Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
So what exactly should the MBPr be called?
- Thread starter FatGuy007
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hey, I'm not sure I want to get into an argument with you here, considering I agree with many of your points. I am, however, having some difficulty with your numbers. I'm looking at the IEEE spec as well as the interpretation of it on Wikipedia. Using 256QAM it looks to me like two antennas at the AP and two antennas at the station endpoint and 160MHz channel bandwidth either contiguous or discontiguous, yields an aggregated capacity of 1.73Gbit/sec. An 8-antenna access point to a four antenna station end point is 3.47Gbit/sec.
I do agree with you that 802.11ac isn't yet ready for prime time, but I think it has enough impetus in the market that it will be gaining wide acceptance long before 10G Ethernet becomes affordable. If for no other reason than the two wildly different sets of market dynamics between the mobile/laptop market and the wired market which is driven predominantly by server and datacenter infrastructure demand.
I believe the IEEE Task Group ac was slated to submit final draft 3.0 at the July 15 IEEE 802 Plenary meeting in San Diego. I'm trying to contact someone who was there for some insight. The bottom line though is that I think 802.11ac has a big head of steam at this point.
Last edited:
How can you tell that it works if the spec isn't even available yet? It is unlikely that the WiFi alliance will introduce a change which breaks compatibility with Draft devices, but the possibility still exists.
I'm saying that if 1000GBase-T will bottleneck a HDD, a wifi connection will as well
What I'm arguing is that it's not "that" unique for someone to require Ethernet. The fact that 2 of 4 (5?) posters have claimed so on this thread certainly doesn't bode well for your 99% statistic. Sure sample size is small, but if 2/5 claim that they need Ethernet means that you'll need to find 195 more people who say they don't need it to make your claim true. What's the probability of that?
It's 10 times longer currently on my 2x2 router. Even using a 3x3 router it would be 6-7 times.
Not feasible. Hard drives have to reside inside my workstation.
3. Just plug in the adapter. I mean really, it sits on the end of the Ethernet cord. It hardly makes a difference. It's about as cumbersome as transferring 100s of GB of files a day
This is what I do currently.
See 2.
4 of your "solutions" are inferior/infeasible. I'm currently using the 3rd one, but there are those claiming 802.11ac will replace it simply because it is superior on throughput specification are clearly on some kind of drugs.
Last edited:
We won't see more than 3x3:3 in laptops (similar to 802.11n), due to power constraints.
Apparently we're all wrong on the bandwidth numbers.
According to this Netgear article, we're going to see roughly 1.3 Gbps. Halve that immediately for best-case Wi-Fi scenario (sitting next to router).
Did I mention that 802.11ac is mandatory 5 GHz? Those of you who live in a big house already know that 2.4 GHz has trouble reaching some corners of the house, could you imagine how bad the throughput 5 GHz will be if you aren't in an immediately adjoining room?
We'll see. Last I heard in early 2012, Intel was sampling 10G silicon for use in consumer products.
Last edited:
BTW Check out these 2 reviews for 802.11ac routers.
http://reviews.cnet.com/routers/buffalo-airstation-ac1300-n900/4505-3319_7-35307573-2.html
http://reviews.cnet.com/routers/netgear-r6300-wifi-router/4505-3319_7-35315201-2.html
331 Mbps for the Netgear.
233 Mbps for the Buffalo.
Yeah they are definitely dominating 1000GBase-T
http://reviews.cnet.com/routers/buffalo-airstation-ac1300-n900/4505-3319_7-35307573-2.html
http://reviews.cnet.com/routers/netgear-r6300-wifi-router/4505-3319_7-35315201-2.html
331 Mbps for the Netgear.
233 Mbps for the Buffalo.
Yeah they are definitely dominating 1000GBase-T
Wow, really. We had that entire discussion just to find out that you use the adapter.
Actually 3 of the 5 are faster or equal to what you'd currently get. The adapter is equal, the usb and TB are faster. Also, you can use USB and thunderbolt WITH THE DRIVES IN THE COMPUTER!!!!!
Bit for bit WiFi can't run with ethernet. But that's not what I argued. I argued that WiFi will perform well above adequate to replace ethernet. And in the instance where you desperately need internet, because you somehow locked yourself out of TB and USB 3.0 then you can use the adapter.
Honestly, if you go back and read how we got to this conversation, you'll see my point was the rMBP doesn't need the ethernet port. And, as you've admitted, it doesn't.
edit: And now looking at your sig I notice that your RAID is in a hackintosh. Further proving my point that your setup is very unique. Do you think 40% (2 out of 5) people, as your survey of this thread results in, own a hackintosh? That's a pretty easy answer.
....almost for got the subtle, yet not so subtle, condesending emoticon
Last edited:
Why would I drag my ass all the way over to the workstation everytime I wanted to transfer when I could easily just run a wire to my study where I know I will be using it?
Keep impressing your use-cases on the rest of the world though.
Nice straw man here. Let's review what I wrote:
AzN1337c0d3r said:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But a still significant proportion of the people don't want to carry around the adapter. Also wrt USB3.0 and TB, see the reply to the first quote of this post.
I've admitted nothing of the sort. Just because I found a TB to E adapter doesn't mean that I dont want the rMBP to have the Ethernet port built-in.
I didnt claim 40% of people use a Hackintosh. You, however, claimed that 99% of people don't need Ethernet. Nice strawman again there though.
Why would I drag my ass all the way over to the workstation everytime I wanted to transfer when I could easily just run a wire to my study where I know I will be using it?
Keep impressing your use-cases on the rest of the world though.
Nice straw man here. Let's review what I wrote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But a still significant proportion of the people don't want to carry around the adapter. Also wrt USB3.0 and TB, see the reply to the first quote of this post.
I've admitted nothing of the sort. Just because I found a TB to E adapter doesn't mean that I dont want the rMBP to have the Ethernet port built-in.
I didnt claim 40% of people use a Hackintosh. You, however, claimed that 99% of people don't need Ethernet. Nice strawman again there though.
Exactly, you said you want it, and I said it doesn't need it. That's what we're discussing. Need, not want. Personally, I want the rMBP to print money, cook dinner and walk the dog.
Also, you based your survey on the situations of 2 of 5 people. Thus those situations must represent 40% of the population, no? If they don't adequately represent the 40% then they must be outliers, by definition.
Why must you degrade your arguments to name calling and passive agressive emoticons?
Nobody even "needs" a computer. So if Apple were to release an aluminum brick you'd buy it and not complain? Right, I thought so.
Here you go with the straw man again. Did I ever claim 40%?
Let's take another review shall we?
AzN1337c0d3r said:
What I did claim is that your claim is highly unlikely to represent 99% of the population. If you don't understand this point, please go take a basic course on probability and statistics, then come back and make a cogent argument as to why you think 99% of people don't "need" Ethernet.
Hint: You can't, because you didn't do marketing research on this. You just pulled the numbers out of thin air.
Exactly what did I name call you? Pray tell.
Unlike your arguments, mine are grounded in facts.
Hardly stupid. Like all components, the retina displays will get cheaper to produce with time. The best selling MB was the white plastic one at one point. Yet Apple had no problem replacing it with the 13" MBA once they could afford to sell it at a low enough price. I would expect the same to happen to the 13" MBP with time. It'll be just like the retina 15" with a 13" display. It would still be a Pro in the sense that it would have processors that still outclassed the ones found in the Air. The discrete GPU is the only true sticking point. The current 13" Pro doesn't have an Nvidia card. Squeezing one in on an even thinner device may be difficult. Even without the optical drive, Apple would probably want to maximize the battery space. We'll have to wait and see what they do, but I very much expect the classic MBP 15" and 13" to go the way of the 17" and old plastic 13".
Also, I'm fairly certain the Airs outsell the more expensive 13" MBP. Its been discussed by Apple in their quarterly reports.
The point you seem to ignore is of all the possible computing scenarios, very few require ethernet, and on those specific setups, the adapter is more than sufficient. The only example you gave that required ethernet was in your study. So leave the adapter on the ethernet cable in your study. Everywhere else the adapter won't typically be needed anyway, so the issue of people not wanting to carry the adapter seems quite besides the point as there is no need to carry it around.
You may want the ethernet port built-in, but the market is indicating it has no need for having built-in ethernet ports, so your needs do not match up with the market. The same can be said for optical drives. Personally what I don't want is people's niche uses, like your own, dictating future market trends. I rather you suffer the inconvenience of having to purchase multiple adapters, or carry one around everywhere, than cluttering my computer with that, for my purposes, useless tech. My conjecture is the majority of people agree with me, and even if they don't, it's a good thing Apple seems to agree with me.
There are more places that need Ethernet than my study. That was just making one point that I don't want to go into my computer room just to plug in the laptop to get data.
I also need Ethernet in my research lab at school also because the public wifi is terrible place to be trying to move 100s of GB of data as well.
Another place I need Ethernet is in the public libraries. There are literally thousands of users in the library here on wifi and speeds when wireless are slower than the 3G on my phone... in the middle of the building. I'm not the only one plugged in either. Every other student are plugged in when you walk by. How's that for a 99% number?
What marketing? You have numbers to cite? That's what I thought.
Ethernet is hardly comparable to the optical drive. It requires maybe $5 for Apple to add it on and doesn't affect the weight/cost/aesthetic factor by any significant amount. There's just no good reason to remove it except for Apple to save a couple of bucks and then charge you $20 for functionality that should have been there in the first place.
See also missing combo audio ports. That one probably costs Apple 10cents (or less) per port to add in. The audio circuitry is there. The software is probably there too. Just the physical contacts are missing on the port for "combo" mode.
Imo, they need to start renaming these laptops to something besides Macbook Pro. The original MBP was billed as a portable solution for professional users, hence the Pro in the name. Most content creators move tons of data onto/out of their machines and would definitely appreciate the use of a 1000Base-T port.
Conjecture is exactly that, conjecture. Unless you have numbers (see previous quote), it is meaningless.
Also you can't claim Apple agrees with you. It could possible (and far more likely of a capitalist company) that they just want to save space/money and charge you even more for the relative value of the laptop rathar than giving the market what it wants.
Fine, you may benefit from an ethernet port, but you haven't shown any evidence to suggest your usage is typical. Again, of all the computing scenarios imaginable very few would need to move 100s of GBs of data on a common basis. Your niche usage shouldn't dictate how computers ought to be designed.
It sounds like your institution's network sucks. I've worked at multiple institutions and their networks are all typically quite good, so again I see no reason to believe your circumstances aren't idiosyncratic.
I haven't any numbers, but nor do you. However, I would imagine Apple did some market research before deciding to cut out the ethernet port. In any case, we will find out over the course of the next few years who was right.
Have any evidence to back those claims up? That's what I thought...
The only thing missing is the s/pdif digital in. But again how many users need that? We already know professionals will typical use ADAT Lightpipe, so this sounds like a non-issue once again.
Oh here we go again with this BS. Professional doesn't mean what you think it does mate. But since your a fan a numbers, how about you show us some data that most content creators move tons of data onto/out of their machines and would definitely appreciate ethernet ports. That's what I thought...
Exactly. So why aren't you providing numbers? Why do you insist, by your own standards, to spread so much meaningless information?
Oh please. Apple gave a reasonable explanation as to why they were chopping out what they did, and it wasn't to save a couple of pennies. I see no reason to doubt what they said. Take your conspiracies elsewhere.
Again, you making a claim that it is a niche doesn't make it a niche. So stop calling it a niche and basing the rest of your argument on it.
Name one institution that successfully distributes wifi to several hundred people on one floor. Even Apple's own WWDC can't manage getting internet access, let alone high-speed data transfer during the show.
The onus is not on me to give market research as to why people need Ethernet. Ethernet represents the status quo (pretty much every laptop has it). Apple may or may not have done market research, but that is irrelevant. Apple isn't the one claiming that 802.11n is "enough". You are.
I do actually. I've bought several for various embedded systems projects. Prices varies by volumes, but you can bet $5 is a conservative upper estimate when you buy millions of them. You can go to any of the vendors (intel, realtek, broadcom, etc..) and get a quote.
There's even resellers and distributors selling them too in medium quantities.
Typically use ADAT Lightpipe? Really now? Did you read the specs on the rMBP before spouting off that nonsense above. ALL input functionality except TRSS is gone. S/PDIF, Lightpipe, Analog-in, it's all gone in the rMBP. At least they could have kept analog-in.
The chip support is there, just not the contacts on the port. This is perhaps the most damning evidence that Apple is just trying to penny-pinch on their new machine.
I know of not a professional content-creator that does not have his machine wired into the network.
While we're at it. Professionals are people with a very certain skillset which are being paid to do a very specific task. I suppose you could call professionals a niche, but since the Macbook Pro is supposed to serve that market, you could call it a niche too.
Apple didn't give any reasons at all. They just removed it, no justifications given.
If removing the Ethernet port had been such a significant improvement, they would have trumpeted it out as a marketing feature like they did with the optical drive during the keynote.
People like you are the ones trying to justify the removal.
Last edited:
You have the scenario mixed up buddy. You claim to use your computer a certain way. I don't doubt that you use it as you do. So that makes one of you. Now, I'm willing to be a good sport, I'll grant you that a few percentage points of the population might use computers as you do. Those are given to you for free. But that makes your usage at most, thus far, only a couple of percentage points, hence niche usage, not typical. Now, if you want to claim that the majority of people use computers as you do, the onus is on you to present that evidence. Absent that there is no reason to think your usage isn't idiosyncratic. Now realize, I'm not saying people use computers as I do. My point is until shown otherwise, the only hard data we have is there is one of you. That's not even a niche usage. Using the term niche is already being generous to you.
Since you ask for one, I'll give you one. Go to any Apple store, there will be hundreds of people using the internet, not only on one floor, but in one tiny little space. Notice, this doesn't mean everyone can do high-speed data transferring at the same time, no typical network will manage that with a large numbers of users on it. But what you again fail to realize is you haven't given any indication that most computer users, and especially those using portable devices, which is our topic here, are doing high-speed data transfers on a regular, or frequent, basis.
No I'm not, but nice attempt at a straw man. I'm saying wifi or an ethernet dongle is good enough for the overwhelming majority of people. Remember you are the one complaining about having to cary the dongle, and again you've given no evidence that most people would find that a big problem or even necessary.
I don't care what you bought or didn't buy. You claimed it has minimal cost/impact on the design of the laptop. Show me how to design a RMBP with an Ethernet port, and which doesn't make much of an impact. That link does not do that, so until then, I'll just assume you are blowing hot air around again.
What nonsense? Regarding audio line-in was removed. Fair enough, but who cares? It isn't of much use anyway, and especially not for professionals, as I point out. They are not going to record using the analog-in, nor will they use jittery s/pdif. You really like making a fuss about old standards don't you?
It's not penny pinching, its them cutting out everything that is useless. Frankly I would have liked the SD card removed too, but I can live with it and recognize there is still a place for it, for now.
First off, who you know is inconsequential. Second, define content-creator. Third, I never saw "MacBook Pro, with Retina display, for content-creators" written on the label. Pro is shorthand for professional. And no where is professional defined as "content-creator".
No, in most developed countries I think professionals are the standard nowadays, not a niche. We have a very skilled and specialized labor force. Any such professionals requiring a computer for their needs would therefore be suitable targets for this machine.
Better inform yourself. I'd suggest starting with the WWDC keynote.
Actually in the keynote they made it explicit they were ruthlessly cutting out all tech that in their mind is antiquated. That is the explanation. They simply don't see the need for the crap you desire in this cutting edge design. This isn't a couple of pennies issue.
Last edited:
We can call it a many things. But the problem is how to make searches in google. (english) would be "Retina Macbook Pro".
"MacBook Pro Retina" I guess means exactly the same thing if your language is not English and you usually move the adjective after the word.
"MacBook Pro Retina" I guess means exactly the same thing if your language is not English and you usually move the adjective after the word.
Actually it does. Ethernet is one of the limiting ports in thinness. Hence its removal.
I'm not sure its worth "discussing" with him. I tried that for the better part of this thread.
I tried to think about what his ideal "environment" would be, with ethernet cords everywhere, and it reminded me of the futurama movie, except replace the tentacles with ethernet cords.
I imagine his ideal library looks something like this:
Apple may think Ethernet port is one of obsolete technology that has not been updated since it was create. Size is always the same. Could it be smaller? Cisco?
Not sure if the form factor could change, but if it were possible that would fall in Apple's favor of not including the legacy port. A change in form factor would necessitate an adapter for many people. Which we all know is not an acceptable alternative if you're in a pinch.
How do you get wired access to each member of the audience during the keynote?
Also, you're limiting to highly concentrated areas. Have you ever tried to put 1000 people through one router on a wired connection? I'll give you a hint, it sucks just as hard.
They're successful at comic-con, CES, E3....