for years to dock the iPad in landscape mode? Here's the reasons why that second port would have been useful:
1) They got rid of MagSafe, so the potential for the port, or MB, to be damaged (in a manner otherwise prevented by MagSafe) is greater.
2) In the event of a damaged port, provides a redundant port.
3) Allows the device to be charged while using a peripheral device, without purchasing and carrying around a separate hub.
4) Allows the power cord to be lugged into either side.
5) Allows Apple to simplify their lineup by letting the rMB directly replace the 11" MBA, or even both MBAs.
Of course in order to offer the second port, Apple would have had to eliminate the dedicated headphone port, as there's literally no where else to put it. Apple chose to support that than offer a far more useful 2nd port. They could have included the second USB-C port and offered a dongle with an external DAC for use with conventional headphones. Or a simple Lightning adapters for headphones which have been introduced to Apple's new Lightning standards released in December. Or just go wireless as Apple touts in all of their marketing on their website.
The nonsense to content ratio in this article is high, and most of the nonsense is of the apple-worshipping, 'reality distortion field' variety.
Props to all of those apple lovers in these comment sections who exercise critical thinking. Your comments are more sensible than the article.
https://thunderbolttechnology.net/blog/thunderbolt-3-usb-c-does-it-all
I can see Apple (and Intel) driving this across all of its product line.
No, but perhaps Apple's invention of the reversible Lightning port did influence the USB committee to redesign their plug.
as USB became so widespread, i suspect each and every committee member, in addition to becoming as frustrated as the rest of us with constantly trying to plug it in upside down, was also considerably embarrassed at such a poor decision.
I believe that USB-C can work with Thunderbolt cabling, which would provide the ultimate one cable solution (power, high bi-directional throughput, drive & video cabling, etc.).
https://thunderbolttechnology.net/blog/thunderbolt-3-usb-c-does-it-all
I can see Apple (and Intel) driving this across all of its product line.
yep - but - right now i can't plug my rMB into the thunderbolt (or even mini-display port) monitors we have around the place. thats a little frustrating.
I wonder if this setup would work?
"For the sake of the world Apple should adopt Android, Windows, and the metric system."
Keep dreaming.
1. Apple were a huge contributor to the USB-C spec.
2. Apple put the first USB-C device in market, a device that has no other ports - forcing any manufacturer who wants to work natively with this device to create USB-C accessories.
3. Mac OS was the only operating systems that supported USB C, Windows 10 *might* support it now.
4. Firewire still got a good kick from iPods, even though it was dropped long before iPods became massively popular.
5. Lightning is Apple proprietary technology, it's only licensed to accessories manufacturers.
6. The original USB also got a kick from Apple, by its exclusive use in the iMac.
...and yes Win10 and Android M also support USB-C. Devices incorporating it should be plentiful later this year.
The Pixel was announced on March 11, two days after the MacBook.
As you say, though, the dates don't matter much. The MacBook will be remembered as the machine that first pushed wide-spread adoption of the new standard, as was the original iMac.
Actually it is a design problem. There is simply not enough room on the rMB to include more than two ports.
They could have done it if they wanted to. They chose not to. I'm not so sure a second USB-C wouldn't fit right next to fist one with the same thin body. It would be tight, but to me, the single port was an intentional and deliberate design decision.