Yeah, I get it, there's nostalgia, there's tradition, there's a bit of conspicuous consumption (sounds that can be heard by those around you, glowing icons in darkened meeting rooms and classrooms...)...
The glowing Apple logo was a byproduct of the display module's design. There was some wasted backlight, why not do something fun with it? However, if the design of the display module changes for valid engineering reasons, such that the glowing icon is not practical? Then should Apple find a way to keep the nightlight burning anyway, perhaps wasting a bit of battery power? That also seems unlike Apple.
You want to know what this really hurts? Apple's product placement - the effort to get Macs into every TV show and movie that needs a laptop as a prop. Bright, glowing Apple logos are hard to miss. Sure, Hollywood will still ask for MacBooks as props, but maybe the shiny, passive/reflective logo won't be seen as easily and fewer people will get the subliminal message that Macs are cool. (Or worse, the cinematographer doesn't want a powerful spotlight reflecting back into the lens, and asks that the logo be covered.)
I don't own one single Apple product with a glowing Apple logo on the back (where I wouldn't see it, anyway, even if it existed), so this certainly hasn't destroyed my opinion of Apple. I'm one of those people who stopped needing a laptop once iPad came along.
No sound on power-up? I also immediately thought, "Wow, this sucks when troubleshooting..." But if the new MBPs run through self-test and move onto OS kernel boot so quickly that the sound is not a useful troubleshooting cue, then the sound is just a conceit. If kernel loading is intentionally delayed in order to allow the sound to play out... why slow the boot process? If the sound and Apple logo appear simultaneously? Some people wouldn't notice, but it sure wouldn't mean much when you're troubleshooting.
The audio cue for POST dates back to the days of CRT displays. Remember display warm-up? If you want/need to deliver an indication that POST has finished successfully and it's time to press some startup keys... you couldn't afford to wait for the display. Sure, the Happy Mac was nice to see, but that was simply replaced by the Apple logo - an indication that POST had successfully finished, the boot drive had been located, and that OS loading had begun.
We've moved from CRTs to LCDs and LEDs, and from spinning HDDs to SSDs with relatively slow SATA interfaces, and now to blindingly fast PCIe Flash drives. On these new, fast machines, all the old boot-up timing cues have gone out the window. Just press your startup key combos as soon as you press the power button. Hold them for 20 seconds or more (NVRAM), or until you see the expected indication (Apple logo for Recovery, spinning globe for Internet Recovery, login screen for Safe Mode, Startup Manager to select a startup disk...). Seems fine to me.
We want the technology to advance, right? Everyone's been bitching, "Where are the new Macs, the current tech is too old!" Well, guess what? The longer you delay a change, the more dramatic the change is when it comes. Skip two or three major revisions of an OS or app, and you face a steeper learning curve. Leave a hardware design unchanged for a few years, and maybe there are logical reasons to change things like boot sequences.
So, we have a MBA that powers up when you open the lid. How much different is that from an MBA that wakes from sleep when you open the lid? My impression is that the vast majority of Mac users today Sleep their machines under most circumstances. A full power-down is so yesterday; as if the OS was so unstable that you needed to reboot on a daily basis.
Today, most people expect their electronics to wake with as little fuss or delay as possible. If I only had to open the lid and login... I'd think that's cool. Every so often, maybe I want to open the lid but have the power off - let's say to wipe off the keyboard. Is it really that hard to shut it down one time out of twenty, compared to not having to power it on nineteen times out of twenty?
It's too much to expect that the assembled masses at MR are going to ooh and ahh about anything Apple does. Part of the conceit here is, "I know better than Apple." But I don't think many of the creatives here would stand for similar gripes about whatever it is that they design. Whatever it is we do, we want to improve it. Sometimes, those improvements can be had without making fundamental changes. Other times, a fundamental change is required. And always, when considering change, it helps if you consider when previous design considerations are no longer valid.
