Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

CES 2017: Griffin Announces 100W Hi-Power Breakaway MagSafe-Style Cable for MacBook Pro

I used to love Apple, but they are just about profit now. They have billions $$$ that could be spent on innovation, but instead they took away magsafe, one of the best innovations, and companies like Griffin have to create not-so-pleasing magsafe connectors. Good for Griffin. Pathetic for Apple. Anyone who defends Tim is being ridiculous. Sorry to rant, but the new MacBooc Pro has made me so made. Like getting cheated on by someone who says they only love you and think of you. Just like Tim saying Apple deeply cares for the MacBook Pro. What a blatant lie. I can't wait for all the post saying I'm being ridiculous. Am I the only person who thought magsafe was awesome??
 
  • Like
Reactions: mkeeley and smacrumon
Labeno said:
I used to love Apple, but they are just about profit now. They have billions $$$ that could be spent on innovation, but instead they took away magsafe, one of the best innovations, and companies like Griffin have to create not-so-pleasing magsafe connectors. Good for Griffin. Pathetic for Apple. Anyone who defends Tim is being ridiculous. Sorry to rant, but the new MacBooc Pro has made me so made. Like getting cheated on by someone who says they only love you and think of you. Just like Tim saying Apple deeply cares for the MacBook Pro. What a blatant lie. I can't wait for all the post saying I'm being ridiculous. Am I the only person who thought magsafe was awesome??
Click to expand...
You're being ridiculous. ... Ridiculously spot on and accurate! MagSafe was superb.

I agree. Apple removed something so innovative and threw it into the trash can and offered a lesser alternative.

If Apple couldn't incorporate a similar MagSafe technology into the device, it should have at the very least incorporated it into the cable allowing the cable to fall apart gracefully during an impact.

It is very disappointing. But a lot about Apple today is disappointing. And they are doing a terrible job at explaining why they are making changes that are so retrograde.

An explanation from Apple such as "courage" is utter bs and doesn't effectively communicate the thinking behind changes.

Has Apple ever come clean about why they removed MagSafe and bothered not to replace it with something more awesome?

My only guess is Apple sees charging MacBook in the future as a cable-less affair, maybe moving to a wireless charging mat that slides under the device.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mkeeley and deadlystriker
SoyCapitanSoyCapitan said:
Lol


And now you have a visible example why MagSafe couldn't merge with USB C charging.
Click to expand...

And why MagSafe should have been left alone. The mac would have been as thin with it as without it.
[doublepost=1483580301][/doublepost]
smacrumon said:
You're being ridiculous. ... Ridiculously spot on and accurate! MagSafe was superb.

I agree. Apple removed something so innovative and threw it into the trash can and offered a lesser alternative.

If Apple couldn't incorporate a similar MagSafe technology into the device, it should have at the very least incorporated it into the cable allowing the cable to fall apart gracefully during an impact.

It is very disappointing. But a lot about Apple today is disappointing. And they are doing a terrible job at explaining why they are making changes that are so retrograde.

An explanation from Apple such as "courage" is utter bs and doesn't effectively communicate the thinking behind changes.

Has Apple ever come clean about why they removed MagSafe and bothered not to replace it with something more awesome?

My only guess is Apple sees charging MacBook in the future as a cable-less affair, maybe moving to a wireless charging mat that slides under the device.
Click to expand...

I imagine that many years from now we'll be rationalizing how wireless charging was worth all the multiple-myeloma and osteo-sarcoma to which we'll be succumbing. "...it... ...it was... so very thinnnn..."

If it's not already apparent, having to explain why a piece of tech is better (when it is not apparent) is much the same as a joke that has to be explained to be funny. Kudos to Griffin: They are responding to the market.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: alvindarkness, NY Guitarist and Westside guy
How and why will it ruin said ports? Be specific. Dongle market-share does not count as ruination.
 
Doc Brown approves of the connector size.
YokBkxP.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: satchmo, blesscheese, KohPhiPhi and 1 other person
JamesPDX said:
And why MagSafe should have been left alone. The mac would have been as thin with it as without it.
[doublepost=1483580301][/doublepost]

I imagine that many years from now we'll be rationalizing how wireless charging was worth all the multiple-myeloma and osteo-sarcoma to which we'll be succumbing. "...it... ...it was... so very thinnnn..."

If it's not already apparent, having to explain why a piece of tech is better (when it is not apparent) is much the same as a joke that has to be explained to be funny. Kudos to Griffin: They are responding to the market.
Click to expand...
I do worry about those myeloma and sarcomas. Personally I don't understand the point of wireless charging. The wireless charger still needs to be connected. Or am I missing something? MagSafe made sense, still makes sense in my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JamesPDX
zorinlynx said:
Could they make it any bigger? Did they even TRY making it compact? Ideally the plug should be just a stub that barely sticks out past the side of the laptop.
Click to expand...

At least they tried, Apple couldn't even be bothered to.
 
konqerror said:
Hardly 0.001%. Don't own a 5K display, but the new USB-C works better for anybody who docks. Old way: get to desk and plug in MagSafe, TB Ethernet, Displayport, USB hub. New way: plug in single USB-C.
Click to expand...

So now I can have 4 docks plugged in :D

One a more serious note though, they could have left in ports for those that are portable which is what laptops were designed for.
[doublepost=1483617932][/doublepost]
smacrumon said:
I do worry about those myeloma and sarcomas. Personally I don't understand the point of wireless charging. The wireless charger still needs to be connected. Or am I missing something? MagSafe made sense, still makes sense in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Wireless charging will be really good for devices that are more awkward to charge - internet of things e.g. security camera - you can put it in places that has no power. (assuming they can ever get distance charging going)
Also good for docking your phone without having to connect a connector Same for your watch.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JamesPDX and Spectrum
konqerror said:
Hardly 0.001%. Don't own a 5K display, but the new USB-C works better for anybody who docks. Old way: get to desk and plug in MagSafe, TB Ethernet, Displayport, USB hub. New way: plug in single USB-C.
Click to expand...
USB-C/thunderbolt is great, but how many users are going to plug in 2 or more displays?
My point is really: what is the need for 4 USB-C/TB ports? You only need one to power a 5K display hub, so what are the other three for?
You need two for those tiny minority of users with 2x 5K displays...but that still leaves 2 unused...why?
Wouldn't it have been better to offer 2xUSB-C, and keep legacy ports like USBA, Magsafe, HDMI and the SD-card reader.
VERY VERY few people are going to need 4 USB-C/thunderbolt ports.
Whereas, I don't know who would complain if Magsafe and the rest were retained...
 
  • Like
Reactions: KohPhiPhi
I wonder how "lossy" wireless charging is or will be. There's no free lunch. I'll be shocked (sorry...) if we'll be able to charge our Tesla sedans wirelessly within 10 years.

Calling on physicists and electrical and biomedical engineers: What's the potential RF vs. DNA-cooking price? Does all wireless charging we're discussing involve "open-air" microwave transmission? Just curious.
 
Some people get it, here. The reason you can't have MagSafe on a USB cable of any kind is because that cable may be being used for data. Someone mentioned a firmware update. Unmounting external drives by accident, even when not transferring data is another disaster prone example. People will say, "Then don't use it with data cables." Apple knows better. Of course people will use it with single connection hubs and the like where data, video, and audio are involved. That's the whole point of the USB-C connector. If you limit the MagSafe, you limit the flexibility of the port itself. Why then not just keep the seperate MagSafe power only port?

Now we can use any charger we want to charge our MacBooks, no more proprietary connections anywhere to be seen. Only wish they would go over to USB-C on the iDevices as well, it would be so great. Think if they could come up with a way to integrate a TB3 controller on the A11 chip...that would be simply AMAZING.

All I'm trying to say is, on balance, Apple believes it made the correct choice here. I would have to agree with them, on balance. They just need to see it through now on all of their devices.
 
MyopicPaideia said:
Some people get it, here. The reason you can't have MagSafe on a USB cable of any kind is because that cable may be being used for data. Someone mentioned a firmware update. Unmounting external drives by accident, even when not transferring data is another disaster prone example. People will say, "Then don't use it with data cables." Apple knows better. Of course people will use it with single connection hubs and the like where data, video, and audio are involved. That's the whole point of the USB-C connector. If you limit the MagSafe, you limit the flexibility of the port itself. Why then not just keep the seperate MagSafe power only port?

Now we can use any charger we want to charge our MacBooks, no more proprietary connections anywhere to be seen. Only wish they would go over to USB-C on the iDevices as well, it would be so great. Think if they could come up with a way to integrate a TB3 controller on the A11 chip...that would be simply AMAZING.

All I'm trying to say is, on balance, Apple believes it made the correct choice here. I would have to agree with them, on balance. They just need to see it through now on all of their devices.
Click to expand...
They could have added UsbC ports and still kept a separate MagSafe charging port.
It is notable how many hubs max out at 65W, so for some usage scenarios, you'll have to plug into a hub (for your connections) AND still plug in the bundled 85W USB charger (which hopefully will take preference over the 65W supplied by a hub..?).
So then why not keep a MagSafe power-only connection?
Personally - and I know these are small things - I'll miss the ease of plugging in that MagSafe permits (hover nearby and it connects the rest for you). It was a stunningly simple, and useful development, and it will be missed. Not to mention the super useful charging lights and cable management.
To me, Apple is dropping all the things that made you happy about spending those extra pounds/dollars on the hardware.
 
Check out the Kickstarter project Snapnator if you like a nicely designed magsafe adapter
 
SoyCapitanSoyCapitan said:
And now you have a visible example why MagSafe couldn't merge with USB C charging.
Click to expand...

They should have allowed the option of charging through a classic MagSafe plug OR the TB3 port. When this this on my desk, I couldn't care less about MagSafe, but if I have to plug it in while in use away from my office, the one cable simplicity is not a concern.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back