Then might as well have a dedicated charger plug, if everyone just uses a dedicated outlet.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Likely Aiming for Late October Launch of Redesigned MacBook Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Then might as well have a dedicated charger plug, if everyone just uses a dedicated outlet.
Doubt it. The leaked chasis didn't have a tapered design. It also seemed to have space for the rumoured OLED row, doubt that is coming to the Air..
Which is a good thing since your iPhone charger is rated at 10-12W max, and simply doesn't have the power to run a Macbook Pro - and the USB-A socket standard can't carry enough power to run a serious laptop.
However, if you look at the MacBook, it comes with a 26W power supply with a USB-C socket, so just get a USB-C to Lightning cable (already available) and, bingo, instead of carrying a Magsafe charger (with cable) for your laptop and a USB-A charger (with cable) for your iDevices, you just need one charger and two cables.
Currently, with Apple only making one USB-C laptop, sticking with USB-A for the iPhone charger makes sense, but once they've updated the rest of the range I daresay they'll switch to a USB-C charger and USB-C-to-Lightning cable in the iPhone box.
Then don't buy iffy no-name chargers from fleaBay, and don't charge from the USB-C sockets currently available in #noHotelRoomAnywhere. Its not like a dodgy charger can't already fry your computer and electrocute you. At least you'll now have the option of third party chargers, and charge/docking stations. Probably, at some stage, there will be some software-level security along the lines of "Do you want to allow USB device X to access your computer? Just once/Always/Charge Only".
No - its not tapered so its almost certainly the rMBP replacement... which might make the Air obsolete, depending on the price and specs.
Sadly, if the Air is updated/replaced by a larger version of the 12" MacBook, I suspect it will have two TB3 ports and nothing else. Reason: you need a separate TB controller chip for every 2 TB3 ports. Kaby Lake will have a 2-port controller on the CPU, so they could make a 2-port Air/rMB without needing a controller chip at all. 2 vs. 4 ports would also be a nice differentiator between the Air/rMB and "Pro" range (+ not sure if the 15W chips have the I/O bandwidth?). Having a mix of TB3 and USB-C (without TB) would be confusing and un-apple-y.
I also suspect that we won't see the 4xUSB-C rMBP with Skylake, since that would need 2x discreet Thunderbolt controller chips - not impossible, but either waiting for Kaby Lake or some sort of "transition" version seems likely.
Apple did develop a Lightning 2 connector and it's available now in the iPad Pro. I expect to see it on the new Macs as well.
As for USB-C thumb drives, why is the 128GB USB-C version $10-20 more than the USB 3.0 version from the same manufacturer? And after I buy one, where am I going to use it? Only on my MacBook? Because no one I know personally or professionally has a USB-C port. Add to the fact that I haven't bought a USB thumb drive in almost a decade. I have a bowl of them I've received from various businesses over the years, and they are all compatible with anything I need to use them on. Add to that, I can buy a USB 3.0 thumb drive at the 24 hour drug store down the street. They don't have USB-C.
While I agree with you entirely that people need to be pushed forward; just like Lightning, USB 2 & 3 are still in common use, and perfectly adequate for their purpose, which USB-C doesn't necessarily improve upon. There's a reason Apple didn't put Lightning 2 on the iPhone 7, and 9" iPP, but did put it on the 12" iPP. Keeping a USB 3.0 port on the next generation of MacBooks wouldn't have been such a bad move at least for a few more years until USB-C had a little more market share. Switching to entirely USB-C is like if Apple had dropped USB when they introduced FireWire, and forced everyone to use an interface that was overkill for most applications.
The Air will be refreshed because it's the entry level model, and Apple will likely keep it around as long as possible. Look at the 2012 MBP. But I think Apple learned a lesson with the SE -- they can't keep an old product around, even as an entry level product because it will taint the image of the brand. So the Air will need to be updated to remain competitive with the comperable low-end PCs. Add to that, it's going to be around for maybe 4 more years, so Apple wants to get USB-C into it -- at least one port. And if I'm right, they will also want at least one Lightning port to encourage ecosystem loyalty, not to mention an optional charging port to replace MagSafe, without monopolizing the one or two USB-C ports added to it.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
I understand that one main benefit of using a "standardized" cable and port such as USB for data and for charging is that it is commonly available. (see second benefit below) Forgot your cable at home? Run out to the local 7-11 and buy a cheapo cable at the register. Suddenly low battery at the library? Borrow one from the librarian. Tired of carrying the bulky ac-dc converter brick? Just use one of the many public charging terminals. I'm saying all of these benefits are insecure.
The rebuttal, as you said, is don't use no-name chargers and cables, only use the OEM one that came with the device or purchased from the OEM, and don't charge from public USB sockets. Fine, but then there is no benefit to the "standardized" charging and data cable. What I mean is: if the use is no different than having a dedicated charger only, then there is no benefit to the more complex system. Might as well just have a regular dedicated charger then.
The issue is charging is the one thing 100% of us have to do, almost on a daily basis. In terms of attackable surface area, it's perfect. All someone has to do is get a compromised cable into someone's hands, and it's nearly certain eventually they will plug it in. Maybe some future USB4.0 and USB-d will have hardware protections against this, but no software solution can protect as USB is designed today. Look at iOS, when you plug it into an unknown computer, it asks whether to trust the computer or not for data. Then look up how easy this is to circumvent. I don't think its hard to imagine a scenario where someone plugs in their laptop using an unknown cable, sits down to do some work (and thereby putting in their password to unlock the computer), and meanwhile the cable installs a keylogger or installs some kind of ransomware.
But there is a second benefit to the "standardized" cable. At home, where you trust all the cables and devices, it would be nice to have one cable that charges your computer, connects a monitor, backup drive, speakers, etc. But is it really so much better than plugging in a regular MagSafe charger and a USB/thunderbolt cable that does the the rest? 2 cables versus 1 cable? Is the security risk outside your home worth the very minor convenience inside your home?
The second link I gave was to a double-ended thumb drive with both USB-C and USB-A plugs.
Prices will fall once there is a bigger market for USB-C and more competition.
Fortunately, the world is not simply divided into no-name products from unknown sellers and overpriced originals from the maker of your computer. Just buy products made by reputable third parties from sellers who are unlikely to be pedalling fakes.
Right, of course. But this is the same thing as saying just buy OEM. It require forethought and foreseeability. You know you might need a cable later, so you buy a spare in advance and keep it where you will likely need it. That's fine for some folks, but again I would argue those folks would just as easily plan to have a second dedicated charging cable - it defeats one of the claimed benefits of having a standardized charging and data cable.
The trouble arises when you are low on power and don't have an OEM or reputable third party from which to buy nearby. Imagine someone in a Holiday Inn on business in some random suburb where there are a bunch of large corporate-like companies (I'm picturing the I-95 belt around Boston, or the south of I-280 area near San Fran). They realized they forgot their charger, but they need to do a few hours of work to prepare for the next day before bed. It's 10pm. The nearest 24-hour Apple store is too far. The nearest Best Buys and Staples and etc. are all closed. The hotel has a lost and found bin full of questionable mismatched cables. There is a 7-11 around the corner, that has a bunch of neon-colored no-name cheapo cables hanging by the register. A gas station further down the road has something similar. Sure would be nice if the thing used to charge didn't also require exposing the entire computer.
It's not using a USB cable to charge that worries me. It's that the only way to charge is through a data port.
If the new Macbook Pros have 4 USB-C ports, and one port that accepts a USB-C plug but is charge-only and does not support a data connection of any kind, that would be fine. (I would still prefer MagSafe2 of course, or wireless charging)
Apple's most recent laptop is USB-C only, and all signs point to every other laptop in the pipeline also being USB-C only. The USB-A charger for the iPhone 7 just doesn't mesh with this. For a company pretending to look forward by dropping the headphone jack, using a USB-A charger is just idiotic and undermines their shoddy excuses.
When has apple ever changed accessories during a product cycle? I don't see it happening, and think a dongle and/or cable for connecting to an iPhone7 will be in the BTO options when ordering a late 17 Macbook.
Also, USB-C charger + USB-C Cable + USB-C-to-lighting dongle + lightning cable is in no way better than USB-C charger + 2 USB-C cables, sorry.
[doublepost=1475252869][/doublepost]
There's no way any Macbook will have a lightning port; there's absolutely no reason. They've already gone with USB-C for power on their laptops, and there currently isn't any lightning to lightning cable on the market that I know of; iPhone 7's cable terminates in a USB-A plug, which you of course won't be able to plug into any 2017 Macbook without a dongle.
I think MagSafe is even more important today when the computers are getting lighter.
What on earth do you think the iPhone charger has to do with USB-C on the MacBook?
The supplied iPhone charger only 5W - It is nowhere near powerful enough to run a MacBook. Even the 12" MacBook needs 26W - the rMBP 13" charger is 60W and the 15" needs 85W. If you could plug your MacBook into your iPhone charger it couldn't work.
However, the 12" Macbook charger includes a USB-C socket (not a captive cable like the MagSafe chargers) and will quite happily charge an iPhone with the simple addition of a USB-C to Lightning cable - as, probably, will any future USB-C chargers for the bigger MacBooks.
When you come to MacRumors and you read every week that the next update is happening in the next couple of months, you end up waiting just like I did
Apple has changed from a 30-pin to Lightning cable with the mid-cycle switch from the iPad 3 to iPad 4. Technically it's a new product, but the only difference was swapping out Lightning, and giving it a processor boost mid-cycle. If Apple has a reason to do it, they will.
There are precisely four good reasons to add Lightning to the Mac:
1) Convince to use Lightning headphones between iOS devices and Macs.
2) Optional power port which leaves the USB-C ports open for data only (of significant importance on the Retina MB). Eliminates concerns of plugging in a sub-standard USB-C cable. Uses the same charging cable provided with the iPhone. One cable, one charger.
3) Optional data port which leaves USB-C ports open for data (again important on the rMB).
4) Provides instant compatibility with other Lightning accessories an iOS customer may already have, which mitigates the need to buy a bunch of new USB-C adapters that may not be available, when Apple removes all the other ports, which also reduces Apple's overhead in having to provide multiple adapter options.
It's unlikely there will ever be a Lightning to Lightning cable. But then again, before Apple removed the headphone jack there wasn't a 3.5mm headphone adapter, not was there an adapter with a female Lightning port put out by a third party as far as I know, much less two. And there was never a female to female Lightning adapter before the Pencil. The Lightning port could be used to charge the Apple Pencil, which could be used in the future with a touch screen Mac, or as an alternative to plugging it into the iPad, or having a separate charging cable for it. The Mac already has Lightning peripherals in the mouse, keypad and keyboard, so it makes sense to bring a Lightning port to the Mac for all of these reasons.
But the main reason most customers will care is convenience of using the Lightning EarPods Apple gives them in the box. Right now there are exactly zero options for using the Lightning EarPods with anything other than newer iOS devices. There's not one single adapter to use them with a Mac, either analogue or digital. Not even a USB-C adapter. And there's no hint on the horizon of any coming to market. So the Lightning headphones are dead in the water in terms of useful convenience within the Mac ecosystem. If Lightning is coming to the Mac, that would explain a lot. So we'll see in two weeks what happens ...
I've read most iPad Pro users are replacing the included charger for the 60W rMB charger. So I would expect this to be the common scenario for any MacBook users. And if I'm right and they add Lightning to Mac, they might include a USB-C to Lightning cable in the box in place of or in addition to, but otherwise make such a purchase essential for any MacBook owner who also uses iOS devices. One charger, one cable.
iDownload and MacDailyNews reporting that latest Sierra beta contains strings for ARM architecture:
“Could Apple be working on next-generation Mac hardware that would be powered by an in-house designed processor based on CPU blueprints from British fabless semiconductor maker ARM Holdings plc?” Christian Zibreg reports for iDownloadBlog. “That’s exactly the conclusion one could reach by looking closely at code strings in the macOS Sierra kernel, discovered by Dutch outlet TechTastic.nl.”
“It’s very peculiar that Apple would add support for ARM technology to macOS Sierra,” Zibreg reports. “As you know, all Macs manufactured since 2005 run Intel chips. The Apple appears to be implementing support for ARM chips in the Mac operating system could mean that first ARM-based Macs might appear this year.”
“Could Apple be working on next-generation Mac hardware that would be powered by an in-house designed processor based on CPU blueprints from British fabless semiconductor maker ARM Holdings plc?” Christian Zibreg reports for iDownloadBlog. “That’s exactly the conclusion one could reach by looking closely at code strings in the macOS Sierra kernel, discovered by Dutch outlet TechTastic.nl.”
“It’s very peculiar that Apple would add support for ARM technology to macOS Sierra,” Zibreg reports. “As you know, all Macs manufactured since 2005 run Intel chips. The Apple appears to be implementing support for ARM chips in the Mac operating system could mean that first ARM-based Macs might appear this year.”
No, what would be peculiar is if Apple weren't experimenting with OS X on ARM.
If and when it ever makes it into a product is another matter, but its an obvious hedge against Intel not delivering the goods in the future.
Pro: Bespoke CPUs - no more getting jerked around waiting for Intel to release the right model of CPU - Modern software written in XCode and using Apple frameworks for graphics etc. should just re-compile.
Con: No more running Windows, probably forget some apps like Adobe CS. Hello again "fat binaries".
Look at the reports of Intel not releasing next-generation chips with high-end iGPUs anytime soon: Apple can build an Axx processor with whatever features they want. Also, the MS Surface Pro is getting popular while iPad may be peaking - ARM could probably spank x86 in a "convertible" form factor, and not being able to run Adobe CS or Windows VMs probably isn't a big issue at that end of the market.
Imagine an iPad pro being able to run even selected OS X applications alongside iOS Apps.
WOW! A whole four USB drives and USB-C to USB-A hubs
I'm glad you can find them in a store near you, but they're not near me and most people aren't going to search for them on Amazon. Moreover, their design is horrid and my drives were the fastest type-A drives on the market as of the end of last year. Transfers are near instant--no need to relate them. Where are all the hard drives? One NAS? Until USB-C is built into more external hard drives, Apple's direction is foolhardy, economically and environmentally (yeah, let's throw out viable hard drives /s).
And those cables all require dongles. Just a reality check, but have you ever run this idea by an average person and asked what they think? I love technological advancement but change is received best when it is gradual.
I haven't seen any PS/2 ports in anything recently manufactured. VGA is no longer supported by Intel, but there is still a lot of VGA equipment in the business world and it will only disappear as it ceases to function or as the abilities of other technologies become more appealing. Sorry, but this business world requires profits, not the latest tech.
Nah, that's an argument from silence. Neither you nor I can prove nor disprove it.
Actually, I use TB DAS with my Mini Server, but I won't eschew upgrading to USB-C/TB3 because of it.
I think the big issue which divides people with regard to an all USB-C MBP is simple: does that person think such a radical shift in design is necessary to facilitate an increased rate of adoption for USB-C or does that person believe a more gradual transition would accomplish the same goal?
Profiting from sales of adapters is a by-product of the radical change and while it may or may not be a driving force in this decision, it can only bring smiles to those who sell such adapters.
Left unmentioned in most discussions is the environmental impact of needing adapters, in terms of raw materials now and e-waste later. If nothing else, a more gradual transition may be more environmentally friendly, but that is beyond my personal ability (or anyone's) to foresee.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Actually, I have TWO 7 port hubs connected (both full), bringing the total number of USB ports in use to 24. As I said, 12 ports is not enough. On a modern desktop, 4 ports is a total joke.
WOW! A whole four USB drives and USB-C to USB-A hubs
Where are all the hard drives? One NAS? Until USB-C is built into more external hard drives, Apple's direction is foolhardy, economically and environmentally (yeah, let's throw out viable hard drives /s).
And those cables all require dongles. Just a reality check, but have you ever run this idea by an average person and asked what they think? I love technological advancement but change is received best when it is gradual.
I haven't seen any PS/2 ports in anything recently manufactured. VGA is no longer supported by Intel, but there is still a lot of VGA equipment in the business world and it will only disappear as it ceases to function or as the abilities of other technologies become more appealing. Sorry, but this business world requires profits, not the latest tech.
Nah, that's an argument from silence. Neither you nor I can prove nor disprove it.
Actually, I use TB DAS with my Mini Server, but I won't eschew upgrading to USB-C/TB3 because of it.
I think the big issue which divides people with regard to an all USB-C MBP is simple: does that person think such a radical shift in design is necessary to facilitate an increased rate of adoption for USB-C or does that person believe a more gradual transition would accomplish the same goal?
Profiting from sales of adapters is a by-product of the radical change and while it may or may not be a driving force in this decision, it can only bring smiles to those who sell such adapters.
Left unmentioned in most discussions is the environmental impact of needing adapters, in terms of raw materials now and e-waste later. If nothing else, a more gradual transition may be more environmentally friendly, but that is beyond my personal ability (or anyone's) to foresee.
Just a few points.
Any USB drive you have now most likely already uses two different connectors. I'm looking at four drives on my desk now, all of which have cables which terminate into USB type A, but none of that drives have that connector. All you need is an inexpensive USB-C to USB-A connector cable to use those exact same drives. You do not need drive enclosures equipped with a USB-C connectors, unless you are specifically looking for a feature not supported by the others.
And no, not all of those cables require dongles. USB-C is capable of native HDMI. All you need is a new HDMI cable. The next TV you buy may have a native USB-C input. I would be surprised if the goal wasn't to provide native signal output for every common standard by using a simple connector change adapter.
Also, Apple did introduce a Lightning "2" connector with the 12" iPad Pro. So they did both.
Last edited:
Gonna go ahead and say no, not happening. ARM is a long ways off from emulating x86, and there is no way Apple would launch a new line of computers that weren't backwards compatible with every single piece of software available on the market. Everyone excluding the die-hard try-hard Apple cultists would collectively tell Tim Cook and company to go F themselves if they had to buy every single piece of software they currently used over again just to use the new hardware. In short, not happening anytime soon despite all those benchmark scores people love to throw around showing how fast the new A series chips are, because an out of context benchmark has anything to do with real world applications and isn't just a metric the basement sweaties throw around when comparing their home built liquid cooled desktop super computers.
And typing on a sheet of glass is always going to be like typing on a sheet of glass. It's one thing if it's just a quick email or iMessage response, but the thought of taping out a three page letter or full article on a what you describe is making my finger joints ache already. Unless they come up with a way to soften the blow by giving that top surface some actual travel like current mechanical keyboards, an all glass keyboard would be a nightmare, especially for anyone with rheumatoid arthritis. Based on current patents, Apple hasn't even dipped it's toes into anywhere near those waters, so don't hold your breath.
They have all the patents for haptic touch and screen-keyboards from the iPhone and the Touch Bar. And they'll offer the new W2-chip-enabled wireless apple keyboard when the time comes.
They went from PowerPC to Intel via Rosetta. What's really to stop Apple from doing the same? It'll actually be a less painful process because they'll be able to download the onus to devs using the App store to offer Intel and A101 support in all apps.
Those were actually the 2 most likely scenarios in my earlier post. For sale in early 2018? Let's be in touch then and see who's closer to correct ;-)
[doublepost=1475282153][/doublepost]
None of those are good reasons:
1) Adding a port that is specific to own-brand headphones only would be ridiculous. When they've dropped so many ports previously, adding one for such a specific and minimal reason makes no sense.
2) A Redundant bonus power port makes no sense. If they're going to use the space, why not an extra USB-C port? Problem solved in terms of an extra port when charging, with much greater functionality.
3) Again, redundant, little used data port. They'd be infinitely more likely to include Thunderbolt 2 or USB-A than lighting for an extra data connection.
4) The only lightning accessories out there are iphone products and nobody will dock their computer to the stereo via an iphone dock. What lightning accessories other than the free iPhone headphones are there that anybody would use with a Macbook pro?
[doublepost=1475282534][/doublepost]
Nowhere in my post did I imply using the iPhone charger to run a macbook.
My point was that the included iPhone 7 charging cable terminates in USB-A. Which isn't on the most recent macbooks, and won't be on the upcoming macbook pros.
Lots of people still plug their iphones into their computers for syncing, charging, etc. It's faster a lot of the time, and convenient if you're not near a power outlet. You won't be able to plug your late 2016 iPhone into your late 2016 Macbook Pro without yet another dongle. It would have made way more sense and been in line with Apple's "bravery" to terminate the iPhone7 in a USB-C plug to mesh with it's USB-A-free computers. Instead, they used the outdated and soon-to-be unused in the rest of Apples products USB-A. It makes no sense.
The last rMBP update was in May 2015 ... it doesn't take much to realize that the next update ain't gonna happen for some time, then ... March 2016 was kinda reasonable...June 2015 was most certainly not.
Isn't that like saying "What's the point of running if you will eventually still reach the same destination by walking there?"
Yes, left to its own devices, we might ultimately transition over to USB-C, but when, and at what cost from the delayed adoption of said standard?
For example, many projectors in my school are still sporting only VGA ports. It suffices for connecting to our work-issued laptops (which still come with VGA ports). But it also means I couldn't connect my Apple TV (which requires a HDMI cable) a few years back, and some students whose laptops don't have VGA ports have to get their own adaptors (or use mine). I eventually settled for running Airserver off my MacBook Air until I finally got a classroom with a projector with a HDMI port.
So I lost 2 years of being able to run an Apple TV in my classroom the way I wanted it. Time and a more frustrating user experience. That was the price I paid for my school's hesitance in adopting newer tech.
Doesn't make the sale of adaptors a bad or wrong thing.
So what? Are we supposed to delay the adoption of a certain piece of tech just because someone might be in a position to profit from it?
I don't even know how to respond to this. It's like you are trying to find fault just for the sake of finding fault.
1) tell that to retina MacBook owners, who have only one port. If it makes no sense for Apple to keep a headphone jack on an iPhone, it really makes no sense to keep it on a single port MacBook. And just what percentage of Retina MacBook owners do you think use Android phones? 90%? Most of them probably use iPhones. Imagine a customer who has just bought a new pair of expensive Audeze Lightning headphones to go with their new iPhone 7, only to be told they will need an adapter to switch back and forth with them on their new MacBook, and then imagine that Apple tells them there's not one!
2) they've already got 4 USB-C ports. How many do you need? The current MBP only has two USB-A and 2 Thunderbolt now. Meanwhile, no way to plug in a Lightning headphone without an adapter, which doesn't exist. And even with 4 USB-C ports, one must be used for power. Why not use instead the one port that is already used for power throughout Apple's product line, and leave all four USB-C ports open for data? Sure, Apple's already got a Thunderbolt 3 board in there good for two ports, and a USB-C board good for two ports, what's one more USB-C board to handle a single extra port which the customer is likely to use mainly for power anyway? Might as well get rid of the headphone jack and replace it with a 6th USB-C port then too. Of course then Lightning headphones which Apple is pushing would need an adapter to plug into a USB-C port, for which there's currently not one.
3) lightning 2 is every bit as useful as a USB 3.0 port. It's not there as a primary port anyway. It's there as a headphone port to support Apple's Lightning infrastructure. Power is likely second, and data third, both of which will make a significant difference to Retina MacBook owners. Maybe a second USB-C port would be better for the rMB, but then right now there's a single function headphone jack. So what difference does it make if it's a Lightning port? Unless of course you want to suggest 90% of rMB owners use Android phones and have no need for Lightning.
4) there's a rich ecosystem of Lightning accessories already out there, besides headphones, which many Apple customers are likely using with their iOS devices -- a USB 3.0 adapter, with a power pass through port; an SD card reader; an HDMI adapter (with power pass through); a VGA adapter (w/pass through); and there are MIDI adapters and instruments, Credit card readers, microphones, musical instrument interfaces, and let's not forget the 3.5mm headphone adapter. Heck the Apple Pencil might even be made compatible with the trackpad. If I got into the Apple ecosystem via the iPhone or iPad, I would find the ability to use any of those investments on my new MacBook without using an adapter invaluable.
It's clear you aren't an iOS person. But there are almost a billion of them worldwide. And that's a pretty critical mass for relatively tiny Mac market to justify the inclusion of the most common port on those devices, especially since Apple has already incorporated it into Mac peripherals, and now it's become the de facto wired headphone jack, with the 12" iPad Pro reliant on it as a primary wired data port.
Anyway, we'll find out in a couple of weeks.
As for your USB-C charger argument, I totally reject it. The world is full of USB-A ports. Work and home PCs, all but one current niche Mac, cars, airplanes, and all the phone and most device chargers currently in existence. Apple could have have included a USB-C charger in the box, but then it's compatible with only one Apple device. A device they have the sales numbers for and know how many iPhone customers it will impact. And by the time the new MBP has sold enough units to even approach a single digit percentage of current iPhone users, the next iPhone will be out, and maybe then it will make sense to include a USB-C charger. Again, it's not so much the block charger, which will be incompatible with all other Apple products, but the cable which will only be compatible with one. Next month that number may start increasing, but it will take a while to make any significant impact in units available in the real world. So for those customers who do charge frequently from their laptops, Apple sells a USB-C to Lightning cable. But Apple also includes a free charging block in the box, which for the price of a minor inconvenience at best, doesn't require the purchase of anything else. Compared to the fact that everywhere else that same person travels in the world for at least the next year, the vast majority of charging ports and cables they will encounter will be compatible with the USB-A cables and chargers, not USB-C.
Last edited: