FYI: recent 2017 MacBooks coming with 61w/87w USB-C charge cable

[BeatCrazy]

Today, my 2017 MacBook (m3/16GB/256GB) arrived. It is a recent January 2018 build with 10.13.2 installed. I previously had a 2016 base rMB that suffered some damage, so this machine replaces it.

To my surprise, the USB-C cable that came in the box was the "thicker" version (serial number DLCxxxxxxx) that normally comes with the 61w/87w MacBooks. My 2016 rMB came with the "thinner" 29w version.

More info at this link: https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT201700

 

[VictorTango777]

Today, my 2017 MacBook (m3/16GB/256GB) arrived. It is a recent January 2018 build with 10.13.2 installed. I previously had a 2016 base rMB that suffered some damage, so this machine replaces it.

To my surprise, the USB-C cable that came in the box was the "thicker" version (serial number DLCxxxxxxx) that normally comes with the 61w/87w MacBooks. My 2016 rMB came with the "thinner" 29w version.

More info at this link: https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT201700

It has always been my opinion that making a custom power adapter for each Mac laptop model needlessly complicates Apple's inventory, wastes shelf space in their stores, and causes customer confusion (evidenced by the need to have tech support articles such as the one in the link). Apple should simply make a single power adapter and charging cable that will work with all of their laptops with a given connector type, whether Magsafe 2 or UBB-C. And if someone has more than one Mac laptop with Magsafe 2, or more than one laptop with USB-C, then the adapters could be used interchangeably. I also doubt that anyone would care about the minute difference in size between Apple's 29, 60 or 85 watt adapters.

Unfortunately, there still are people who don't understand power supply technology and think that using a higher rated power adapter is going to "overpower" their smaller laptop. As if plugging in a power adapter is the same as wiring a battery directly into the main power line of their house. Does an iMac with a 500 W power supply draw 500 W all the time it is plugged in?

 

[Mike Boreham]

Today, my 2017 MacBook (m3/16GB/256GB) arrived. It is a recent January 2018 build with 10.13.2 installed. I previously had a 2016 base rMB that suffered some damage, so this machine replaces it.

To my surprise, the USB-C cable that came in the box was the "thicker" version (serial number DLCxxxxxxx) that normally comes with the 61w/87w MacBooks. My 2016 rMB came with the "thinner" 29w version.

More info at this link: https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT201700

Is it still USB2 if used for data, like the original one was?

 

[BeatCrazy]

Is it still USB2 if used for data, like the original one was?

I would have to assume so, especially since it's 2m.
[doublepost=1516750371][/doublepost]

It has always been my opinion that making a custom power adapter for each Mac laptop model needlessly complicates Apple's inventory, wastes shelf space in their stores, and causes customer confusion (evidenced by the need to have tech support articles such as the one in the link). Apple should simply make a single power adapter and charging cable that will work with all of their laptops with a given connector type, whether Magsafe 2 or UBB-C. And if someone has more than one Mac laptop with Magsafe 2, or more than one laptop with USB-C, then the adapters could be used interchangeably. I also doubt that anyone would care about the minute difference in size between Apple's 29, 60 or 85 watt adapters.

Unfortunately, there still are people who don't understand power supply technology and think that using a higher rated power adapter is going to "overpower" their smaller laptop. As if plugging in a power adapter is the same as wiring a battery directly into the main power line of their house. Does an iMac with a 500 W power supply draw 500 W all the time it is plugged in?

Well, it's a balance. I can charge my MacBook with anything from the 12w iPad charger, all the way to the 87w MacBook Pro charger. Certainly the bigger charger costs Apple quite a bit more, and would be overkill for an iPad.

But there should have never been two USB-C charge cables to begin with.

 

[Brookzy]

Can confirm that this was the case since the thicker cable was introduced - which was in the summer of 2016, i.e. before the MacBook Pros which actually required the higher wattage were around. The cables were changed silently at some point in the summer, including those that shipped with MacBooks.

[And, for the benefit of anyone interested, that means there have now been three Apple USB-C Charge Cables: the first one that shipped with the 2015 MacBook that had reliability issues (and were subject to a replacement programme in 2016); the second one - which has a serial starting C4M or FL4 as per OP's link - supported up to 60W and fixed the reliability issues; and the current one - which has a serial starting DLC or CTC and is thicker - supports up to 100W. All are only USB 2.]

 

[BeatCrazy]

Can confirm that this was the case since the thicker cable was introduced - which was in the summer of 2016, i.e. before the MacBook Pros which actually required the higher wattage were around. The cables were changed silently at some point in the summer, including those that shipped with MacBooks.

[And, for the benefit of anyone interested, that means there have now been three Apple USB-C Charge Cables: the first one that shipped with the 2015 MacBook that had reliability issues (and were subject to a replacement programme in 2016); the second one - which has a serial starting C4M or FL4 as per OP's link - supported up to 60W and fixed the reliability issues; and the current one - which has a serial starting DLC or CTC and is thicker - supports up to 100W. All are only USB 2.]

This makes sense. I got my 2016 12" MacBook in April '16, which aligns with your explanation above that the in the summer of '16, all the 2m USB-C charge cables went to the thicker/100w version.

 

[Brookzy]

This makes sense. I got my 2016 12" MacBook in April '16, which aligns with your explanation above that the in the summer of '16, all the 2m USB-C charge cables went to the thicker/100w version.

Exactly the same here!

 

[VictorTango777]

Well, it's a balance. I can charge my MacBook with anything from the 12w iPad charger, all the way to the 87w MacBook Pro charger. Certainly the bigger charger costs Apple quite a bit more, and would be overkill for an iPad.

But there should have never been two USB-C charge cables to begin with.

As stated, my comment was regarding Mac laptop power adapters only. There was no mention of iPhone or iPad anywhere in my comment. All the Magsafe and MagSafe 2 adapters from MacBook Air to 17 inch MacBook Pro cost the same price regardless of watts. There still are people who insist that they "must" use the smaller power adapter with their smaller laptop because they think that using the higher rated power adapter would push more power into the laptop than the laptop was designed to handle. They think that using a power adapter is the same as wiring their laptop directly to a generator at the local power company and force-feeding the laptop.

Apple is partly to blame for these people's lack of understanding of how a power supply works. Apple may also share the blame for nearly all Thunderbolt 3 docks not supporting full 87 watt charging for 15 inch MacBook Pro. The dock manufacturers only test with the 13 inch MacBook Pro because it is the cheapest for them to buy. And since the 13 inch MacBook Pro only includes a 60 watt power adapter, these manufacturers decide to support only 60 watt charging. If Apple included the same 87 watt power adapter with all Thunderbolt 3 MacBook Pros, the situation would probably be different.