Bloomberg: Next MacBook Pro to Feature SD Card Reader

[Lemon Olive]

That ‘only good thing about them’ as you say, is a massive improvement. Weird to not acknowledge that.

No, not really. TB is already massively over spec'd for most users, even Pro users, so having 2 ports split across 1 controller that meant "only" 20 Gbps of bandwidth per port....simply meant more ports. "Slow" has never been a concern. So no, its not a practical improvement, even though its a technical improvement.

I think- before anything else- it’s important to wait until they realise their full vision.

It’s more telling if you look at what they’ve left in their line up, intel wise, than it is trying to speculate from the AS systems released so far.

What's telling is that they are planning to release models with legacy ports, because the new models will also only have 2 TB ports. This doesn't take much to understand.

 

[0924487]

USB4.0 is out, and Apple at least, is using it.

The Adobe/PDF example is an apt comparison, but I dont think it makes the point you intended.

Adobe gave the spec to the ISO, so anyone else can implement it and be interoperable. It doesn't mean Adobe has to give away their software for free.

Intel gave the spec for TB3 to the USB-IF, so anyone else can implemented it as part of USB4 and be interoperable. It doesn't mean Intel give away their controllers for free.

My understanding is that TB3 needs a controller on the master, usually integrated into the CPU, like M1 or i7, then you need another chip in the slave device, and another two chips in the cable if the cable is active.

Going forward, chip standard in the slaves will be royalty free and become a commodity with chip venders, just like Arduino. I’m not sure if the chip standard in the master will be royalty free. I’m not sure if Apple can build the master from the ground up. If they can’t, they would have to license the chip IP from Intel.

This wasn’t that big of a problem because previously, no one was building the master.

I wonder how AMD does it.

 

[bookofxero]

Syncing 500GB-1TB via wifi every month or two when the media library get's corrupted isn't something that's very attractive. Even over USB 3 it takes several hours

Remember a crazy little thing called Time Capsule? I am thinking more along those lines. Continuous/iterative sync will always beat a monolithic monthly sync.

 

[dannys1]

FYI:
Apple on Using SD card as startup volume.

imagine running a boot volume on a 480mbit SD card, absolutely horrendous experience. Never mind slow the card would die for R/W in about a week.

 

[theorist9]

And I never said you were implying it.

I'm not sidestepping your point, I am actively refuting the validity of your claim that it's unreasonable.

If people want to claim that a USB-C to <insert legacy adaptor> is some great hardship and they want their legacy ports back, I'm going to call them a luddite.

That's also a straw man. No one here is claiming "great hardship". They are simply expressing a preference for how they like to use technology. Leaving aside the general issue of name-calling, to term people Luddites simply because their preferences differ from yours is silly.

For instance, according to your way of thinking, Linus Sebastian, who hosts four technology channels on YouTube (e.g., Linus Tech Tips), is a Luddite (he recently remarked he would have preferred that the Dell XPS include a USB-A port). Do you even know what a Luddite is?

Likewise, by your way of thinking, it's fair game for anyone who wants Apple to, say, abandon ports altogether and go completely wireless to call you a Luddite for wanting Apple to continue to offer USB-C.

 

[cmaier]

That's also a straw man. No one here is claiming "great hardship". They are simply expressing a preference for how they like to use technology. Leaving aside the general issue of name-calling, to term people Luddites simply because their preferences differ from yours is silly.

For instance, according to your way of thinking, Linus Sebastian, who hosts four technology channels on YouTube (e.g., Linus Tech Tips), is a Luddite (he recently remarked he would have preferred that the Dell XPS include a USB-A port). Do you even know what a Luddite is?

Likewise, by your way of thinking, it's fair game for anyone who wants Apple to, say, abandon ports altogether and go completely wireless to call you a Luddite for wanting Apple to continue to offer USB-C.

Poor Ned Ludd, having his name misused like this.

 

[Stephen.R]

No one here is claiming "great hardship".

They're certainly acting like it is a great hardship.

to term people Luddites simply because their preferences differ from yours is silly.

It's not about a 'preference', it's about capability.

USB-C is a newer port. It is fully backwards compatible, and cross compatible with dozens of other port types.

USB-A is a legacy port. It is not forwards compatible.

Do you even know what a Luddite is?

Yes, I do actually. Do you?

noun
derogatory a person opposed to new technology or ways of working: a small-minded Luddite resisting progress

If that doesn't describe the people arguing for legacy ports, nothing does.

 

[WaltCD]

I wonder what the percentage of people who use MacBook Pros also use SD Cards? I'm under the impression most people don't even use digital cameras anymore. (Conversely, I'm thinking most people who use SD Cards also use Macs)
I would think more people would make benefit of an HDMI port? Perhaps not, with Apple TV doing mirroring so well.
USB-A is a given, there are still many, MANY devices which use it, even with new devices still coming out each day.

I got my current MacBook Pro in December, 2016. I immediately purchased an Anker Hub: https://amzn.to/2N4hjlW
It covers everything I need (Ethernet, USB-A, HDMI) and has an SD Card slot.

Perhaps Anker should make a deal with Apple: Every MacBook Pro comes with a $50 coupon for an Anker hub. Each user, if needed, can get the hub that best fits their needs. Done. Voila! Everyone happy.
It'd probably be less cost for Apple.

I'm happy for those who use SD Cards. I can't see any negative to it (what else would Apple put in that same spot?). I just don't know if its worth it for those few who use it. Maybe I underestimate the number of people who do.


Walt D in LV

 

[theorist9]

They're certainly acting like it is a great hardship.



It's not about a 'preference', it's about capability.

USB-C is a newer port. It is fully backwards compatible, and cross compatible with dozens of other port types.

USB-A is a legacy port. It is not forwards compatible.


Yes, I do actually. Do you?



If that doesn't describe the people arguing for legacy ports, nothing does.

Yeah, you definitely don't understand what Luddite means. It's meant to refer to those who broadly reject technology generally, not to those who have a different view of how technology should be designed than you do.

Just because I think USB-A would be a nice convenience, doesn't mean you get to call me a Luddite. As a biophysicist, much of my research has depended on bleeding edge tech. You're substituting insult for reasoned argument.

And with regard to capability, you have an overly narrow view. Capability is not merely pure specification. it's capability within the context of how you are using the product.

And USB-A is not a legacy port. A legacy port is one that's no longer found on new product. Yet many new products continue to be produced that use USB-A. Logitech, one of the key producers of high-end gaming mice, continues to equip its wired gaming mice (maybe not all of them, but at least the ones I checked) with USB-A. And I believe that's true of Razer's wired gaming mice as well.

 

[Stephen.R]

It's meant to refer to those who broadly reject technology generally

I assume you're referring to the original Luddites, 200 years ago who destroyed machines to "protect their jobs".

No dictionary definition I can find, has just the 200 year old definition. They all include a definition as I'm using it. So you can argue about what it's "meant" to mean till you're blue in the face, but you're arguing that multiple concurring dictionaries are wrong.

someone who is opposed or resistant to new technologies or technological change.

broadly : one who is opposed to especially technological change

One who opposes technical or technological change.

Nowadays, the term is often used to describe someone that is opposed or resistant to new technologies

someone who is against the introduction of new equipment, working methods, etc

As a biophysicist, much of my research has depended on bleeding edge tech.

Good for you. Irrelevant, unless your work involves hybrid USB mice that are actual rodents.

Capability is not merely pure specification. it's capability within the context of how you are using the product.

Capability literally means the power or ability to do something.

USB-A is not a legacy port. A legacy port is one that's no longer found on new product.

So by your logic, if a vendor ships a USB1.0 port on a product today, it isn't legacy? What about PS2? ADB? Parallel Port?

Here's a hint that USB type-A is legacy: the last USB-spec that actually affected USB-A ports in a meaningful way (i.e. not just naming) was 2013, when USB 3.1 replaced 3.0, and we got "USB 3.1Gen2" (which later became "USB 3.2 Gen2x1") which added support for 10Gbps.

No USB specification since then has changed anything for USB Type-A, besides naming.

USB 3.2 Gen1x2 USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 are actual new modes of transfer, but only support USB-C.

USB4.0 defines only USB-C ports.

I don't understand why you're so upset about a word. It's a legacy port. It doesn't mean you can't use it. I use a Firewire port all the time, and eSATA, and even some USB-A ports. Just because they're legacy doesn't mean they don't work for the devices I have.

But it also doesn't mean I actually expect a manufacturer to dedicate space and IO lanes etc to provide me with those ports on the machine.

 

[theorist9]

I assume you're referring to the original Luddites, 200 years ago who destroyed machines to "protect their jobs".

No dictionary definition I can find, has just the 200 year old definition. They all include a definition as I'm using it. So you can argue about what it's "meant" to mean till you're blue in the face, but you're arguing that multiple concurring dictionaries are wrong.













Good for you. Irrelevant, unless your work involves hybrid USB mice that are actual rodents.


Capability literally means the power or ability to do something.



So by your logic, if a vendor ships a USB1.0 port on a product today, it isn't legacy? What about PS2? ADB? Parallel Port?

Here's a hint that USB type-A is legacy: the last USB-spec that actually affected USB-A ports in a meaningful way (i.e. not just naming) was 2013, when USB 3.1 replaced 3.0, and we got "USB 3.1Gen2" (which later became "USB 3.2 Gen2x1") which added support for 10Gbps.

No USB specification since then has changed anything for USB Type-A, besides naming.

USB 3.2 Gen1x2 USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 are actual new modes of transfer, but only support USB-C.

USB4.0 defines only USB-C ports.

I don't understand why you're so upset about a word. It's a legacy port. It doesn't mean you can't use it. I use a Firewire port all the time, and eSATA, and even some USB-A ports. Just because they're legacy doesn't mean they don't work for the devices I have.

But it also doesn't mean I actually expect a manufacturer to dedicate space and IO lanes etc to provide me with those ports on the machine.

You just don't get it. By the very defintion you quoted for Luddite, the word is "derogatory". So it's like calling someone a fool or an idiot. As they say, "them's fightin' words". A Luddite is someone who wants to go backwards generally—rejects tech generally. The people you are mistakenly calling Luddite, including myself, are those who generally want the latest in cutting edge tech, but, in certain applications, for reasons of compatability, would like one piece of older (but still current) tech as well. And capability does mean the ability to do something. In this context, it would be the ability to plug in a USB-A device without having to bring along a dongle. That is also a form of capability, which you don't seem to understand.

 

[Stephen.R]

By the very defintion you quoted for Luddite, the word is "derogatory".

That doesn't change the definition mate.

A Luddite is someone who wants to go backwards generally—rejects tech generally.

So, you're still arguing that <checks notes> four dictionaries and wikipedia are all wrong, and you know better?

The people you are mistakenly calling Luddite,

It's not a mistake mate.

those who generally want the latest in cutting edge tech, but, in certain applications, for reasons of compatability, would like one piece of older (but still current) tech as well.

Anker USB C Hub, 341 USB-C Hub (7-in-1) with 4K HDMI, 100W Power Delivery, USB-C and 2 USB-A 5 Gbps Data Ports, microSD and SD Card Reader, for MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, XPS, and More

A8346

www.amazon.com

$28 gets you 4K HDMI, Pass through 100W USB-PD charging, USB-A, SD, microSD, and a downstream USB-C (separate from the PD port). You asked for "one piece of older tech for compatibility". $28 gives you more "legacy" connectivity than any pre-TB3/USB-C MacBook Pro had, and if in a few years you decide USB3.0 doesn't quite cut it, or SD is dead, you can use the upstream TB3 ports on the Mac for whatever is current at the time, because they can adapt to anything that's routable over PCIe lanes.

 

[cmaier]

You just don't get it. By the very defintion you quoted for Luddite, the word is "derogatory". So it's like calling someone a fool or an idiot. As they say, "them's fightin' words". A Luddite is someone who wants to go backwards generally—rejects tech generally. The people you are mistakenly calling Luddite, including myself, are those who generally want the latest in cutting edge tech, but, in certain applications, for reasons of compatability, would like one piece of older (but still current) tech as well. And capability does mean the ability to do something. In this context, it would be the ability to plug in a USB-A device without having to bring along a dongle. That is also a form of capability, which you don't seem to understand.

Not to mention, you wouldn’t find an actual Luddite complaining about the wrong ports on his or her computer. Because, of course, an actual Luddite would reject computers.

 

[theorist9]

The problem, Stephen, is your arguments aren't legitimate—they're all either misinformed, or deliberate game-playing.

Take this one:

So by your logic, if a vendor ships a USB1.0 port on a product today, it isn't legacy? What about PS2? ADB? Parallel Port?

Yeah, no. Your're pretending I said if a single mfr ships a single product with port x, then port x isn't legacy. That's a straw man. My point was that USB-A is commonly found, across multiple manufacturers, on new product. That's what demonstrates it's not legacy.


Or this:

So, you're still arguing that <checks notes> four dictionaries and wikipedia are all wrong, and you know better?

Not at all. I agree with the dictionary definitions. I'm simply saying that you are twisting those defs., to claim they're saying something they don't. Luddite means someone that broadly rejects technology, not someone who has a different view from you on a specific piece of tech.

That is the consensus view of this term. Take a look at https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/478368/what-is-an-antonym-for-luddite There the accepted, and highly-upvoted, answer to the question "What is an antonym for 'luddite'" is "technophile". Of course, everyone here on these forums arguing about ports is, by the very fact that they are passionate about tech and here arguing about the best tech (and the best way to implement it), a technophile.

So you're trying to insult people who are the opposite of Luddites, by callng them Luddites. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. You're just a model of logical clarity, aren't you?

Besides, what's got you so up-in-arms about this that you decided you need to resort to name-calling? It's a tech forum. We're *supposed* to have different views about tech. Don't you know how to behave here? I understand swinging back at someone who's taken a swing at you (like I'm doing with you, after you hurled the insult). But I don't understand taking the swing in the first place.

 

[Stephen.R]

The problem, Stephen, is your arguments aren't legitimate—they're all either misinformed, or deliberate game-playing.

The problem mate, is you say (write) something, or post a link to something that says (writes) something, and then don't like it when I respond to what was actually said (written). If you don't know what a word means, just don't use it.

Yeah, no. Your're pretending I said if a single mfr ships a single product with port x, then port x isn't legacy.

You literally said this:

USB-A is not a legacy port. A legacy port is one that's no longer found on new product.

I then posed an unlikely scenario that still meets that, to prove that your claim is incorrect.

Just to drive this point home, open up Dictionary.app on your Mac, and search for legacy. See what definition you get.
Hint, it's this one:

adjective Computing denoting or relating to software or hardware that has been superseded but is difficult to replace because of its wide use.

The same definition can be seen online at https://www.lexico.com/definition/legacy (i.e. it also uses Oxford dictionary).

Wikipedia uses the Lexico/Oxford definition as its source, and defines "legacy port" as:

In computing, a legacy port is a computer port or connector that is considered by some to be fully or partially superseded. The replacement ports usually provide most of the functionality of the legacy ports with higher speeds, more compact design, or plug and play and hot swap capabilities for greater ease of use.

But probably more importantly than all of that: The USB-IF (you know, the industry group that literally defines what USB is) considers USB Type-A ports to be "legacy". They're not part of the USB4.0 spec, at all.

That is the consensus view of this term. Take a look at https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/478368/what-is-an-antonym-for-luddite There the accepted, and highly-upvoted, answer to the question "What is an antonym for 'luddite'" is "technophile". Of course, everyone here on these forums arguing about ports is, by the very fact that they are passionate about tech and here arguing about the best tech (and the best way to implement it), a technophile.

I'm glad you posted that. And it's very telling that you chose not to either copy the definition given in the answer, or one directly from a dictionary. Instead you made a hand-waving gesture to imply that anyone discussing technology must be a technophile... but that isn't what the definition says, is it?

In the linked Accepted answer, technophile is defined the same as it is in Oxford (emphasis mine):

: a person who is enthusiastic about new technology.

Merriam-Webster's definition supports your view "enthusiast of technology", but that isn't the definition used to answer the question "what is the antonym of technophobe".

The other two upvoted answers to that same question, suggest "vanguard", defined as "The forefront of an action or movement" and "early adopter", defined as "someone who is one of the first people to start using a new product, especially a new piece of technology".

Besides, what's got you so up-in-arms about this that you decided you need to resort to name-calling?

What term would you prefer I use, to refer to those who wish to reverse technological progress? "Luddites" seemed like a nicer term than "*****".

 

[theorist9]

You literally said this:

I then posed an unlikely scenario that still meets that, to prove that your claim is incorrect.

No, I literally said this (bolding adding subsequently for emphasis). But congratulations on deceptively taking a snippet of my quote to remove my added explanatory language—you're definitely a class act:

"And USB-A is not a legacy port. A legacy port is one that's no longer found on new product. Yet many new products continue to be produced that use USB-A. Logitech, one of the key producers of high-end gaming mice, continues to equip its wired gaming mice (maybe not all of them, but at least the ones I checked) with USB-A. And I believe that's true of Razer's wired gaming mice as well."

I was clearly saying that USB-A isn't legacy b/c, not only is still found on new product but, in addition, it is is found across the entire lines of current product from more than one of the major producers of an important category of high-end computer product. Do any of your example ports meet those criteria? Unlikely, so thus far you've proved nothing.

Also, from technopedia:

USB-A is currently supported, probably more commonly used than USB-C, is still in production on modern devices, etc., etc. So it's only legacy by the very narrowest of defintions.

Getting back to the main point of contention, your responses about the meaning of Luddite vs. technophile are so confused that I'm having a hard time disentangling them. To quote a phrase, I would describe it as "Not even wrong". Which is not surprising, since your dogged and willful misinterpretation of "Luddite" makes no sense.

Your absolutist position seems to be that someone is a technophile, and is not a Luddite, only if they want *only* the very latest type of tech on their devices; thus, if they would like a single piece of older (but still current) tech on their devices (like USB-A), because it makes sense for a particular application, this makes them a Luddite and disqualifies them as a technophile, because it's got to be latest tech only (regardless of whether latest tech makes sense in that application). But this is wrong, because the terms aren't meant to be applied in such a rigid, narrow, and absolutist manner. Rather, they describe a general mindset—a general approach to technology.

To give an analogy, it's like saying a politican with a very conservative voting record isn't actually a conservative if he's sympathetic to a single liberal view, or visa versa.

I don't know if this will help drive the point home, but this guy, according to your narrow, rigid worldview, is a Luddite:

[At 12:35 of this August 2020 video review of the Dell XPS 15/17, he says "I personally would have liked to see at least one USB Type A" :

So, by your defintion, a Luddite.]

 

[Stephen.R]

No, I literally said this (bolding adding subsequently for emphasis). But congratulations on deceptively taking a snippet of my quote to remove my added explanatory language—you're definitely a class act:

"And USB-A is not a legacy port. A legacy port is one that's no longer found on new product. Yet many new products continue to be produced that use USB-A. Logitech, one of the key producers of high-end gaming mice, continues to equip its wired gaming mice (maybe not all of them, but at least the ones I checked) with USB-A. And I believe that's true of Razer's wired gaming mice as well."

I was clearly saying that USB-A isn't legacy b/c, not only is still found on new product but, in addition, it is is found across the entire lines of current product from more than one of the major producers of an important category of high-end computer product. Do any of your example ports meet those criteria? Unlikely, so thus far you've proved nothing.

There's no intention to deceive. The first sentence was a summary of your view, and the subsequent ones backed it up with examples. It's a good argument for USB Type-A being in use still, on a range of products. I've not said that it isn't in use.

In fact, it being in use on a range of products (and thus "difficult" to replace) is part of the definition for "legacy" (referring to hardware or software) in Oxford dictionary, and someone (you) disagreeing that it's even considered legacy, is part of the definition of "legacy port" from Wikipedia.

Do any of your example ports meet those criteria? Unlikely, so thus far you've proved nothing.

What example ports? I don't need to prove anything mate, I'm literally telling you what multiple dictionaries define words and phrases as.

USB-A is currently supported, probably more commonly used than USB-C, is still in production on modern devices, etc., etc.

Again, the definition for legacy port literally defines something that has been superseded, but is included on new hardware for compatibility reasons.

So it's only legacy by the very narrowest of defintions.

Well at least you acknowledge that it is a legacy port.

Your absolutist position seems to be that someone is a technophile, and is not a Luddite, only if they want *only* the very latest type of tech on their devices; thus, if they would like a single piece of older (but still current) tech on their devices (like USB-A), because it makes sense for a particular application, this makes them a Luddite and disqualifies them as a technophile, because it's got to be latest tech only

The link you posted that asks about the antonym of Luddite, includes definitions for both Luddite and Technophile, and both mention "new technology" specifically, not "technology in general".

The last USB specification that had any impact on USB Type-A ports, is from 2013 - 8 years ago. They're still included in the 2017 spec, but the changes from 3.1 affect Type-C ports only. In modern technology, 8 years is an eternity. USB 3.0 is only 2 years older than 3.1.

You can argue all you want, USB Type-A is not a "current port" It's not (and hasn't been for 18 months) part of the latest USB specification (4.0). That doesn't mean you can't use them, or that you shouldn't buy products that have them. But they are by definition, legacy ports.


As for my "absolutist position". There have been several very drawn out "discussions" about what the implications of adding USB Type-A ports, HDMI ports (and to a lesser degree an SD slot) back to Mac laptops will be. A good number of people posted about this, either expecting or worried that the number of USB-C/TB3/USB4 ports included will either be reduced, or that they'll be gimped in some way (I'm not going to rehash the whole HDMI dedicated video thing here), to accomodate the legacy/single use ports.


Apple's laptops for the last 4-ish years have been using TB3 ports exclusively - the most modern port available at the time (in practical terms - Intel didn't have suitable products out that support USB4/TB4 immediately).

The M1 Mac portables released already support the most modern USB port available, and apparently support all but the minimum dual display-per-port requirement of TB4 (because they don't support multiple external displays at all)

If the hypothetical next MacBookPro 16" gimps the USB4/TB4 ports (either in number or in function) to support legacy/single use ports, the product has essentially gone backwards, in technical terms.

A good number of the people who I vaguely referred to as "luddites" either don't care about this backwards move, or actively want it.

There is no legacy/single-use port anyone is asking for (or even, in existence) that can't be accommodated by the existing USB-C ports and the correct adapter or cable.

There is also no possible way for any of the legacy/single use ports being asked for, to accomodate anything but what they are designed for. A USB type-A port is always going to be a USB type-A port, all it can do is carry USB3.x traffic. A HDMI port is always going to be a HDMI port, all it can do is carry video to a HDMI-equipped display.


Advocating for legacy ports, knowing (and in some cases hoping) that it could well be at the cost of the most flexible ports we've ever had on a computer, is absolutely worthy of the title Luddite.


I don't know who the bearded weirdo is, nor do I care whether he wants USB type-A ports or a ham sandwich.

 

[Zdigital2015]

The problem, Stephen, is your arguments aren't legitimate—they're all either misinformed, or deliberate game-playing.

Take this one:

Yeah, no. Your're pretending I said if a single mfr ships a single product with port x, then port x isn't legacy. That's a straw man. My point was that USB-A is commonly found, across multiple manufacturers, on new product. That's what demonstrates it's not legacy.


Or this:



Not at all. I agree with the dictionary definitions. I'm simply saying that you are twisting those defs., to claim they're saying something they don't. Luddite means someone that broadly rejects technology, not someone who has a different view from you on a specific piece of tech.

That is the consensus view of this term. Take a look at https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/478368/what-is-an-antonym-for-luddite There the accepted, and highly-upvoted, answer to the question "What is an antonym for 'luddite'" is "technophile". Of course, everyone here on these forums arguing about ports is, by the very fact that they are passionate about tech and here arguing about the best tech (and the best way to implement it), a technophile.

So you're trying to insult people who are the opposite of Luddites, by callng them Luddites. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. You're just a model of logical clarity, aren't you?

Besides, what's got you so up-in-arms about this that you decided you need to resort to name-calling? It's a tech forum. We're *supposed* to have different views about tech. Don't you know how to behave here? I understand swinging back at someone who's taken a swing at you (like I'm doing with you, after you hurled the insult). But I don't understand taking the swing in the first place.

No, I literally said this (bolding adding subsequently for emphasis). But congratulations on deceptively taking a snippet of my quote to remove my added explanatory language—you're definitely a class act:

"And USB-A is not a legacy port. A legacy port is one that's no longer found on new product. Yet many new products continue to be produced that use USB-A. Logitech, one of the key producers of high-end gaming mice, continues to equip its wired gaming mice (maybe not all of them, but at least the ones I checked) with USB-A. And I believe that's true of Razer's wired gaming mice as well."

I was clearly saying that USB-A isn't legacy b/c, not only is still found on new product but, in addition, it is is found across the entire lines of current product from more than one of the major producers of an important category of high-end computer product. Do any of your example ports meet those criteria? Unlikely, so thus far you've proved nothing.

Also, from technopedia:

View attachment 1736375
USB-A is currently supported, probably more commonly used than USB-C, is still in production on modern devices, etc., etc. So it's only legacy by the very narrowest of defintions.

Getting back to the main point of contention, your responses about the meaning of Luddite vs. technophile are so confused that I'm having a hard time disentangling them. To quote a phrase, I would describe it as "Not even wrong". Which is not surprising, since your dogged and willful misinterpretation of "Luddite" makes no sense.

Your absolutist position seems to be that someone is a technophile, and is not a Luddite, only if they want *only* the very latest type of tech on their devices; thus, if they would like a single piece of older (but still current) tech on their devices (like USB-A), because it makes sense for a particular application, this makes them a Luddite and disqualifies them as a technophile, because it's got to be latest tech only (regardless of whether latest tech makes sense in that application). But this is wrong, because the terms aren't meant to be applied in such a rigid, narrow, and absolutist manner. Rather, they describe a general mindset—a general approach to technology.

To give an analogy, it's like saying a politican with a very conservative voting record isn't actually a conservative if he's sympathetic to a single liberal view, or visa versa.

I don't know if this will help drive the point home, but this guy, according to your narrow, rigid worldview, is a Luddite:

[At 12:35 of this August 2020 video review of the Dell XPS 15/17, he says "I personally would have liked to see at least one USB Type A" :

So, by your defintion, a Luddite.]

USB-A is most definitely legacy and not the future, but the past. Apple will not add it to any upcoming MacBook, Pro or otherwise. The port is a wasted space on a space constrained device. Users here who really need to connect a USB-A device simply need to suck it up, with buy a dongle or a dock and quit wasting everyone else’s time with their pratttling on trying to extol the virtues of USB-A. No one is buying that cow or it’s milk.

PC Vendors still include or have just recently stopped including VGA ports on their portable devices because the competition is so fierce that lost sales can sink a company. The only reason PC vendors will continue including USB-A is the monolith of how slowly the PC market actually embraces new technology. Pure inertia is the only driver for USB-A at this point.

I would prefer Apple figure out how to add six USB4 ports to the next 16” MBP, than waste time adding in worthless single use ports like HDMI and SD card. The beauty of the 2016+ MBP is that TB3 made it a Swiss Army knife, not a crap knockoff with a plastic spork. But here we are with the lowest common denominator “technophiles” crying and whining until they get what the rest of us figured how to move past long ago. God help us all.

Luddites? No...just cheap asses who cannot pry open their wallet to outfit their rig properly and then cry that it’s someone else’s fault.