Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I’m not sure how many ports can be run at full speed on the 16” MacBook Pro, but for the sake of argument, let’s say it’s 2. I’d still want to versatility of having that ability from either side of the laptop (and it’d still be faster than most usb-a ports) I find hdmi useful as long as TVs continue to use hdmi, so I’d be ok replacing one with hdmi, because the convenience may outweigh the cost there. USB-a is a dumb port. It should go away. I don’t want it, and wouldn’t use it. If anyone needs a legacy port like that, they can use an adapter.
Looking into it I didn't know that HDMI was updated, so yeah that makes some sense. The fact that there are still hundreds of devices with USB-A ports is why I suggest they keep one around. Looking around my set up I have no less than a dozen USB-A devices, two 7 port USB 3 hubs filled. It will be interesting to see what they actually have on the physical MBPs, because I seriously doubt that all of the ports that rumor sites are talking about will be there. It makes total sense to support only the latest ports and for there to be less. Less flatly = less Apple Care support usage.
 
I’m not sure how many ports can be run at full speed on the 16” MacBook Pro, but for the sake of argument, let’s say it’s 2. I’d still want to versatility of having that ability from either side of the laptop (and it’d still be faster than most usb-a ports) I find hdmi useful as long as TVs continue to use hdmi, so I’d be ok replacing one with hdmi, because the convenience may outweigh the cost there. USB-a is a dumb port. It should go away. I don’t want it, and wouldn’t use it. If anyone needs a legacy port like that, they can use an adapter.
On the intel macs you get full speed only from one port on each side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: machinesworking
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.