You made the point that people wouldn't be upset by a cable that is male at both ends, but are somehow upset by the fact that dongles have lady parts. I don't think that's what is motivating the manufactured rage.
I think it does change the point materially. People need cables to connect one device to another, that was never in contention. However, some people don't like the fact that they have to buy and carry dongles for most of their current devices and cables. Personally, that argument doesn't have a ton of merit to me, but I get that some people are frustrated by it. Also, the majority of your list consists of dongles and adapters made for iPod and iPhone. Those devices only ever had one port since their inception, and thus by their very design, required adapters to connect them to anything but a computer. Basically, your list here is a bit of a straw man, against what's already a relatively weak argument anyway.
A dongle lets you continue using the cable you already have and bridges the time until third parties start making USB-C conversion cables. Are you suggesting that everyone here would be fine if Apple made everyone buy 2m cables for everything? 1m? 50cm? 5m? How many cables should there be? What about the guy who just complained that there are 9 dongles-- would they be happier with 36 cables?
And, of course, you realize that to interface with legacy USB devices, you need to contend with half a dozen device side connectors. Should Apple make people buy USB-C cables for all of those, or just provide an adapter that interfaces with the common end?
I'm sure those cables will come from dozens of third party manufacturers.
Right in this thread, people are complaining that iPhone doesn't have a USB-C connection. Before that, people complained that Apple didn't use micro USB like Android does, and that there isn't a(n) (micro) SD card interface. So those can't be excepted.
To say that the iPhone only ever had one interface and thus those dongles shouldn't be discussed is a weird argument to make in a thread about a laptop that only has one interface. If a phone was made with two port types, would these suddenly become relevant?
Here's what I see: people emitting broadband noise until something resonates and then striking that note over and over again.
My point was simply that for all of time there has been converters to bridge the awkward time period between the introduction of a new interface and the time when people update their peripherals. This isn't new with Tim Cook, and Jobs didn't shy away from it.
As
@keysofanxiety pointed out-- this machine pretty much conforms to the Jobsian ideal: only one reversible connector to worry about for absolutely everything. I don't want to speak for a dead man, but do you think Jobs would have considered a bunch of legacy interfaces on his devices "good design" or would he have grudgingly allowed adapters for those who are slow to accept the future?
Long list, but you fail to see the point, while dongles back then enhanced the product and gave more functionality, and in most cases were not required, with Tim's product you cannot use the product without the adapters.
You cannot even sync the latest phone with the latest computer (sold 2 months apart) without an adapter, or use the headphones of the phone with the conputer without an adapter....
HUGE DIFFERENCE!
You went back like.. 10 years and around 24 adapters (for different computers)...there are about 9 adapters for the current Macbook by itself .... (yeah i know .. only about 2-3 are really needed, but still )
USB C to USB A
USB C to HDMI
USB C to Ethernet
USB C to Multiport AV
USB C to Thunderbolt 2
USB C to SD card
USB C to VGA
USB C to USB Mini B
Lighining to Audio Jack
Also If i recall correctly many adapters where included back then at least the main ones(i still have some of them originally wrapped around the house...most of them where for displays).
Ok, so is the problem here that adapters are required, or that Apple isn't making everyone pay for stuff they may not need? I'm sure they could have put all 9 of those in the box for a price and, like you point out, most would still be in original wrapping.
How did an adapter give a product more functionality? How was an adapter not required if you had a VGA display and bought a computer with a DVI output?
Why do you
need an adapter to sync your phone with your computer when Apple has been pushing wireless sync for years?
Which of those 9 are "really needed"?
Right now I travel with this:
Until that's updated with a USB-C interface, I'd need to carry an extra adapter. Eventually the market will catch up and I'll be back to one ugly device to deal with all my legacy crap.
