Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

El Burro

Suspended
Sep 7, 2009
134
226
How many actually need that bandwidth on even ONE port much less 3 to 4? And are actually in the market for the 13" Pro right now? How many were truly planning to get the 13" and hook up 4 TB3 devices that need that bandwidth? How many pay zero attention to far more significant positives, from screen quality to giant trackpad?

I've had every iBook and Macbook since 2005, and this is the first one I won't be upgrading to based on the rapacious pricing, and miniscule update (slower processor in the base model, and less battery life).

Nothing about this device is "pro."
 
Last edited by a moderator:

840quadra

Moderator
Staff member
Feb 1, 2005
9,261
5,979
Twin Cities Minnesota
The limitation on charging through the Digital AV Multiport adaptor seems really silly at this point. It honestly tells me they didn't update their dongles to fully support the new MBP systems. In addition to that issue, the Multimedia adapters HDMI port doesn't support 60hz video on anything larger than 1080P. The low charging speed, and video limitation really makes it a worthless / inadequate product for the new MBP.

There is so much to like about the new 15" MBP, but honestly may just keep my 2015 15" Radeon equipped MBP for a bit longer. I hope the aftermarket can catch up with more affordable connectivity options. As it stands, I would need to spend over $200 to match the current ports my MBP has, to be able to use my existing drives / monitors / accessories.
 

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,546
1,196
There are certainly pluses and minuses--for me included. But so many of things people are saying have surpassed parody level. Which is a shame, because Apple could use the feedback--but it just sounds insane half the time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ritmo99

macrumors newbie
Oct 12, 2012
24
3
Like many of you, I too am upset about this release. I do think this may be strategic marketing though. Due to poor Mac Sales, release a new product they know is overpriced, to dump the previous generation devices to third-party vendors at normal cost, but now seems discounted compared to the current generation. Then in a few months at the next keynote, they're going to say "we listened to you" and drop the price and include a few dongles in the box.

Unfortunately, this new MBP isn't going away anytime soon. Thank god my 2011 15" MBP is still going strong. I'm going to ride this release out.
 

Icaras

macrumors 603
Mar 18, 2008
6,344
3,393
Heh, the whining is almost comical at this point. Of course I'll be called a McPologist! ;)

This is nothing new anyway, the previous smaller MacBooks (Airs, etc) had reduced Thunderbolt functionality over the larger pros. The cylinder Mac Pro doesn't have Thunderbolt 2 on all 6 ports, it divides 3 TB buses among them. So, the 13" MacBook Pros probably only have 1 thunderbolt 3 bus instead of 2 on the 15", or some other lesser vs. greater combination (not sure how the TB 3 hardware support works). You should've been complaining about this for years as it's been that way since Thunderbolt was introduced on the smaller devices vs. the larger.

The whining going on is very comical. And one thing I've learned is that people here have very very short memories.
 

840quadra

Moderator
Staff member
Feb 1, 2005
9,261
5,979
Twin Cities Minnesota
How many actually need that bandwidth on even ONE port much less 3 to 4? And are actually in the market for the 13" Pro right now? How many were truly planning to get the 13" and hook up 4 TB3 devices that need that bandwidth? How many pay zero attention to far more significant positives, from screen quality to giant trackpad?

I agree fully on the subject of overall IO. The overall IO Capability exceeds the outgoing model by far.

The only thing I don't like is the "need" for even more adapters now. I could handle buying stuff for TB2 as I still had regular USB and could chain more USB ports of the TB2 ports. Now they have went for absurdly thin, removing standard USB / TB2, requiring that I juggle more dongles to achieve the same connectivity my 2015 model does.

As others have asked of Apple in the other thread, would it have hurt for them to make it slightly thicker, given us some legacy ports, more battery, and perhaps offer a BTO version with 32GB or more RAM?

I don't think death to Apple at this point, but, this update has a few items that have put the brakes on my ordering a new laptop.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

polee

macrumors 6502a
Jul 22, 2008
689
458
Well this is rather confusing for people who have no idea whether an item is a 15 watt and a 7.5 device. End of the day, why did Apple do this? Was it because of some technical limitations? Why did they not make everything just 15 watts? So so confusing, so unlike Apple. This is what Microsoft would do...
 

zhenya

macrumors 604
Jan 6, 2005
6,929
3,677
I agree fully on the subject of overall IO. The overall IO Capability exceeds the outgoing model by far.

The only thing I don't like is the "need" for even more adapters now. I could handle buying stuff for TB2 as I still had regular USB and could chain more USB ports of the TB2 ports. Now they have went for absurdly thin, removing standard USB / TB2, requiring that I juggle more dongles to achieve the same connectivity my 2015 model does.

As others have asked of Apple in the other thread, would it have hurt for them to make it slightly thicker, given us some legacy ports, more battery, and perhaps offer a BTO version with 32GB or more RAM?

I don't think death to Apple at this point, but, this update has a few items that have put the brakes on my ordering a new laptop.

When was the last time Apple supported legacy connections any longer than they absolutely had to? The new Thunderbolt ports are exactly what everyone has been asking for for 20 years. And we expect Apple, who has dumped SCSI, Serial, Floppy disks, CD drives, 3.5mm audio, etc. all way before their time, to hold back here? Really?
 

LordVic

Cancelled
Sep 7, 2011
5,938
12,458
Well this is rather confusing for people who have no idea whether an item is a 15 watt and a 7.5 device. End of the day, why did Apple do this? Was it because of some technical limitations? Why did they not make everything just 15 watts? So so confusing, so unlike Apple. This is what Microsoft would do...

Havent looked up exact spec's yet, But likely because the 13" only come with Intel's Dual Core CPU's, not the 4 core, which may have reduced PCI-E lanes.

the 15" has the quad core, so more PCI-E lanes, more bandwidth
 

maflynn

macrumors Haswell
May 3, 2009
73,574
43,560
Wow, gone are the days where Steve Jobs would take out a jewelers loupe and examine each pixel placement, now they're cutting corners and raising the price. Kind of sad if you think about it.

Is this the Apple, I want to send my limited funds too for a computer?
 

Voidness

macrumors 6502a
Aug 2, 2005
847
65
Null
This has to do with the number of PCI Express lanes provided by the Intel chips. Thunderbolt 3 needs 4 PCI Express lanes for full throughput. The dual-core chips in the 13" MacBook Pro only have 12 lanes, so that can only support two full speed ports (2x4 lanes) and two ports at half speed (2x2 lanes). The quad-core in 15" MacBook Pro supports up to 16 lanes, which gives 4 full speed thunderbolt ports.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.