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.
CES 2017: 'OWC DEC' Adds More Storage and Ports to the 2016 MacBook Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
itsmilo
Suspended
pkouame
macrumors 65816
Seriously?! This ugly "attachment" (not a dock) transforms your expensive light & sleek 2016 MacBook Pro into a 2012 (2008?) MacBook Pro wannabe. 5+ years of cutting edge Apple MacBook Pro design&engineering out the window for expansion options already available thru equally ugly but easily removable port-dock/dongle options. I like OWC, but this makes no sense to me. I can live with T3(usb-c) external SSD storage and a small multi-purpose (usb-c) dock when I really need ethernet or flashcard support. Also, I can't see how this "concept" took "over three years" to develop. It seems like a knee jerk reaction to me...
Analog Kid
macrumors G3
On a lot of hardware, it doesn't void the warranty to just open the box, but I'm not sure about the MPB16.
I've never made a warranty claim though, so I don't know if I would care...
For some reason, Apple is obssessed with making these devices tinfoil-thin. For users who buy the MB Air and non-pro models, granted. But PRO users are concerned about PRO features such as PRO ports, NOT whether their laptops are so thin and light they feel like they'll break in your backpack! Someone please slap some sense into Jonny!!
The macrumors article is incorrect regarding size:
while the (macsales) article linked to specifies:
That makes it a lot more bearable.
while the (macsales) article linked to specifies:
That makes it a lot more bearable.
I've heard through the grapevine that Apple doesn't consider itself a hardware/software/computer company anymore. They consider themselves a "luxury lifestyle" company. I am not kidding. I heard this from a reliable source. And this would explain a lot of their actions lately.
I'm done with Apple.
JOLoughlin
macrumors regular
OldSchoolMacGuy
Suspended
Because they're not wrong. How many people REALLY need something like this? Please give examples.
keysofanxiety
macrumors G3
Odd how you consider a 'Pro' port to be USB-A 3.0 or an SD card reader.
Yet Apple give you Thunderbolt 3/USB-C capable of 40Gb/s throughput each, capable of transforming into any interface you need, or run your entire workstation & charge the laptop at the same time from just one port, and all people can think of is how they need a dongle to charge their phone.
Canubis
macrumors 6502
I am pretty sure that was one of the ideas around at Apple when and before they launched the original Apple Watch, esp. the super expensive gold edition. But with release of version 2 and the removal of the super expensive model you could see them refocusing at least their watch business away from luxery to a more sports related and functional perspective. But yeah, Apple definitely sees better revenue in selling hardware to people who want a nice looking computer/phone/etc. and don't care about specs as long as it works more or less. This is the logic of a sales guy like Cook.
tobian
macrumors member
I would love to have this full of battery
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Apparently people want former ports instead of dongles. Check this kickstarter adapter out: https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/11-000-people-bought-adapter-145033091.html
[doublepost=1483478400][/doublepost]
It's really simple: "thinner" rules all. Why? Thinner is cheaper. Now that thinner requires stuff to get jettisoned to "make room" (for thinner), less parts = less cost. Less battery = less cost. And what does Apple like at least as much as "thinner"? Profit. So "thinner" via hardware ejection is 2 bird$ with one $tone.
They do it and the faithful will work overtime trying to rationalize it to those that find it less than ideal. "We" will spin and spin... and redirect... and call each other trolls... etc, etc in blind loyalty to the brand because Apple is always right (to some of "us").
Put both of those concepts together and eventually Apple can ship an empty box while still charging the full historical price and then we assemble what used to come all built into a complete computer from a variety of parts like this thing (all sold separately of course). And what is this thing? It's almost the bottom chunk of a MBpro from a few years ago. Put a keyboard on top and attach a screen.
Is it really hard to imagine that "thinner" will eventually kick the whole battery out (the part that sucks up most of the "thick" now)? As long as we readily buy whatever is served... and as long as we passionately argue how wonderful the new is no matter how it affects us consumers... Apple makes more money and get's the 5 seconds to spin "thinner" at the big reveal. Thinner & more profitable! Why should anything else matter? 🙁
[doublepost=1483478400][/doublepost]
It's really simple: "thinner" rules all. Why? Thinner is cheaper. Now that thinner requires stuff to get jettisoned to "make room" (for thinner), less parts = less cost. Less battery = less cost. And what does Apple like at least as much as "thinner"? Profit. So "thinner" via hardware ejection is 2 bird$ with one $tone.
They do it and the faithful will work overtime trying to rationalize it to those that find it less than ideal. "We" will spin and spin... and redirect... and call each other trolls... etc, etc in blind loyalty to the brand because Apple is always right (to some of "us").
Put both of those concepts together and eventually Apple can ship an empty box while still charging the full historical price and then we assemble what used to come all built into a complete computer from a variety of parts like this thing (all sold separately of course). And what is this thing? It's almost the bottom chunk of a MBpro from a few years ago. Put a keyboard on top and attach a screen.
Is it really hard to imagine that "thinner" will eventually kick the whole battery out (the part that sucks up most of the "thick" now)? As long as we readily buy whatever is served... and as long as we passionately argue how wonderful the new is no matter how it affects us consumers... Apple makes more money and get's the 5 seconds to spin "thinner" at the big reveal. Thinner & more profitable! Why should anything else matter? 🙁
Last edited:
They'll push a software update to disable it like the diagnostic port on the Apple Watch
keysofanxiety
macrumors G3
You're entitled to your opinion about the new MacBook Pro. But if you think thinner=cheaper with computers, especially when taking into account the specs of the nMBP, then frankly you don't know a thing about hardware design. It's entirely the opposite.
Thicker equals cheaper. Thicker is easier. Yes, Apple have a ridiculous obsession with pushing themselves to get things thinner and thinner, which again you're entitled to disagree with. But cheaper or easier to do? That's completely disingenuous to claim. It doesn't help your argument; it hinders it.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
As you say, you are entitled to your opinion too. I'll grant you that "thinner" requires design engineering to work out the miniaturization. However, spread that added cost over all units and I doubt that it makes the unit cost here more expensive than recent "thicker" MBpros... especially when stuff (tangible parts and battery) gets to be jettisoned to help accommodate it. But, even if I'm wrong about that here, the price hike should certainly more than make up for the added R&D cost spread over all units.
Again, that too is my opinion which one can easily take a poke at since I'm not an Apple insider with evidence of how much each unit costs (but then again, neither- I presume- are you). However, I find it easier to imagine that the genius of Apple is smart enough to have noticed the seemingly building perception that "thinner is thin enough" several years ago. And no one doubts that Apple loves to maximize their profits in any way possible. So if they know we consumers don't desire "thinner" at the cost of consumer utility, why add to their costs to then try to make us like a "feature" that the bulk of us don't seem to want? Choosing to make their unit costs more expensive doesn't seem to be a modern Apple-minded thing to do to me.
Why does THIS thing from OWC exist? OWC believes there is sufficient market that would rather "thicken" the newest MBpros (likely voiding any warranty), rather than juggle dongles & added disc drive, etc. as separate parts... and PAY up for that on top of the new higher price for the MBpro itself. OWC could be fools here and nobody wants common use ports & added storage "built in" that badly, but then again, see the kickstarter story I also referenced. Apparently some of us do want common use ports built in bad enough to commit to buy something that we basically only hope will be built.
Again, that too is my opinion which one can easily take a poke at since I'm not an Apple insider with evidence of how much each unit costs (but then again, neither- I presume- are you). However, I find it easier to imagine that the genius of Apple is smart enough to have noticed the seemingly building perception that "thinner is thin enough" several years ago. And no one doubts that Apple loves to maximize their profits in any way possible. So if they know we consumers don't desire "thinner" at the cost of consumer utility, why add to their costs to then try to make us like a "feature" that the bulk of us don't seem to want? Choosing to make their unit costs more expensive doesn't seem to be a modern Apple-minded thing to do to me.
Why does THIS thing from OWC exist? OWC believes there is sufficient market that would rather "thicken" the newest MBpros (likely voiding any warranty), rather than juggle dongles & added disc drive, etc. as separate parts... and PAY up for that on top of the new higher price for the MBpro itself. OWC could be fools here and nobody wants common use ports & added storage "built in" that badly, but then again, see the kickstarter story I also referenced. Apparently some of us do want common use ports built in bad enough to commit to buy something that we basically only hope will be built.
Last edited:
Thanks for pointing this out, will update the wording. Sorry about that, didn't realize I'd written it so confusingly.
Digital Skunk
macrumors G3
I agree and this concept would've been nice if it REALLY gave us something more than ports. Like if it was a GPU extender or something.
Otherwise, it's the ugliest FOOT I've ever seen.
According to Apple guidelines, third-party hardware vendors must use and only use, glue. 🙂
lincolntran
macrumors 6502a
As usual, people always want a horse instead of a car. Then there're those "pro" users who want 450 separate horses instead of a powerful engine that takes less space than a horse and make the same power as 450 separate horses.
I'm happy that Apple doesn't listen to those "pros" just because a couple more dongles is too heavy to carry around. I have a no use for dongles since my stuff are cloud based and when I need a different port, a dongle is just fine.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Correct. All us consumers are just too ignorant to know what we want in technology. Fortunately there is ONE corporation that knows what we want better than we know ourselves. 🙄
Miguel Cunha
macrumors 6502
Finally! My dream came true! 🙂At long last.... The PowerBook G5 of our dreams has arrived.
