Thank you Apple: No more FW, Ethernet, and Optical

[SnowLeopard2008]

And that eats one of your very useful Thunderbolt ports. With the other used for Firewire, leaving zero for display (and HDMI can't do high-res displays).

Thing is... Yeah, this is all "minority" functionality, but you know what? The point of the Macbook Pro was to be the machine which has the extra features that only a minority of users need, or that they only need a minority of the time.

Also, before you are too quick to condemn the Ethernet port as redundant, please do a quick test: Get 750GB of files. Now run a full (not just incremental) backup to a Time Capsule over gigabit ethernet, and run another backup to it over 802.11. Let us know how equivalent they are.

Nothing's really changed much since this thread was first posted; I still find that the cMBP is a much more powerful computer. I bought a Mini, and I am using the firewire port on it -- in fact, I wish it had two, because I want to use both FW800 and FW400 devices, and I want to be able to leave the 400 plugged in but possibly remove the 800. I bought a new drive with FireWire interfaces on it last night, because it turns out I still use those, because they're still awesome for disk transfer.

I still think it says a lot that people were dismissing my concerns about the rMBP by saying that "only professional users" would want that functionality.

Maybe a year or two out, there'll be thunderbolt hubs that have dual-link DVI (or just displayport) output, ethernet, firewire, and all the other stuff that's missing. But in the mean time... This is just the thing where some Apple fans are so devoted that they will actively attack functionality that's not included in a given Apple product on the grounds that they can't emotionally handle the idea that an Apple product could not meet the needs of absolutely all users unless the users are somehow defective.

Still loving the OS, still buying Macs, but also getting more concerned about the long-term viability of OS X as a primary platform for my work, because Apple seems to be moving away from the stuff I need...

You're supposed to use those Thunderbolt ports, they aren't there for nothing. There's also TWO of these ports so you can use TWO Ethernet connections at once if "your line of work" needs that. What you say about "eating into one of your very useful Thunderbolt ports" is baseless since you are supposed to use them. If you need Ethernet, FireWire AND an external display all at once, you are most definitely the minority. Plus, HDMI DOES support high-res displays. I'm not sure where you get your information. The newest HDMI standard does up to 8K AND 3D. Is that enough for you? An 8K 3D display, FireWire 800 AND Ethernet ALL AT ONCE.

No, that is most definitely NOT the point of the MacBook Pro. The MacBook Pro is not supposed to have every single IO port known to man. Besides, Apple still sells the cMBP. This "new" rMBP is just for people who know that they don't need those ports BUT would rather have a thinner, smaller, lighter computer and still do "Pro" things. Maybe the display is more important for their line of work. Who knows? Some people in the minority favor better displays, lighter, thinner, smaller, etc. Some don't.

I did not condemn Ethernet, I said for CONSUMERS (not PROsumers) it is not really used that much. Of course ISPs still use Ethernet, as do many companies and such. But consumers? Not really, most people (as in consumer people) use WiFi. And 802.11 N is 300Mbps transfer speed. If you have a better router, that speed can be 450Mbps. And who seriously transfers 750GB of data? MOST people don't. You do, but most (keyword) people don't. If you do, then buy a cMBP. If you don't but still do "Pro" work, then get a rMBP. Simple. There's more choices for everybody.

Apple isn't moving anywhere. They still offer the cMBP. And by performance, the chips (both CPU and GPU) used by rMBP and cMBP are the same. It depends on configuration options. Don't fool yourself into thinking that just because the rMBP has the drive a much much more resource-intensive display means it performs less than the cMBP. The display can be turned off (such as clamshell mode) and with all other factors equalized, they perform the same.

Not in my line of work.

Well okay. Are you or your line of work the norm for consumers? No.

 

[therealseebs]

You're supposed to use those Thunderbolt ports, they aren't there for nothing. There's also TWO of these ports so you can use TWO Ethernet connections at once if "your line of work" needs that. What you say about "eating into one of your very useful Thunderbolt ports" is baseless since you are supposed to use them.

Well, yes. So I hook up 2560x1600 displays to both ports and... whoops, no ethernet or firewire.

If you need Ethernet, FireWire AND an external display all at once, you are most definitely the minority. Plus, HDMI DOES support high-res displays. I'm not sure where you get your information. The newest HDMI standard does up to 8K AND 3D. Is that enough for you? An 8K 3D display, FireWire 800 AND Ethernet ALL AT ONCE.

There may exist an HDMI spec which does. I have never seen an HDMI device which actually supported resolutions over 1920x1200, speaking only of devices which actually exist.

I did not condemn Ethernet,

No, but the OP did.

And 802.11 N is 300Mbps transfer speed. If you have a better router, that speed can be 450Mbps.

We had this discussion before; in practice, people do not get the rated speed, especially not if there's more than one device on the network. In reality, 802.11 networks are slow for most real-world circumstances.

And who seriously transfers 750GB of data? MOST people don't.

Why does Apple ship machines with 1TB drives if no one needs them?

Apple isn't moving anywhere.

Their flagship models lack core functionality I still use. They have removed the 17" model. They no longer ship a MBP with more than two USB ports, either.

Don't fool yourself into thinking that just because the rMBP has the drive a much much more resource-intensive display means it performs less than the cMBP. The display can be turned off (such as clamshell mode) and with all other factors equalized, they perform the same.

Except that the rMBP lacks the features I want. And both of them are... Well, I'd benefit a lot more from a machine 1/4" thicker that could run longer under heavier load without as much fan noise.

Well okay. Are you or your line of work the norm for consumers? No.

But the point is: The Macbook Pro is supposed to be the pro line, not the consumer line. That's the distinction they used to have between "Macbook" and "Macbook Pro". The rMBP is fundamentally in the product space of the Macbook, not the Macbook Pro. If they had a MBP with the additional ports and features, and a retina display, that would be a pretty awesome machine. If it existed weren't glossy, I'd probably have one.

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

Well, yes. So I hook up 2560x1600 displays to both ports and... whoops, no ethernet or firewire.

True but if you had a cMBP, you could only hook up ONE external display max.

There may exist an HDMI spec which does. I have never seen an HDMI device which actually supported resolutions over 1920x1200, speaking only of devices which actually exist.

This is a pretty baseless argument, HDMI cables can carry 8K signal BUT there are very few 8K resolution displays. But make no mistake, HDMI supports 8K. Even the older cables support 4K. The post I was replying to claimed that HDMI does not support high-res displays. That claim is 100% baseless as even the oldest HDMI cable does 1080P which is high res and newer ones carry 4K and 8K signals.

No, but the OP did.

Well I'm not the OP and the post I replied to claimed that I condemned Ethernet. I did not. Ethernet is useful but eventually people will use something else. Maybe not today or tomorrow or next year, but no IO port is forever.

We had this discussion before; in practice, people do not get the rated speed, especially not if there's more than one device on the network. In reality, 802.11 networks are slow for most real-world circumstances.

Not true. If you had 100 devices on the network AND more than 1 computer was transferring data to another, then yes the speed drops. But since in this thread we are talking about using a MBP to connect to a hard drive and transfer data to and from that hard drive, the scope of this situation is similar enough that your point is invalidated. If we had a wireless network consisting of one computer and one NAS versus one computer and one NAS over Ethernet, the speed between both would be very similar. But I do agree that the more devices added and more nodes transferring data to another node, then the speed does drop significantly.

Why does Apple ship machines with 1TB drives if no one needs them?

Why does Apple ship machines with smaller HD/SSD capacities if we all use 1TB? For the consumer, transferring 750GB of data in one go (as implied by the post I replied to) is pretty rare.

Their flagship models lack core functionality I still use. They have removed the 17" model. They no longer ship a MBP with more than two USB ports, either.

Okay, so get a hub? If you use 3 USB devices all at once, then get a hub.

Except that the rMBP lacks the features I want. And both of them are... Well, I'd benefit a lot more from a machine 1/4" thicker that could run longer under heavier load without as much fan noise.

Then buy the cMBP or another computer all together. Apple didn't stop shipping non-retina MBPs. The 17" didn't sell well enough to warrant it being continued. Look across the market, very few PC vendors make 17" models compared with smaller screen sizes.

But the point is: The Macbook Pro is supposed to be the pro line, not the consumer line. That's the distinction they used to have between "Macbook" and "Macbook Pro". The rMBP is fundamentally in the product space of the Macbook, not the Macbook Pro. If they had a MBP with the additional ports and features, and a retina display, that would be a pretty awesome machine. If it existed weren't glossy, I'd probably have one.

Glossy is better than AG actually, at least in "pro" line of work. The distinction between pro and consumer line is pretty blurred. The MBP is the most popular Mac notebook for Apple, does that mean there are more pros than consumers? No. Just that it's the sweet spot in price, size, and performance. It does everything for the most people. And the rMBP is most definitely not in the product space of the MacBook. It has a retina display, two Thunderbolt ports, HDMI and dual mics. This is hardly what a consumer would need. Consumers can make do with much less (i.e. MacBook Air).

Reply in red.

 

[therealseebs]

I am not going to bother trying to disentangle the quotes.

And no, I don't believe that glossy is "better than" anti-glare. It's absolutely, certainly, not universally and always better for pro work. But I'd go further; I don't actually know anyone who does pro work and prefers glossy. Glossy displays are popular with end-users who are looking for Shiny And Impressive. They are not popular with people who have to work with a display for long periods of time and care whether they get eyestrain or neck pain from trying to avoid glare and reflections.

Long story short: What you are doing here is, at best, making excuses. And that's fine. Heck, they're pretty decent excuses. The hardware's not unbearable, or anything. But you're acting as though you are proving that these choices result in a machine which is better, and you're not. You are merely arguing that the ways in which it's obviously lacking are mitigated or tolerable, or only affect a minority of users. Well, that may well be. But the thing is...

Mac users as a group are a minority. If Apple stopped catering to minorities of the computer-using population, they'd start by switching to Windows.

It is fine to say "this group of users is not large enough to justify Apple's continued support for them". I've accepted that the high-end computing I want to do is basically not a market Apple cares about. Apple is moving away from the pro market and towards the consumer market, and they're welcome to; it's certainly making them a ton of money.

But what's so bad about just, you know. Admitting that. Saying "yes, Apple's new machines are not as good for some of the pro users, and there has been a consistent shift away from that market over the last five or six years" should not be some kind of major emotional breakthrough, it should be just acknowledging an obvious fact. What is it about the mac community that produces this horrified rejection of the notion of admitting that sometimes Apple's support for a particular user community isn't as good as it used to be?

The macrumors forums have some great stuff, but the number of people who are emotionally committed to asserting that everything Apple does is the best of all possible choices, and that anyone who isn't happier with it is defective, is ridiculous.

And keep in mind, all your arguments that rely on the continued existence of the cMBP are, in effect, agreement with those of us (like me) who have been dismissing the OP as a lunatic. You are conceding that these "obsolete" formats and functions are, in fact, still of real value to people.

 

[Purant]

Mac users as a group are a minority. If Apple stopped catering to minorities of the computer-using population, they'd start by switching to Windows.

It is fine to say "this group of users is not large enough to justify Apple's continued support for them". I've accepted that the high-end computing I want to do is basically not a market Apple cares about. Apple is moving away from the pro market and towards the consumer market, and they're welcome to; it's certainly making them a ton of money.

But what's so bad about just, you know. Admitting that. Saying "yes, Apple's new machines are not as good for some of the pro users, and there has been a consistent shift away from that market over the last five or six years" should not be some kind of major emotional breakthrough, it should be just acknowledging an obvious fact. What is it about the mac community that produces this horrified rejection of the notion of admitting that sometimes Apple's support for a particular user community isn't as good as it used to be?

Thank you, wonderful post, couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[TheSpeaker]

Well, your line of work may be a minority in general.

Guess they should drop the "Pro" moniker then huh...

----------

I did not condemn Ethernet, I said for CONSUMERS (not PROsumers) it is not really used that much.

You don't spend a lot of time in hotels with next-to-nothing wifi do you? Not to mention, what about when 10Gb over Ethernet becomes the new standard. Sure, the internet may not be that fast, but moving data around a home and office network would sure as hell benefit. You're as short sighted as Apple in this regard. And until companies start utilizing Thunderbolt ports and it has a throw greater than 10 feet, Cat5 is still by far, the best way to move data around a home or office.

I've seen Apple apologists, and then I read your posts. Wow.

 

[throAU]

ahh cute.

someone who thinks that wifi only is good enough

 

[shurcooL]

Guess they should drop the "Pro" moniker then huh...

If you've seen their latest TV advertisement for the 13 inch Retina MacBook Pro, they mention that "it's for the pro in all of us." That doesn't sound pro at all, it sounds like it's for average consumers.

 

[TheSpeaker]

If you've seen their latest TV advertisement for the 13 inch Retina MacBook Pro, they mention that "it's for the pro in all of us." That doesn't sound pro at all, it sounds like it's for average consumers.

Might as well just call it the iMacBook

 

[skottichan]

Guess they should drop the "Pro" moniker then huh...

So it's only "Pro" when it fits your job criteria. I work in the design industry, and I've seen many of my peers switching to the rMBP + TB Display, and I may do the same when my '09 MBP finally gives up the ghost (or whatever new iMac is out then). I'd like to believe our opinion counts, since we're professionals and all.

 

[Mr. Buzzcut]

You've only been to very small offices/companies then since they didn't have AD authentication.

802.1x probably isn't all that common on wired networks. Most foreign devices will at least be put on a guest network. Wireless is insecure enough to even password protect guest networks that aren't public (i.e., see the receptionist).

To the rest of the thread, my last Latitude laptop had PCMCIA, smartcard, eSATA, Ethernet, and serial but was only slightly thicker than a MBP. The new one is no thinner but eliminates the serial port. Still has the rest. As a network guy, I'm annoyed that I have to carry around an adapter to do my job. I can definitely empathize with others here. I think the "Pro" moniker has become a joke as the MacBook is very much a consumer device. Now that smaller devices are becoming so powerful, I think Apple should reevaluate their branding strategy. As others have said, move the thin and light devices to the Air line. Keep a separate and more robust Pro line.

 

[Benguitar]

I fail to see the point of this thread..

It states no information we didn't already know, nor does it help anybody.

 

[iancapable]

Ethernet requires physical access and is thus by nature more secure than WiFi.

With WiFi, I can wardrive directly into your wireless network without needing to physically enter your premises.

In the world of IT security, the latter is an instant GAME OVER. When the cost of the security breach also includes customer data, you would be insane to continue using wireless over wired.

Seriously dude, don't talk rubbish...

War driving will allow me to find a network and gather a bit of information about it. If it is properly secured, then you will still have to break the encryption and the wireless security, then physically break on to the individual machines all without being traced. No different to someone walking into your building plugging in and doing the same thing, or breaking through your VPN.

If your network is properly secured, it's just as good as being wired in.

The only true secure network is not to have one at all

 

[TheSpeaker]

So it's only "Pro" when it fits your job criteria. I work in the design industry, and I've seen many of my peers switching to the rMBP + TB Display, and I may do the same when my '09 MBP finally gives up the ghost (or whatever new iMac is out then). I'd like to believe our opinion counts, since we're professionals and all.

Designers... Always form over function.

 

[therealseebs]

The point about "pro" is not that it fits any one person's job criteria, but that it should be built with advanced and professional use in mind, not with end-user/consumer use only in mind. It's fine for the pro line to be useful to end-users and non-professionals, but the original idea was to have the "MacBook" for those users, and the "MacBook Pro" for the people like IT techs, programmers, and other folks who needed a range of functionality beyond what they considered the baseline.

 

[Poisonivy326]

Ok I'll just point out that if you want Ethernet, an optical drive, etc. the cMBP is a perfectly good machine. Just because it's "old fashioned" and doesn't have SSD and a retina display doesn't mean that it's not great if you want a machine to do grunt work. I have the cMBP to do the heavy stuff, for the "light" stuff like web browsing, email, music, etc. you can get an ipad. Or, if you want to go cheap, a Nexus/KindleFire.

Personally I'm not upgrading to rMBP because I don't buy the first-gen of anything Apple. I know newer generations will work out the kinks and be more affordable.

 

[FluJunkie]

I love that these discussions always assume the definition of "Pro" must be them.

The Macbook Pro is undeniably a Pro machine - and a flexible one at that. They don't have to choose between adding a networking port and a display port, and risk their users never being able to use one or the other - a TB port works for both.

Beyond that, thin-ness is a professional feature - the number of people I know who both need a portable computer, and need that computer to have serious firepower are almost all people using their computers professionally.

"It doesn't have the feature set I want" doesn't mean it isn't a professional machine. It just means it might not be your professional machine.

 

[TheSpeaker]

Beyond that, thin-ness is a professional feature

Not a chance at the expense of features and connectability. That's insane. You give up FW800, matte display, Ethernet, etc for a half a pound and a slightly thinner machine? What kind of "pro" are you?

It's the same bat-***** mentality with the new iMac. They made the EDGE thinner, but sacrificed ports, cooling, and additional HDD capability for thinness that NOBODY WILL EVER NOTICE...on a DESKTOP!!! It's bat***** crazy.

 

[Freyqq]

Thank you Apple,

For moving technology and the industry forward, by phasing these interfaces that are old, decrepit, and superceded by better standards and technology. It's about time that they go the way of floppy disks, serial ports, P/S2, and a myriad of ancient interconnect standards.

Ethernet was simply designed during a time when mainframe dominated, and when mini-computers size of refrigerators were considered "portable". There is no excuse in continuing to use a port that is designed during Watergate, and has a totally unreasonable size for the function that it performs and the designed bit rate. Its plastic and fragile construction was originally designed for data centers and intranets, very few people today can justify its continued existence.

FW is something that has not been used by normal people in many years. It is mostly a few stubborn people in photo/video production who have a baseless fear of new technology, while clinging to the things that they knew best. Even the iPod and most Apple consumer electronic products have not used it for nearly a decade, that tells how arcane and ineffective this interface really it. It's simply time to upgrade people's drives, peripheral, cameras, etc, and move on from this anachronistic monstrosity.

The ODD itself takes up huge amount of space. Even the media oriented Apple machines like the Mac Mini and Apple TV no long use such outdated forms of media recordings like DVD. Most people today watch shows and films on Netflix and Hulu, places like Blockbuster are dying a slow by certain death. Hopefully these huge space and weight hog in laptops will meet their final demise in all laptops soon, and we will never have to worry about having a disk stuck in the drive and rendering it useless, and having to carry a laptop with +2 lbs just because some people refuse to migrate to the streaming model.

Great job, , it's time to make the switch. Now that these ports have been relegated to legacy status, only being found on old, outdated models of MBPs. Please also phase these out on the iMac and other computers, and not look back.

FW: I'm fine with this move, as Thunderbolt has a native adapter, and USB 3 is faster

Ethernet: until apple puts in wireless 802.11ac, n is still slower than gigabit ethernet. 802.11ac is still going to be slower than gigabit ethernet, but it'll be close enough. Therefore, I'm against this move in principle. In practice, they have a thunderbolt adapter with gigabit ethernet, so I can live with it. Also, due to the thickness of the laptops, I understand the move.

ODD: I have no issues with this move. However, I do have an issue with the cost of the apple ODD. $79? Really? Bring it down to $20-30. However, this is a non-issue, b\c you can just buy a third party ODD for $20-30 and use it for the once every 6 months you need an ODD.

 

[derbothaus]

I wish Apple would phase out the CPU and screen as well.

 

[FluJunkie]

Not a chance at the expense of features and connectability. That's insane. You give up FW800, matte display, Ethernet, etc for a half a pound and a slightly thinner machine? What kind of "pro" are you?

I'm a professional computational scientist, thank you very much.

I haven't *ever* used the FW800 port on either my Mac Pro, or my current Macbook Pro. Entirely wasted space.

I'd prefer a matte display, but its not a bit enough selling feature for me either way.

I've got Ethernet - a smallish adaptor that's easy enough to carry around. Though it gets left at home more often than not and also something I don't particularly miss - while the Mac Pro is hooked up to a wired connection, the laptop is usually living on a wireless network. The limiting reagent for my connection speeds most times is not the Me - > Network interface, but the speed of the connection to the outside world. 802.11g or above easily outstrips that unless I happen to be on campus. I also don't make a habit of transferring large files generally - most of what I do can be boiled down on the cluster to a much smaller file, where in it takes me longer to type $scp... than it does for the file to actually transfer.

It's not a slightly thinner machine, it's a significantly thinner one. And its a half-pound lighter. What kind of Pro am I? One who moves around a lot, finds himself carrying his computer more than I'd like, and has dragged it around most of the U.S., good portions of Europe, Australia and Uganda. One who looks at Macbook Airs with envy, but needs more RAM than they provide, and regularly has all the cores available on his Mac Pro at or near 100%, and likes his machines to have a bit of firepower.

Someone who knows the weight and size of his machine comes up every time I use it, and for whom FW800 has never once come up.

We might agree on the iMac - I don't really understand the purpose of "Thin" on a desktop, but for a laptop, it's far from "bats**t". It's a laptop.

Your rant is basically the essence of my complaint. Your vision of "Pro" is not everyone's vision of "Pro". Your work is not everyone's work. Something that doesn't meet your needs isn't something that means its inherently not professional, anymore than the things the Macbook Pro doesn't necessarily meet for my needs doesn't mean all the people who are punching it are terrible, horrible, no-good very bad non-Pro users. They're just people with different requirements.

 

[TheSpeaker]

I'm a professional computational scientist, thank you very much.

I haven't *ever* used the FW800 port on either my Mac Pro, or my current Macbook Pro. Entirely wasted space.

I'd prefer a matte display, but its not a bit enough selling feature for me either way.

I've got Ethernet - a smallish adaptor that's easy enough to carry around. Though it gets left at home more often than not and also something I don't particularly miss - while the Mac Pro is hooked up to a wired connection, the laptop is usually living on a wireless network. The limiting reagent for my connection speeds most times is not the Me - > Network interface, but the speed of the connection to the outside world. 802.11g or above easily outstrips that unless I happen to be on campus. I also don't make a habit of transferring large files generally - most of what I do can be boiled down on the cluster to a much smaller file, where in it takes me longer to type $scp... than it does for the file to actually transfer.

It's not a slightly thinner machine, it's a significantly thinner one. And its a half-pound lighter. What kind of Pro am I? One who moves around a lot, finds himself carrying his computer more than I'd like, and has dragged it around most of the U.S., good portions of Europe, Australia and Uganda. One who looks at Macbook Airs with envy, but needs more RAM than they provide, and regularly has all the cores available on his Mac Pro at or near 100%, and likes his machines to have a bit of firepower.

Someone who knows the weight and size of his machine comes up every time I use it, and for whom FW800 has never once come up.

We might agree on the iMac - I don't really understand the purpose of "Thin" on a desktop, but for a laptop, it's far from "bats**t". It's a laptop.

Your rant is basically the essence of my complaint. Your vision of "Pro" is not everyone's vision of "Pro". Your work is not everyone's work. Something that doesn't meet your needs isn't something that means its inherently not professional, anymore than the things the Macbook Pro doesn't necessarily meet for my needs doesn't mean all the people who are punching it are terrible, horrible, no-good very bad non-Pro users. They're just people with different requirements.

Oh go write an algorithm and get yourself a MacBook Air and leave the "Pro" to those of us who need ports.

 

[Essenar]

I can't believe his sarcasm flew by this many heads lol.

I was laughing at every paragraph. The Watergate plug had me nearly rolling.

Good job with the post, thumbs up.

If you weren't laughing, you fell for it lol.

 

[FluJunkie]

Oh go write an algorithm and get yourself a MacBook Air and leave the "Pro" to those of us who need ports.

Computational scientist, not computer science I don't write the algorithms, I just throw them at massive data sets.

The Air is utterly unsuited for that task. The Pro works swimmingly.