Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
You can't charge your MacBook when using "InfiniteUSB"

"InfiniteUSB-C is literally a USB hub like InfiniteUSB. It will be powered by MacBook but won't charge back. The technical constrain for MacBook charging is mostly for the hub size. The size of InfintieUSB-C won't be like this small if we put an additional charging module inside the case."

Q-6
 
Last edited:
scalability doesn't seem the best; how would this be better than a usb-c to usb adapter ($20 from apple direct) and a usb 3.0 hub plugged into that?

I do like the look though and the flat cables, and if you are only doing one or two chained, it won't stick out that much.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
This Anker thing is just a charger though, not a hub.. right?

This specific thing, yes. I want that form factor for a hub with a couple C ports instead of all USB A. As of today, it's rated for 40w, but that could go up as well. (They make a 60W version as well with one more port.)
 
This has to be the most useless product I have ever seen. Not only is it ugly, but it could see this damaging the USB C port once you connect too many of those adapters. The leverage of having 3 or more adapter looks like an accident waiting to happen. To top it off thy dob't even supply power, why would you connect all those devices and then not power the computer. The apple 79$ video adapter is cleaner, safer, provides power and more versatile IMO.

The Hydra Dock looks better but even that has it's limitations. I hope apple sticks with Thunderbolt (V3) on it's other laptops as it is a way superior implementation, like multi monitor support and supporting higher resolutions.
 
This has to be the most useless product I have ever seen. Not only is it ugly, but it could see this damaging the USB C port once you connect too many of those adapters. The leverage of having 3 or more adapter looks like an accident waiting to happen. To top it off thy dob't even supply power, why would you connect all those devices and then not power the computer. The apple 79$ video adapter is cleaner, safer, provides power and more versatile IMO.

The Hydra Dock looks better but even that has it's limitations. I hope apple sticks with Thunderbolt (V3) on it's other laptops as it is a way superior implementation, like multi monitor support and supporting higher resolutions.

Video ports on the Hydra Dock are useless.
 
Video ports on the Hydra Dock are useless.

Just curious - what makes them useless?

I hope apple sticks with Thunderbolt (V3) on it's other laptops as it is a way superior implementation, like multi monitor support and supporting higher resolutions.

USB-C can support multiple monitors as well as full 4K@60Hz. 5K over USB-C will also be possible with DP 1.3 in Alt Mode. The limitations of current rMB have nothing to do with USB-C versus Thunderbolt - they have more to do with CPU/GPU limitations on MacBook itself.

Personally, I think the days of Thundrebolt are numbered. Apple may keep it on MacPro, but I see them dropping it on all MacBooks over time in favor of USB-C.
 
Last edited:
Why is it saying it does not support higher resolutions. The Macbook does the dock does not. It does not power?
 
Thanks. I didn't see that.

- Hah. I really do hope they mean effect rather than affect and that it isn't just an error on the bottom of the page. I've always thought zombie invasions were looked upon too negatively. Clearly, they can be quite useful! :D

KickShark said:
Standard crazy risks like hurricanes and zombie invasions could effect our schedule.
 
Just curious - what makes them useless?



USB-C can support multiple monitors as well as full 4K@60Hz. 5K over USB-C will also be possible with DP 1.3 in Alt Mode. The limitations of current rMB have nothing to do with USB-C versus Thunderbolt - they have more to do with CPU/GPU limitations on MacBook itself.

Personally, I think the days of Thundrebolt are numbered. Apple may keep it on MacPro, but I see them dropping it on MacBooks over time in favor of USB-C.


I never said it was a USB-C thing, but as it stands the Hydra Dock has limitations that thunderbolt docks do not have. Maybe it's just the hydra Dock and future docks for the MacBook will be able to support Ultra wide and 4K monitors.
 
I never said it was a USB-C thing, but as it stands the Hydra Dock has limitations that thunderbolt docks do not have. Maybe it's just the hydra Dock and future docks for the MacBook will be able to support Ultra wide and 4K monitors.

The limitations of Hydradock video ports come from the limitations of MacBook GPU. They are not due to the fact it's USB-C and not Thunderbolt dock. Future docks will have the same limitations as long as they connect to 12" MacBook.
 
The limitations of Hydradock video ports come from the limitations of MacBook GPU. They are not due to the fact it's USB-C and not Thunderbolt dock. Future docks will have the same limitations as long as they connect to 12" MacBook.

I see, I thought the macbook could support 4K, 3440X1440, 2560 x 1600 and had multi monitor support. I guess the Macbook is a turd after all as the 2010 Macbook air supports a higher res than that.
 
The limitations of Hydradock video ports come from the limitations of MacBook GPU. They are not due to the fact it's USB-C and not Thunderbolt dock. Future docks will have the same limitations as long as they connect to 12" MacBook.

- Not to dredge up our old discussion, but that's just not strictly true. The MacBook can do 4K at at least 30Hz (which is supported via Apple's own adaptor), so the fact that the Mini DisplayPort on the dock can't means it's a limitation of the dock and not of the MacBook.

I see, I thought the macbook could support 4K, 3440X1440, 2560 x 1600 and had multi monitor support. I guess the Macbook is a turd after all as the 2010 Macbook air supports a higher res than that.

- It can, and it does. 4K/UHD at at least 30Hz in addition to its own built-in display. Apple's specifications as well as Ars Technica's test reveal as much.
 
- Not to dredge up our old discussion, but that's just not strictly true. The MacBook can do 4K at at least 30Hz (which is supported via Apple's own adaptor), so the fact that the Mini DisplayPort on the dock can't means it's a limitation of the dock and not of the MacBook.

I am not sure that it can't. 4K@30Hz is frankly crap, so they may have chosen to not advertise it. If the dock is USB-C iF compliant (as they claim it is) - it just passes through AltMode signal from the computer port to the display. Therefore, whatever resolution / refresh the host machine supports - the dock should support as well.
 
I am not sure that it can't. 4K@30Hz is frankly crap, so they may have chosen to not advertise it. If the dock is USB-C iF compliant (as they claim it is) - it just passes through AltMode signal from the computer port to the display. Therefore, whatever resolution / refresh the host machine supports - the dock should support as well.


From the FAQ on the Hydra site.


"Can the HydraDock drive both display types at the same time?

No. The USB-C port on the MacBook only outputs a DisplayPort v1.2 signal, which can only support one of the two connectors at a time — either HDMI to 1920x1080, or Mini DisplayPort to 2560x1440 — but not both together."


Functionality

HydraDock is named after the multi-headed mythological serpent, and expands the single USB-C port on the MacBook into an array of eleven useful ports, including:

1 — 3.5mm stereo headphone port
1 — Gigabit Ethernet port
1 — SDXC card slot
1 — Mini DisplayPort (up to 2,560 x 1,440 resolution, w/HDCP)
1 — HDMI (up to 1,920 x 1,080 resolution, w/HDCP)
4 — USB 3.0 ports
2 — USB-C ports (data only, no video)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.