Bloomberg: Next-Generation MacBook Pro to Offer Improved Displays, Faster Charging Over MagSafe

[Stephen.R]

That's true when you connect to a well-behaving Mac. Can you not conceive of a charger or cable that might be able to deliver a malicious payload without triggering this warning?


In practice, people share data cables, buy cheap third-party cables and chargers, and use public charging stations (in airports, etc) all the time. I'm mostly talking about mobile devices here, but the principle is the same.

I just think it's a benefit worth mentioning, because most people don't even think about it. If I had the choice between buying a Mac with USB-C charging or MagSafe, I'd choose MagSafe every time. Even if there was no security benefit, the trip-hazard reduction is worth the ticket price alone.

Buy one of the existing magnetic breakaway USB-c charge cables and use it with a power adapter you take yourself.

you can do that today if you want, no additional ports required.

 

[chucker23n1]

That's true when you connect to a well-behaving Mac. Can you not conceive of a charger or cable that might be able to deliver a malicious payload without triggering this warning?

I can, sure. It hasn’t happened on iOS so far, to my knowledge.

In practice, people share data cables, buy cheap third-party cables and chargers, and use public charging stations (in airports, etc) all the time. I'm mostly talking about mobile devices here, but the principle is the same.

Yes, but charging cables wouldn’t show this alert. People rarely share cables that they expect to transmit data.

 

[kalsta]

Buy one of the existing magnetic breakaway USB-c charge cables …

I didn't know such things existed. Thanks for the tip.

… and use it with a power adapter you take yourself.

Always a good strategy. Unfortunately though, most people are not so well-informed, and aren't even aware of the potential risk.

you can do that today if you want, no additional ports required.

You've spent quite a bit of energy now telling me why this MagSafe port isn't necessary, despite the fact that it offers some tangible benefits over Apple's USB-C charging models. What you haven't done if offered a tangible benefit of not having a MagSafe port (in addition to at least two USB-C ports). I can't think of one good, practical reason. If you happen to know that it costs Apple more to produce a MagSafe port than a USB-C port, then you could argue a small cost benefit perhaps. Or do you just spend a lot of time looking at the edge of your MacBook and marvelling at the minimalist aesthetics?

 

[Stephen.R]

Two very similar solutions sounds very unlike apple to me, so my concern is about a reduction in existing functionality to accommodate any “alternative”.

 

[kalsta]

Yes, but charging cables wouldn’t show this alert. People rarely share cables that they expect to transmit data.

Exactly. Most people don't realise that malicious trojan chargers and cables even exist. The point is, a port that combines power and data is capable of transferring data, whether people expect it to or not.

Look, even R2D2 occasionally mistakes a power terminal for a data port. How can you expect the average consumer to know this stuff?

 

[kalsta]

… sounds very unlike apple to me …

Being Apple-like isn't a tangible benefit. But I'll respond anyway…

Apple is at its best when it takes existing technology and makes it more usable. MagSafe delivers on this. It's super easy to connect and disconnect. It stays in when you need it to, and it pops out when there's a risk of your expensive machine hitting the floor. I can't think of a more Apple-like technology, and I've been a Mac user for close to three decades.

… my concern is about a reduction in existing functionality to accommodate any “alternative”.

How does adding MagSafe reduce existing functionality? When Apple needlessly removes ports (as they did with this abomination), that is a reduction of functionality.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

That's true when you connect to a well-behaving Mac. Can you not conceive of a charger or cable that might be able to deliver a malicious payload without triggering this warning?

As it is currently, any cable that does not get approval by the UI to send data is only going to be charging. The only way that permission can be escalated without notification is if the OS on the device was already compromised. And if the OS on your device is compromised, then you’ve got bigger problems than whether or not a cable or charger might be sending malicious payloads.

 

[Mr.PT]

Being Apple-like isn't a tangible benefit. But I'll respond anyway…

Apple is at its best when it takes existing technology and makes it more usable. MagSafe delivers on this. It's super easy to connect and disconnect. It stays in when you need it to, and it pops out when there's a risk of your expensive machine hitting the floor. I can't think of a more Apple-like technology, and I've been a Mac user for close to three decades.


How does adding MagSafe reduce existing functionality? When Apple needlessly removes ports (as they did with this abomination), that is a reduction of functionality.

Also a MagSafe nostalgic with high hopes, but would prefer a TB/Usb-C interface cable “tweak” solution because:
a) you keep the ability to choose side for charging;
b) in Apple scarce ports layout you don’t “sacrifice” one to charging only.
c) This would allow you to use any charger.

PS: I suggest you LMP Usb-C “MagSafe” solutions (power cable or adapter) they are not as Apple, but reasonable Ok

 

[Stephen.R]

Being Apple-like isn't a tangible benefit. But I'll respond anyway…

Apple is at its best when it takes existing technology and makes it more usable. MagSafe delivers on this. It's super easy to connect and disconnect. It stays in when you need it to, and it pops out when there's a risk of your expensive machine hitting the floor. I can't think of a more Apple-like technology, and I've been a Mac user for close to three decades.


How does adding MagSafe reduce existing functionality? When Apple needlessly removes ports (as they did with this abomination), that is a reduction of functionality.

You're taking a single thought (I'll admit the dots maybe made it seem like two sentences?) and discussing the points separately.

The concern is:

Two very similar "solutions" in one device, for the same "problem" is distinctly un Apple-like. Thus, if MagSafe were added back as an additional, power only port, there is concern that power via the USB-C ports could be affected in some way.

I find it hard to believe Apple would drop support for USB-PD, but then I find it equally hard to believe they would add mag a dedicated charging port (particularly when they're just now migrating to much more power efficient CPUs).

 

[svish]

Both Magsafe and faster charging are welcome.

 

[ds2000]

It's superior in terms of "it just pulls away if the cable gets caught". But it doesn't carry data, so it's inferior in terms of "I want fewer cables to connect".

It's a very subjective topic.

Agree. Its nice to have the option but I love putting USB-C between my Macbook and Windows machines and having my magic mouse and keyboards just connect without any effort.

Magsafe would be nice on the road.

 

[UltimateSyn]

No mention of 120Hz - everything else is welcome, though.

 

[heath_durbin]

I'm happy to se the mag safe back, but I will be upset if it no longer supports USB C charging...

It should support BOTH... so that we have flexibility.

 

[heath_durbin]

Also a MagSafe nostalgic with high hopes, but would prefer a TB/Usb-C interface cable “tweak” solution because:
a) you keep the ability to choose side for charging;
b) in Apple scarce ports layout you don’t “sacrifice” one to charging only.
c) This would allow you to use any charger.

PS: I suggest you LMP Usb-C “MagSafe” solutions (power cable or adapter) they are not as Apple, but reasonable Ok

I have one of those... but yea, no file transfer.... why can't apple just make it all work... lol