Yeah, that's my whole issue buddy. I buy computers and use the TB3 ports. All of them. Oh right. You're only talking about the ports you use. How silly of me, how could I have forgotten that little detail.
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.
Stolen MacBook Pro Schematics Confirm Apple's Plans to Add More Ports and Remove Touch Bar
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's honestly not surprising that you took the sarcastic parts and tried to argue it's a logical fallacy, and ignored the actual points being made.I apologise for confusing your sarcasm with an attempt at a rational argument.
The irony of using a straw man argument to claim a false equivalence is not lost on me.
Laptops are replaced every three years in every corporate environment I’ve ever dealt with.
But @theluggage buys computers and uses the ports he mentions. All of them. Oh right. @Stephen.R is only talking about the ports he uses. How silly of him, how could he have forgotten that little detail.
Sorry I couldn’t resist !!
Lucky them. Going on 7 years for me, at a major international engineering/design/mfg company. Were given highpower (back then) i7’s with maxed out RAM and we’re surviving fine even if it provides us with the unrequested opportunity for bicep curls between every meeting. VGA port, HDMI port, four USB-A ports. All being replaced this year with Surface 3’s.
Yet again, you miss the point.
Where have I (seriously) advocated for the video outputs to be built in DisplayPort? For it to have built in Ethernet? When did I ask for eSATA ports or FireWire ports?
I accept that those things are limited to a single use, and other people have different uses, so I will buy the adapters and cables etc that let me use the devices I want to use, from the universally adaptable TB3 ports.
Exactly. Win-Win. But if certain people value 'symmetric aesthetics' higher than usefulness and celebrate their awesome dongles, it is futile to argue against them. Save your time.
^This. Since 2016, I've had to endure the fanboys telling me how great four identical ports are and that every competitor and third-party manufacturer would jump on the bandwagon in a timely manner, would adapt. I guess they meant adapter.
Ba-dum-tss.
Five years later, not a single person in my setting has ever needed or utilized all four USB-C ports on the same time. But a lot of them still use the stuff you call "legacy" (no, it's not) like SD-cards to quickly share photos and videos without having to carry the whole camera, or HDMI, which most projectors and monitors use. Also, Magsafe is more convenient and robust (!) than the rather frail USB-C port, which you still will be able to use if you prefer that. So if the leaks turn out to be true, you are going to lose one USB-C port and get three useful ports in return, plus the headphone jack being located on the left side again. In 2016 the sheep defended Apple for knowing what they're doing, "going with the time". Stop crying when Apple is doing the same in 2021, as they did in 2019 with the 16" MBP, listening to their customers. Peoples have different needs, and the majority has missed the flexibility since the 2015 MBP. Now they are getting it back and I approve.
For the touchbar, I don't mind or care much. Physical keys with included mini-displays would be dope and the best of both worlds, but I guess this is not going to happen.
Last edited:
The only people claiming TB3 ports are about "aesthetics" are detractors such as yourself, convinced that that must be why they were adopted.
We literally only care about being able to use the ports. All of them. You literally can use a TB3 port to drive your HDMI display or USB-A device. It's impossible to use a built in HDMI port or USB A port to drive a TB3 device. Or any of the other types of devices, that are also supported by adapters and cables.
In case you weren't aware, Apple sells the same models all over the world.
In 30 years of using a computer I think I've seen a HDMI port used... once? Does that discount the other claims that it is used?
I'm literally telling you I use all four ports. Not necessarily for TB3 or USB-C devices. But I'm not self-obsessed enough to think that Apple should or would provide multiple built in DisplayPort connections just so I don't need an adapter or different cable. I don't expect a physical ethernet port either, for the same reason. It's trivially solvable, without impacting on the flexibility of the machine to suit others' needs.
Firstly - the schematic shows USB-C shaped cutouts. That doesn't mean they're necessarily TB3/USB4 ports. The iMac 24" has four cutouts, but only two are USB4.
The ports being added are, presumably useful to you. They're not useful to myself and many others.
But apparently only your needs matter.
Don't make the mistake of assuming the loudest voices are in the majority.
Self-reflectivness is something you still need to learn, huh? Eventually you will.
On the one hand you state "They're not useful to myself and many others" and on the other "But apparently only your needs matter". I could turn this exactly the other way round, right? Such quotes are ignorant and stupid, so in that terms I'm not going to waste my time with you.
However, one thing is certain: You can't even prove that you represent a majority, just that you have a very loud voice here yourself, obviously. However, I have evidence that people who embrace the return of additional parts form the majority:
We are not talking about Apple going to kill USB-C or your awesome dongles. You can keep and use them. They are about to remove one port of four to get three other ones in return, ffs. To even fuzz about that rather than simply being happy for the people who a willing to buy a MacBook again, strengthening the marketshare, is absolutely ridiculous. With that being said, cheers and bye.
On the one hand you state "They're not useful to myself and many others" and on the other "But apparently only your needs matter". I could turn this exactly the other way round, right? Such quotes are ignorant and stupid, so in that terms I'm not going to waste my time with you.
However, one thing is certain: You can't even prove that you represent a majority, just that you have a very loud voice here yourself, obviously. However, I have evidence that people who embrace the return of additional parts form the majority:
- In all international as well as German forums, blogs, news-feeds and portals; comments expressing approval with the ports leak have more upvotes and positives responses than the ones stubbornly defending USB-C only
- Apple wouldn't even consider bringing back Magsafe, HDMI and SD if the majority of people and reviews were positive about the USB-C only decision back in 2016, which was never the case, same with butterfly & touchbar
We are not talking about Apple going to kill USB-C or your awesome dongles. You can keep and use them. They are about to remove one port of four to get three other ones in return, ffs. To even fuzz about that rather than simply being happy for the people who a willing to buy a MacBook again, strengthening the marketshare, is absolutely ridiculous. With that being said, cheers and bye.
Last edited:
Lol. Your not self obsessed. Please. Your preaching how everyone here is wrong and your right. Lol
...so, none of them are using USB-C or thunderbolt, so it’s not like you can use them without an adapter anyway. I bet you an internet that some or all of the DP displays have HDMI inputs as well. HDMI to DVI is a simple passive cable. Heck, I use DP whenever possible - and if Apple were going to make me my own special personalised laptop I‘d go with a DP++ port, but that ain’t gonna happen, and HDMI is going to be the most use to the most people.
...and you gain extra dedicated power and display ports that mean you don’t have to waste your high-speed data I/o ports on unrelated functions, plus the new USB4 hub technology that will let you expand the number of TB ports to 4-6 with at least the same bandwidth as before (if Apple gimp the i/o and display capabilities of the M2 that’s another story). Yet to see a use case where you’d need to carry a USB4 hub on the road unless you were already carrying a truckload of bulky peripherals...
If you need more than three it’s not a very good do-it-all port.
No. You can't "turn it around".
With a TB3 port, you can use a HDMI adapter, I can use a DP adapter. John can use an ethernet adapter. Margaret can use a USB-Hub. Bob can use a fast external SSD.
With a HDMI port you can use a HDMI cable directly..... the rest of us can just sit around and play with our genitals.
When ports on laptops becomes a democracy that will be relevant.
That's not evidence of a 'majority' of users by any stretch of the imagination.
I'm always amazed at how people manage to claim that Apple has perfectly analysed the market when the change is for their benefit. So Apple completely ****ed up in 2016, and for the following half-decade... but now, they've measured the market correctly... sure ok.
How exactly do you suppose someone plug in 4 TB3 devices, to 3 ports? Or, if it follows the iMac model: two TB3 ports and a USB-C port?
Remember, the solution for you to run HDMI (or a plethora of other ports) from TB3/USB-C costs as little as $7, needs no additional power and is ubiquitous. The only solution to connect more TB3 devices if they don't have pass-through (which generally adapter type devices don't) is a USB4 hub, none of which are portable, and the cheapest of which is $200.
I'm trying to explain a different use-case for a computer, which some of you are ironically unwilling to listen to, while claiming 'people use laptops differently'.
The irony from some posts in this thread is off the charts.
I get what you are saying. All of you.
What I wonder is: why 4 ports? Maybe 3+2 or whatever.
This is NOT a cheap computer. It should be doable to integrate 4 TB ports. 3 USB-A ports. An SD card slot and an ethernet port. All of them
I do have TB/USB-C devices. USB3 (Type A) devices, etc. They won't go away anytime soon. Every cheapo motherboard has that sort of interfaces. Yes, one could use an adapter. But I'd rather not use one, at least not when trying to connect to an interface as ubiquitous as USB-A, ethernet or even HDMI
I don't get Apple's ports minimalism.
What I wonder is: why 4 ports? Maybe 3+2 or whatever.
This is NOT a cheap computer. It should be doable to integrate 4 TB ports. 3 USB-A ports. An SD card slot and an ethernet port. All of them
I do have TB/USB-C devices. USB3 (Type A) devices, etc. They won't go away anytime soon. Every cheapo motherboard has that sort of interfaces. Yes, one could use an adapter. But I'd rather not use one, at least not when trying to connect to an interface as ubiquitous as USB-A, ethernet or even HDMI
I don't get Apple's ports minimalism.
Here's a thought.
Maybe you're picking the wrong device if your usage profile needs the connectivity of that many USB3/4 ports so often when out & about with your laptop. Maybe a MacBook is wrong for you. After all, I don't believe you're carrying toting around things like an 8K monitor, GPU, external storage devices, etc, to need so many high-speed high-capability ports so often? Or maybe you need a MacBook with a larger SSD if you need access to high-speed data transfer so much. And then just carry a nice, small hub/adapter for when you need to connect to any USB-A or HDMI type device.
On the other hand there are those who specifically pick a MacBook over an iMac or MacMini to have a truly portable "all-in-one" solution for a majority of their use time. The desire (and expectation) is to not need an externally-connected camera, screen, keyboard, mouse, power supply, speaker, etc., directly carries over to wanting to not need to compensate by toting, retrieving (and not losing) USB-A, HDMI, DVI, ethernet, etc. adapters/hubs/blah blah blah's for the diverse grouping of devices one might encounter on a typical day. Carrying a few adapters around on a mobile day would be as PITA as carrying around a separate mouse to many of us.
I (and nobody) would try to convince you to adopt "our" values/priorities, but I do think you should just save yourself some time and accept that a large market has values/priorities that are very different from yours (and where yours seems quite unique IMHO). You can complain that the ports won't fill your preferred usage profile that should be respected, and nobody should say you're wrong there. But you may as well stop trying to convince users away from their usage profile preferences...
You can lead an "all-in-one dongle-less device wanting" user to the hub/dongle pond but you can't make them drink.
Hear hear!
Last edited:
By your logic : maybe you’re picking the wrong device if your usage profile needs a built in hdmi port.
the top level MacBook Pro port arrangement hasn’t changed for 5 years but you’re suggesting that somehow me making use of those ports is “wrong” because you don’t want to use a different cable?
Ok sure buddy.
Ha ha I think you're a lost cause to try to even try to acknowledge (not adopt but just acknowledge) what might be expected from an "all-in-one" mobile laptop that can interface with its surroundings "as-is out of the box" (after being charged) by not having to adjust to its surroundings....the user drops their hands onto the built-in keyboard/trackpad without adding a piece of hardware, focuses their eyes on the built-in screen without adding a screen, and connects various commonly-used peripherals nearby without having to add various pieces of intermediate hardware....
I mostly was suggesting you consider: the laptop is a mobile device that's designed to do as much as possible by itself as-is out of the box (once charged) for whatever it encounters, be it hands, eyes, ears, or cables leading big pieces of hardware that are rather impractical to build into a laptop (printer...50" monitor when needed, etc). How nice is it when you can connect your mobile laptop to that external device instantly with the available cable connected to it?
As far as "for 5 years..." But it *may* be changing by Apple now. Improved. And in response to......
In response to.....?
Hmmm. Think about it.
Last edited:
In response to whiny entitled people doing what they do best.
I thought we clarified this earlier.
And USB-C has been out for 5 years and USB-A is far older than that.
As has been demonstrated there are people who will hold on to old ports untilt he heat death of the unviers.e There are cards for serial ports out there.
...yet new products are still appearing with USB-A. not to mention the vast majority of USB-C products that only use it to provide the same old regular USB 3.1, DisplayPort or HDMI connection as before (and probably have a USB C to A cable or adapter in the box)...
That could be a hint that maybe, just maybe USB-C could be a solution looking for a problem... at least for anything other than a handful of high-end devices that actually need Thunderbolt.
If you think people are hanging on to RS232 or SCSI or coax ethernet (all of which have been dredged up by USB-C evangelists in this thread) out of stubbornness then you obviously don't remember 9600 bps connections, huge clunky SCSI connectors, device IDs, missing terminators, soldering up weird RS423-to-RS232 cables... In the case of genuinely obsolete technologies like those, people only hang on to them because they need them for genuine legacy equipment. In the case of RS232 that's often in the form of giant CNC milling machines that cost as much as a house (and fill most of one) or because the cable they'd need to replace is several miles long and/or threaded through the bowels of their building... and I don't see any of that relative handful of people complaining that they've needed a dongle since the 1990s (although, of course, USB-C means they now need a dongle for that dongle...).
That's simply not the case with USB-A, DisplayPort, HDMI - not only are they still common on brand new equipment, but in the majority of cases USB-C/Thunderbolt is using the exact same protocol under the hood - and all USB-C achieves is to make them more expensive to implement and require a more complex cable with embedded power conversion circuitry. The technologies aren't outdated - USB-A can quite happily carry 10Gbps - and only the fastest SSDs, DisplayPort 1.4 and the latest HDMI can drive 8K@60Hz - and are still being actively developed... in fact, until a year or two ago, Thunderbolt was holding back display technology by only supporting DP 1.2 when DP 1.4 (which could support up to 8k with a single cable) was rolling out.
You can keep claiming that these ports are obsolete/legacy/whatever - and making false comparisons with ancient technologies that were already bottlenecks & out-performed by their replacements 20 years ago - but that won't change the reality that they self-evidently are not.
Yes, Thunderbolt is good for single-cable docking, a handful of ultra-high bandwidth devices and external PCIe racks... which is probably why Apple are keeping 2 (if not 3 - it's only me speculating that the third port will be USB only) ports on the MBP and, most likely, at least 2 controllers, so the bandwidth hasn't been cut. I wouldn't buy a new computer that didn't have some Thunderbolt capability for high-speed I/O - the issue is the stupid "all or nothing" attitude and the artificial bottleneck created by using USB-C as the only connection for display, power, low-bandwidth I/O etc. that wouldn't otherwise compete for resources.
Of course I do.
I also clearly remember being frustrated by equipment suppliers refusing to update their gear to USB because it was still possible to buy laptops with RS-232 ports. (I would have gladly used an adapter if reliability had not been a major issue.)
I still need to deal with underwater positioning systems, DGPS units, data loggers and CTD pods that require serial interfaces.
Part of it is determined by the I/O capabilities of the CPU/GPU - especially mobile chips. The CPU either has to have embedded USB/Thunderbolt controllers or to provide enough external PCIe lanes to drive external controllers. If you want to connect 4 x 4k-or-more displays, then the GPU has to (a) provide 4, 4k-capable DisplayPort streams and (b) have the grunt - and enough VRAM/Unified RAM - to smoothly drive that many 4k+ screens using a graphically rich OS like MacOS. All of that uses space, costs money and (in particular) uses power and generates heat.
The M1 MacBook Air and iPad Pro deliver amazing performance and battery life and run without a fan - that didn't happen without compromise. Only supporting one external display, "only" two Thunderbolt controllers and just enough USB to run the keyboard, trackpad, webcam etc. is sensible for a system-on-a-chip designed primarily for fanless ultra-portables and tablets.
I don't think the specifics are known, but it's a reasonable educated guess that the M1 chip only has connections for one external DisplayPort stream (for the laptop display), two TB3/USB4 outputs (sharing a second internal DisplayPort stream) and maybe 2-4 USB ports - which the laptops will use for webcam, keyboard, trackpad etc. (If you have an M1 Mac you could do a system report and see what's connected to what...) Maybe - like Intel - they're in the form of universal I/O lines that can be configured to various permutations of PCIe/USB3/etc. by the system builder, but that's the sort of complexity that it might be sensible to leave out when you're making your own bespoke chips.
The M1 Mini doesn't have webcams, trackpads etc. or an internal display, so it would make sense that it has a couple of USBs and a display output to spare. The M1 iMac would have some spare USB (no keyboard/trackpad) but would need its internal display connection (so no chance of HDMI). As I said, nobody who is telling knows the exact M1 specs but the machines released so far are consistent with being determined by the I/O resources of the M1 itself.
Looking at the 2016 MBP design, Apple probably couldn't have added any ports while keeping 4 TB3 ports, even if they'd wanted to. There probably just weren't enough PCIe/USB3 lanes coming from the chipset (...and they had the T1 chip/touchbar combo to drive, too). What a lot of people would have preferred would have been 2 TB3 ports + the old complement of USBA/HDMI/SD (which, together, would have used less resources than the second TB controller).
...that's the problem with TB3/USB-C: each fully-featured TB controller needs a 4xPCIe connection, two DisplayPort streams and to be hooked up to the power/charging circuitry. That's a lot of resources that need to be provided by the CPU and a lot of extra cost/complexity/power c.f. a couple of USBA's and an HDMI. If you cut corners on that, then you end up with different supposedly "universal" ports having different capabilities and having to break out the Advanced Dungeons and Dragons handbook to work out where to plug your kit - something that Apple likes to avoid (although not always - see the 2016 4-port 13" MBP where 2 of the TB3 ports had reduced bandwidth or, of course the M1 iMac.)
Of course, some of it is Apple's combination of form-over-function obsession and penny pinching habits. Now, the entry-level M1 iMac with just the 2 ports and no ethernet is just pure pricing strategy on Apple's part to create an artificial distinction between the $1300 and $1500 models. There's no practical justification for not putting those ports in the $1300 model. Plus, throwing a couple of the most commonly needed dongles in with the 2016 iMac wouldn't have solved the problem but it would have calmed a few tempers...
Key word there is adapter
No. USB-C came about because the previous things weren't a standard anymore but rather a hodgepodge of plug types.
Ha. I remember 300 bps and freaking punch cards. Had to use them too. Not fun is putting it mildly.
USB C to RS232 cables have been around for a while. If one can't spend the $15 such a cable costs they have other problems.