5 ms·

Actually it isn't precisely Apple's fault. It's the USB-IFs fault. USB 3.1 in general is a mess. The spec allows for Alternate Modes, where the port is hardwi

Actually it isn't precisely Apple's fault. It's the USB-IFs fault. USB 3.1 in general is a mess. The spec allows for Alternate Modes, where the port is hardwired on the Motherboard to be able to be switched to deliver DisplayPort, HDMI, MHL, Thunderbolt, and damn near anything else you can figure out how to mux over the port's pins and cheaply demux on the other end of the cable. The best part is no one will actually list what Alternate Modes their laptop or motherboard supports. So if I want a laptop that supports, DisplayPort Alternate Mode with dual monitors, I'm opening support tickets with manufacturers asking "Does your USB-C port run this?" Apple and Intel simply followed along what with what was already a mess.

riazrizvi 10y ago
Apple is lauded for making confusing technology simple. It's not Apple's fault, it's Apple's missed opportunity and it's our high expectations of Apple that are being eroded.
- Philipp__ 10y ago
  This! Thing is that situation with ports and adapters has never been worse, but Apple came there, wanted to be first again that will pull the plug on old technology and embrace the new one! But their execution was a miss. But anyway, my predictions are that from 2017. every Apple machine, wether it's computer or iPhone or iPad, will go down the USB-C route. Most probably next iPhone would use USB-C. And I just hope 2016. will be the year that was bad, and won't happen again. Since some Apple's small decisions were completely off, and we as costumers (or fans), are not used to it.
  - jellicle 10y ago
    Apple has never gone with an open standard when a proprietary closed standard would do. More likely than using any sort of standard port would be Apple inventing yet another new proprietary port.
    - stcredzero 10y ago
      Apple has never gone with an open standard when a proprietary closed standard would do. False. USB 1.
      - eropple 10y ago
        Yup. Or...y'know...FireWire. Also known as IEEE 1394.
        macintux 10y ago
        I remember overhearing a Best Buy employee describe the FireWire port on the back of an iMac as a Sony proprietary camera connector. Not sure why I didn't correct him. Apple rarely goes proprietary with their ports. The original 30-pin iPod port. Lightning. ADB in the mists of time. All of which were I believe better than what was available.
        labster 10y ago
        MagSafe 1 and 2. They are better, but we also have a situation where the only port on an Apple device is proprietary with the latest iPhone.
        eropple 10y ago
        Lightning was better-ish, but we also knew USB-C was on the horizon. I don't think that one is defensible.
        solaceb 10y ago
        If my memory serves, lightning was introduced in late 2012 with the iPhone 5. I'm not sure we can really say that lightning was "on the horizon" that long ago. I would say lightning was "on the horizon" in late 2014, when in early 2015 we saw USB-C come to notable devices such as the Chromebook Pixel and 12" MacBook.
        mbreese 10y ago
  - visakanv 10y ago
    > Apple came there, wanted to be first again Interesting point. Got me thinking about how the iPod was not the first MP3 player, and how the iPhone was not the first smartphone. I believe the philosophy was "don't be the first; be the first to get it right." It's a little disappointing that they haven't been so magical lately.
    - Philipp__ 10y ago
      It is, but you know, magic couldn't last forever, and we all knew it, since Jobds left us. It was just the matter of year. But I believe that these new MBP will be amazing and beautiful machines in next iteration. Some bad decision and bad timing led to disappointments but as long as they learn something from it, it's all good.
- amckinlay 10y ago
  Yup. And they could have started by shipping a more compatible USB-C cable, instead of shipping a USB 2.0 one.
- jshevek 10y ago
  Well, it is partly Apple's fault in that they chose to go completely type c only, and that they chose not to provide the right sets of clearly marked and explained adapters that would be guaranteed to work with their hardware.
- Twisell 10y ago
  I'm pretty sure if you stick to apple hardware, things just work. So in a sense their technology is simple for those who stay in the ecosystem. But don't dare buy a low-cost adapter from eBay or be damned for 10 generation. So yeah it's a closed environment but is it so far worst than the jungle outside?
grandalf 10y ago
So the alternate modes are required for proper operation? Or will it fall back to a standard mode and still work?
- gumby 10y ago
  That's not how alternate modes work -- there isn't really a "standard" mode. When you plug in a Type C cable the two devices negotiate (via a combination of passives and some active negotiation) what protocols you want to use. Yes protocols with an "s." Power and, say USB 3.1 v2, or power and TB3 or HDMI or whatever. Among the problems is you can have a cable that can't support a particular alternate modes, or can't support adequate power. The USB-IF hasn't defined a set of standard icons (not that there's much room for them -- they'd be microscopic). Also the MacBook Retina has USB 3.1 v1 so supports just ordinary USB 3.0 & HDMI. The MacBook Pro supports several more alternate modes. At least to Apple's credit, AFAICT all four USB ports are identical. Even that isn't required by the spec.
  - grandalf 10y ago
    Interesting. Sounds like they prioritized standardizing the connector but not the rest of the details. Perhaps in the scope of large scale manufacturing, having multiple (redundant) connector styles is a low hanging fruit for cost reduction. But it seems that there would be increased user confusion and technical support required. Very strange.
    - manarth 10y ago
      > "they prioritized standardizing the connector but not the rest of the details" In this case, "they" are the "USB Implementors Forum (USB-IF)" [1], rather than Apple. It's the USB-IF who agreed the standardisation of spec, but permitted the potential for "alternative mode". Apple might have taken advantage of it, but it's the USB-IF who decided to make the standard rather more variable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_Implementers_Forum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_Implementers_Forum
  - Osiris 10y ago
makomk 10y ago
The whole ongoing Thunderbolt display fiasco where there are two different kinds of adapter from USB-C to mini-DisplayPort, each of which supports a non-overlapping set of monitors, is almost entirely Apple's fault though. They were the ones who decided to push Thunderbolt monitors using the mini-DP connectors, then chose to make and sell an adapter that didn't support actual DisplayPort.

riazrizvi 10y ago

Apple is lauded for making confusing technology simple. It's not Apple's fault, it's Apple's missed opportunity and it's our high expectations of Apple that are being eroded.

Philipp__ 10y ago
This! Thing is that situation with ports and adapters has never been worse, but Apple came there, wanted to be first again that will pull the plug on old technology and embrace the new one! But their execution was a miss. But anyway, my predictions are that from 2017. every Apple machine, wether it's computer or iPhone or iPad, will go down the USB-C route. Most probably next iPhone would use USB-C. And I just hope 2016. will be the year that was bad, and won't happen again. Since some Apple's small decisions were completely off, and we as costumers (or fans), are not used to it.
- jellicle 10y ago
  Apple has never gone with an open standard when a proprietary closed standard would do. More likely than using any sort of standard port would be Apple inventing yet another new proprietary port.
  - stcredzero 10y ago
    Apple has never gone with an open standard when a proprietary closed standard would do. False. USB 1.
    - eropple 10y ago
      Yup. Or...y'know...FireWire. Also known as IEEE 1394.
      - macintux 10y ago
        I remember overhearing a Best Buy employee describe the FireWire port on the back of an iMac as a Sony proprietary camera connector. Not sure why I didn't correct him. Apple rarely goes proprietary with their ports. The original 30-pin iPod port. Lightning. ADB in the mists of time. All of which were I believe better than what was available.
        labster 10y ago
        MagSafe 1 and 2. They are better, but we also have a situation where the only port on an Apple device is proprietary with the latest iPhone.
        eropple 10y ago
        Lightning was better-ish, but we also knew USB-C was on the horizon. I don't think that one is defensible.
        solaceb 10y ago
        If my memory serves, lightning was introduced in late 2012 with the iPhone 5. I'm not sure we can really say that lightning was "on the horizon" that long ago. I would say lightning was "on the horizon" in late 2014, when in early 2015 we saw USB-C come to notable devices such as the Chromebook Pixel and 12" MacBook.
        mbreese 10y ago
- visakanv 10y ago
  > Apple came there, wanted to be first again Interesting point. Got me thinking about how the iPod was not the first MP3 player, and how the iPhone was not the first smartphone. I believe the philosophy was "don't be the first; be the first to get it right." It's a little disappointing that they haven't been so magical lately.
  - Philipp__ 10y ago
    It is, but you know, magic couldn't last forever, and we all knew it, since Jobds left us. It was just the matter of year. But I believe that these new MBP will be amazing and beautiful machines in next iteration. Some bad decision and bad timing led to disappointments but as long as they learn something from it, it's all good.
amckinlay 10y ago
Yup. And they could have started by shipping a more compatible USB-C cable, instead of shipping a USB 2.0 one.
jshevek 10y ago
Well, it is partly Apple's fault in that they chose to go completely type c only, and that they chose not to provide the right sets of clearly marked and explained adapters that would be guaranteed to work with their hardware.
Twisell 10y ago
I'm pretty sure if you stick to apple hardware, things just work. So in a sense their technology is simple for those who stay in the ecosystem. But don't dare buy a low-cost adapter from eBay or be damned for 10 generation. So yeah it's a closed environment but is it so far worst than the jungle outside?

grandalf 10y ago

So the alternate modes are required for proper operation? Or will it fall back to a standard mode and still work?

gumby 10y ago
That's not how alternate modes work -- there isn't really a "standard" mode. When you plug in a Type C cable the two devices negotiate (via a combination of passives and some active negotiation) what protocols you want to use. Yes protocols with an "s." Power and, say USB 3.1 v2, or power and TB3 or HDMI or whatever. Among the problems is you can have a cable that can't support a particular alternate modes, or can't support adequate power. The USB-IF hasn't defined a set of standard icons (not that there's much room for them -- they'd be microscopic). Also the MacBook Retina has USB 3.1 v1 so supports just ordinary USB 3.0 & HDMI. The MacBook Pro supports several more alternate modes. At least to Apple's credit, AFAICT all four USB ports are identical. Even that isn't required by the spec.
- grandalf 10y ago
  Interesting. Sounds like they prioritized standardizing the connector but not the rest of the details. Perhaps in the scope of large scale manufacturing, having multiple (redundant) connector styles is a low hanging fruit for cost reduction. But it seems that there would be increased user confusion and technical support required. Very strange.
  - manarth 10y ago
    > "they prioritized standardizing the connector but not the rest of the details" In this case, "they" are the "USB Implementors Forum (USB-IF)" [1], rather than Apple. It's the USB-IF who agreed the standardisation of spec, but permitted the potential for "alternative mode". Apple might have taken advantage of it, but it's the USB-IF who decided to make the standard rather more variable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_Implementers_Forum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_Implementers_Forum
- Osiris 10y ago

makomk 10y ago

The whole ongoing Thunderbolt display fiasco where there are two different kinds of adapter from USB-C to mini-DisplayPort, each of which supports a non-overlapping set of monitors, is almost entirely Apple's fault though. They were the ones who decided to push Thunderbolt monitors using the mini-DP connectors, then chose to make and sell an adapter that didn't support actual DisplayPort.