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

Ports in the new MBPs

Kulfon

Kulfon

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Nov 4, 2013
937
1,439
To be clear, I am super happy with the new macbooks. I have 15” 2015 MBP which is the last good macbook I had. I also had 2017 and 2020 M1, but they are nit as great as 2015.

Now the ports are back, but the reality is, I am not sure what problems do they fix?
1. HDMI is not 2.1, so you cannot do 4K 120hz. It is an older HDMI. Why even bother?
2. SD…maybe for some folks, however I am using Cfast in Canon R5, so will anyway use card reader. Not a problem
3. We are back to only USB C being usable

So ports are back, but in my opinion they should have done HDMI 2.1 at least
 
Why even bother (HDMI 2.0)? Because it's really easy to connect to a TV/projector without the need for an adapter when 120Hz is not a requirement. If you want 4K 120Hz, simply use one of the TB ports. I don't think the point here is to fix any "problems", but rather to add that little extra touch of convenience for many users. It's very easy to project our needs/wants/desires for a certain port onto every MBP user when it's simply not the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fishrrman, Hankster, chabig and 1 other person
Kulfon said:
To be clear, I am super happy with the new macbooks. I have 15” 2015 MBP which is the last good macbook I had. I also had 2017 and 2020 M1, but they are nit as great as 2015.

Now the ports are back, but the reality is, I am not sure what problems do they fix?
1. HDMI is not 2.1, so you cannot do 4K 120hz. It is an older HDMI. Why even bother?
2. SD…maybe for some folks, however I am using Cfast in Canon R5, so will anyway use card reader. Not a problem
3. We are back to only USB C being usable

So ports are back, but in my opinion they should have done HDMI 2.1 at least
Click to expand...
Thankfully, I don't use Canon, and I will use the HDMI port for connecting to projectors. Speak for yourself.
 
usagora said:
Why even bother (HDMI 2.0)? Because it's really easy to connect to a TV/projector without the need for an adapter when 120Hz is not a requirement. If you want 4K 120Hz, simply use one of the TB ports. I don't think the point here is to fix any "problems", but rather to add that little extra touch of convenience for many users. It's very easy to project our needs/wants/desires for a certain port onto every MBP user when it's simply not the case.
Click to expand...
But you can still do your TV/Projector with 60 Hz with HDMI 2.1, right? On top, others could use 120 Hz. HDMI 2.1 exists for some years already.
 
Kulfon said:
But you can still do your TV/Projector with 60 Hz with HDMI 2.1, right? On top, others could use 120 Hz. HDMI 2.1 exists for some years already.
Click to expand...

I never said you couldn't. My point is you're not losing the ability to export a 4k 120Hz signal, because you have other ports that can do that. From what I've read on other threads about this, the decision to limit to 2.0 was one of bandwidth. I'd rather them "downgrade" the HDMI than a TB port.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: chabig
Personally, I would have liked to see an ethernet port. These are professional devices after all.
 
Hankster said:
You are really reaching to find something to complain about.
Click to expand...
Nope. I just cannot understand why no HDMI 2.1. People will purchase these macbooks to serve them multiple years, at least I will do. So this HDMI 2.0 will be totally useless 4-5 years from, it is outdated today already. I will use TB4 to connect with my Eizo monitor, but was wondering why HDMI 2.0 then?
 
Kulfon said:
Nope. I just cannot understand why no HDMI 2.1. People will purchase these macbooks to serve them multiple years, at least I will do. So this HDMI 2.0 will be totally useless 4-5 years from, it is outdated today already. I will use TB4 to connect with my Eizo monitor, but was wondering why HDMI 2.0 then?
Click to expand...

Maybe it’s a bandwidth issue. No way to squeeze in HDMI 2.1 with SD or something?

The port is solely there for meeting room screens, which are unlikely to be upgraded to 4k 120hz anytime soon, if ever.

You want to connect it to your higher res monitor at your desk, that’s what the thunderbolt port is for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: usagora
Most of cameras are connected via USB-C to transfer the photos (not speaking of the nuisance to take out the SD card etc.), so adding this port is quite awkward. Not to add normal USB port is really strange though. And having 2 charging ports (USB-C and the old mag safe) does not make much sense. So these "new" ports look quite weird to me.
 
Micka88 said:
Most of cameras are connected via USB-C to transfer the photos (not speaking of the nuisance to take out the SD card etc.), so adding this port is quite awkward. Not to add normal USB port is really strange though. And having 2 charging ports (USB-C and the old mag safe) does not make much sense. So these "new" ports look quite weird to me.
Click to expand...
Exactly my point. If I think about my workfkow, then I would use:
1. TB4 to connect to Eizo monitor
2. Magsafe
3. Normal USB
So HDMI is strange. SD- I assume many people use it, so I get it. I think it would be better to add normal USB instead of HDMI.
Anyways, I always had SD in my 2015 MBP and never used, but I know mamy folks were using, so it was meeded.
I think ot would have been better to have HDMI 2.1 or a normal USB.
 
Micka88 said:
And having 2 charging ports (USB-C and the old mag safe) does not make much sense. So these "new" ports look quite weird to me.
Click to expand...

Makes perfect sense to me. Many (including me) much prefer MagSafe, so now everyone has the best of both worlds. And if you charge via MagSafe, you're not taking up a TB port (or having to use a hub with pass-thru power).
 
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