2016 Macbook Pro all USB-C ports dead

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by nsxrox, Mar 12, 2017.

  1. nsxrox, Mar 12, 2017
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2017

    nsxrox macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2010
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    #1
    I went to charge my 2016 15" MBP via Apple power adapter and heard two beeps. I thought that was odd. I checked back an hour later and my battery was still at 15%. Took it into the Genius Bar, reset PRAM and SMC, then they confirmed that all 4 USB-C ports were completely dead. I've only ever used Apple branded USB-C adapters during the last 3 months that I've owned this laptop.

    The repair estimate was $575 to replace the logic board. Fortunately its still under warranty, so no charge to me. I'll lose all of my data since the SSD is soldered to the logic board. No chance of backing up now that the battery is down to 3% after all of the diagnostics.

    I bought this machine despite the negative reviews because I've always owned Mac laptops and I like the hardware. This is a very disappointing turn of events for this product. Was already on the fence about the future of Macs. This is not helping.
     
  2. Sanpete macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Location:
    Utah
    #2
  3. alFR macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    #3
    Definitely disappointing, but the reality is that any product can have occasional failures, Apple are fixing it for free and they can get your data back (although you have a backup anyway, right? Right?). Hardly cause for declaring that the Mac is doomed.
     
  4. magicschoolbus macrumors 6502a

    magicschoolbus

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    #4
    Terrible news - sorry to hear. Apple is fixing it free of charge as they should. Wonder how all of your ports died?
     
  5. hotmetal macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Location:
    London
    #5
    Maybe not, but I've read more negative stuff about the 'rushed to market for PGP' 2016 MBP than any other I can remember, and things like soldered RAM and SSDs that you can't remove and drop into an enclosure are really making me wonder how much longer MBPs will be the choice of professionals (me included) who rely on them for daily workhorses. They say their research shows that people don't care about crap battery life, paying over the odds for RAM and not being able to remove the drives in exchange for a couple of mm 'thinness'. Really? Maybe for the coffee shop brigade but not for us contractors. I call BS. I have no issue with products like the Air, but please keep 'pro' machines viable, useable and repairable for people who depend upon it for work. I'm desperately hoping my 17" can be repaired so it lasts at least until they bring out the 2017, which, while not addressing any of those particular gripes, will hopefully have had some of these gremlins fixed.

    Totally agree about backups though! I have a TM backup on one external and a Super Duper clone on the HDD I took out of mine when I put my SSD in. Ah, those were the days!
     
  6. leman, Mar 12, 2017
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2017

    leman macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #6
    You are blowing it out of proportions. Your computer was defective, it gets repaired under warranty. Every year, the same happens to thousands and thousands of consumer products. This is also the reason why warranties exist. If that's your benchmark of "Apple being doomed" then they (along with any other pc manufacturer) have been doomed from the start.
     
  7. Sanpete macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Location:
    Utah
    #7
    Most of the complaints had nothing to do with things being rushed to the market. They had to do with decisions made early on, about ports, keyboard type, MagSafe, etc.

    Who are "they"? Obviously people do care about those things. That's why they made room for larger batteries, and the battery life for the 15" is better than before. But they also care about size and weight, which is why there's even such a thing as a 13".
     
  8. hotmetal macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Location:
    London
    #8
    Well yeah ok. And I totally agree that the 17" is a fair lump to lug around, but for my use case (freelance designer) I value the extra real estate over a bit of extra weight. I also loved that I could update the thing after 3 years to 16GB and 1TB SSD, at Crucial prices. I admit I'm just sore that Apple (the "they" in my previous post) try to present the thickness reduction as a boon worth trading upgradeability for, when we know really that they stand to gain from forcing you to CTO at time of purchase and then mark up the RAM to silly prices cos you don't have a choice. And of course they benefit from forced upgrades, lower shipping cost etc. Of course it makes sense for them as a business. I just don't care for them peeing down my back and telling me they hate rain too, like I should be glad I can't upgrade cos hey, it's 2mm thinner.
     
  9. Sanpete macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Location:
    Utah
    #9
    I haven't seen Apple say what you attribute to them. They solder in RAM even where size isn't an issue, probably to keep people from messing things up inside, same reason they use special screws.
     
  10. hotmetal macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Location:
    London
    #10
    Ok well it was a while ago so I can't quote you the source but I recall it being a quote from Apple that they claimed they had asked people and that their research showed people were willing to trade upgradeability for "thinness". My guess is that they asked people if size and weight were important (yes, obviously). I doubt they presented it as "we can offer you a thinner, lighter macbook, but you will have to buy all the RAM you want from us, and we will mark it up big time - who's in? ". I can't *prove* to you it was Apple, any more than you saying you haven't heard them say it means they didn't say it. So we're going to differ on that. The 16GB Crucial RAM has not 'messed it up inside'. I underestimated how much RAM I would need for 2014 back when I bought it in 2012 in a hurry for a contract I won. Sorry if it upsets you that I now feel sad that what I was able to do then (retrospectively upgrade) I now cannot, for the sake of "thinness". You were always able to pay massively over the odds for your Ram if you wanted, and I am sure Apple appreciate your loyalty. I hereby validate your purchase and apple's business model. Don't get me wrong - I still love Apple devices, I just don't like the way they've become so expensive and yet you're forced to now configure to order at monopoly prices based on your projection at time of purchase about your likely future needs and your estimate of how long the thing will last. For the record, I am pretty stoked that my 2011 MBP is (well, was) still going strong after 5 years BUT only because I was able to upgrade parts. Also, if I want a 1TB 2016 MBP it's CTO and a 2 week lead time minimum. Previously I could walk into a store, buy a laptop, buy a bigger drive, and take it to work the next day. Now, if I need one tomorrow for a job, I have to either turn the work away cos I have no computer while I wait for a CTO to ship, or buy one off the shelf, do the job, and then return it, get the refund, then order the spec I need, and hope that I don't need a mac in the meantime. That's my use case, YMMV.
     
  11. Sanpete macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Location:
    Utah
    #11
    Given how much you just (inaccurately) read into what I just said, it's probably best not to rely on your memory of what Apple said a while ago. I don't object to anyone complaining about things they don't like about Apple products, but I do prefer people stick to real facts when facts are claimed, verifiable ones if possible.
     
  12. leman macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #12
    They have always earned a lot of money from CTO upgrades, but now probably less then ever. Don't forget that they use LDDDR3 RAM, which is much more expensive than your SODIMM modules. Not to mention that repairs are much more costly to Apple now than they were before. So its not that simple as you put it.
     
  13. hotmetal macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Location:
    London
    #13
    Do I need to quote you some RAM prices to back up my unverified assertion that we're being taken advantage of? Do you not even want the option to upgrade? I guess it won't alter your position so maybe not. Given how both of us appear to be misinterpreting the entire conversation, I am gonna leave it. I'm not the kind of guy that remembers the page number, paragraph and issue number of Macworld, or URL of the site where I read something, for use in a discussion on a forum about whether or not I should be pleased that I can no longer update my mac for fear of messing it up inside. Yeah my memory clearly sucks. None of my points have any validity, and I have strayed from the party line. I humbly apologise. I'm glad you're happy, and do not need proof of that, I will take you at your word. I didn't come on here looking to be controversial, and whilst it's not a court of law I'm allowed an opinion, and I don't believe I have to present verifiable facts for everything Is might wish to say. Clearly you think I'm here to bash apple, but as I've used Apples exclusively since the LCII and early Performa series, actually I'm pretty loyal. I just don't like the way things have gone with regards to upgrades. Seems like me criticising their change in practice (real or imagined, verifiable or otherwise) seems to undermine your feelgood factor. That was not my intention, but I don't want to cause any upset, and it seems you're taking offence, so let's just agree to disagree. Toodle-pip old bean.
     
  14. Sanpete macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Location:
    Utah
    #14
    Only one person is misinterpreting things. @leman and I have said little, but you've read a great deal into it that simply isn't there, some in clear disregard of what is there. And it appears only one person here is upset, which may account for the misunderstandings.
     
  15. hotmetal macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Location:
    London
    #15
    Ok whatevs. Not sure where this is getting any of us, my gripe with the newer unupgradeable MBPs still stands, and no 'verifiable facts' from you will help me upgrade my next laptop. Fora such as these are a great source of information but this exchange of opinions between you and I is proving somewhat counterproductive. If you don't want to be able to update your mac mid life that is totally cool with me. I do, and am somewhat surprised at how this seems to have rattled you. As I said, I did not come here to argue, so now I will go and do something more constructive. I'm still not sure what your actual argument is (that Apple do no wrong? That upgrades are bad? That my memory is bad? Or that my assertions can't be proven?) I'm was hoping for some clarity of your position, but so far all I can ascertain is that it's just the opposite of whatever it is I said. I'm not terribly bothered any more as all that seems to be happening is we are descending into the realms of conversation that I generally prefer to avoid, so, again, fare thee well.
     
  16. Sanpete macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Location:
    Utah
    #16
    See above. You have yet to respond to what I've actually said, preferring your own conversation with someone you're made up.
     
  17. killawat macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    #17
    Sorry for your trouble, you shouldn't have to be dealing with this so soon.

    But thanks for posting the price of the mobo replace.
     
  18. leman macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #18
    Please do, but then take effort to quote correct RAM prices. Again, the modern MacBooks don't use your stock DDR3, but a much more expensive LPDDR3.

    Thats pretty much a rhetorical question given the fact that the 15" MBP (my work machine) comes with maxed out RAM in its stock option.

    What do you mean "have gone"? Apple's upgrades were always crazy expensive. The main difference is that they now charge you $300 for a CPU upgrade that costs $200 for then. Before, they charged the same amount of money for an upgrade that cost them half of that.

    Thats an interesting way to put it. I don't really know what this thing has to do with my "feelgood factor", but the primary reason why I criticise your criticism is because I believe it to be mostly misplaced and logically inconsistent. Apple always made a lot of money of CTO upgrades, and now they are most likely making much less — simply because the actual hardware prices rose dramatically, while the upgrade prices haven't risen that much. As to the upgradeability debate... thats obviously a more complicated issue. My personal stance on it is that RAM upgradeability doesn't matter anymore — simply because the market has changed. Laptops now come with insane amounts of RAM in stock configs, and if you need more RAM, you can easily plan ahead. Frankly, its not like you would be able to upgrade RAM in a 13" or 12" Apple laptop anyway, simply because they use different RAM tech for which no slotted designs exist. And if you'd go for slotted RAM, you'd compromise battery life and possibly performance. Thats what I was trying to convey: hardware design is hard, there are a lot of things to consider. And you are trivialising all these things.
     

Share This Page