4 ms·

I just can't understand the reasoning behind only one USB Type C port.

pacomerh 12y ago
Well, the use case for this laptop is for portability. Why would you need a million ports if you're gonna be traveling or at the coffee shop?. The only time I use an additional port is to charge my iphone, and I could easily do that with the wall charger. This is not a work laptop
- outworlder 12y ago
  And, if the iPhones eventually get a type-C as well (and there's a high probability), you'll be able to feed up to 100W to it, according to the specifications. Also by the specs, it could even work backwards, in theory.
- jkubicek 12y ago
  Except for the processor speed, this could easily be my work laptop. I would prefer having only one thing to plug-in at my desk, as opposed to the power / USB hub / monitor setup that I currently have. Even with an Apple Thunderbolt monitor I would still have 2 things to plug in. At all other points in the day I'm running on battery power, so I don't need any ports.
- thinkmassive 12y ago
  Maybe not a million, but TWO is far more reasonable than one. Here is a brief list of wired accessories likely to be used at least 2 at a time: headphones, mouse, flash drive, mobile device.
- baddox 12y ago
  Still, why not two USB-C ports, like some of the recent comparable Windows laptop designs?
yequalsx 12y ago
I can't remember the last time I had more than one port in use. With battery life as good as it is in modern laptops one port is all I need. I like that there is no fan in Macbook and it is thin and highly portable. By the time my Retina Macbook Pro dies I think the Macbook will have a powerful enough processor and enough ram for my needs. At that time I will get a Macbook. I like that there is only one port and that I don't have to fiddle with getting the connector the right side up to plug it into the port. My only concern regarding the Macbook is the new touchpad. Does it allow click and hold for copying/pasting text? This wasn't clear to me from the videos I've seen. I'm guessing that these will replace the Macbook Air in a couple of years.
pervycreeper 12y ago
The designers are trying to "make a point", but what that point is, exactly, is unclear.
- ctdonath 12y ago
  Apple has a long history of dramatic changes in ports, which is usually met with derision yet, not long after, becomes the industry norm. I've seen such "why is unclear" rhetoric when Apple dropped floppy drives, RS-232 ports, Centronix printer ports, prior keyboard/mouse ports, VGA, etc and went exclusively (or nearly) to CDs, USB, FireWire, assorted video (jumping to the best as available), and other connectors. USB has done well, but is lacking: high power (both directions), extremely high data rates, flippable, and generally able to hub a bunch of wires into a single connector (power included). Yeah we can live without the USB-C's aggregation of all that, but for the target market (leading-edge ultraportable) it's a good improvement.
  - yellowapple 12y ago
    Much of that early difference in port availability relative to IBM-compatibles is because Apple's computers weren't IBM-compatibles; in that context, things like PS/2 ports for one's keyboard or mouse wouldn't make sense, whereas USB would. In other words, Apple never really "dropped" those things (other than floppy disks and maybe VGA); rather, it simply never adopted them because their computers weren't in the same class as those which had adopted them.
    - ctdonath 12y ago
      They did, however, drop other ports which were in use. The Mac did have a wired keyboard, using some quasi-proprietary connection - and it was dropped, preventing further use of old keyboards on new devices. Centronix and RS-232 (both 25- and 9-pin) connectors were ubiquitous, what with a great many devices available which could very well have been connected (printers, modems) and had been included on Apple products. Macs weren't _that_ different as to make strange the notion of attaching common peripherals to them.
eropple 12y ago
I'm just guessing, but perhaps the mainboard doesn't have the lanes for two.
ctdonath 12y ago
When I do "plug everything in" (some combination of 2-4 hard drives, DVD drive, charger, two Lightning cables) I'd like very much to have all that mostly-not-going-anywhere stuff attached to a single multi-port box so I can attach it all with just one plug. That's the reasoning: if you're part of a very large subset of mobile users, you're likely not bringing all that with you, and when you're at home-base desk you can plug it all in with just one cable. Bonus: that USB-C port provides significant power. If I do want to run a bunch of stuff while mobile, I can drive a powered-ports mobile USB hub with it.
pbreit 12y ago
Because more ports are unnecessary. It's really that simple. And Apple has a strong track record of breaking from the past to bring us into the future.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
Pxtl 12y ago
I assume the plan is hubs as docking stations. USB 3 allows to host and draw power at the same time, right?
yellowapple 12y ago
Because that's all you really need (in theory at least). That one USB Type-C port can drive your monitor(s), a keyboard/mouse, and various other peripherals (by hooking up a USB hub), all while charging your device. Right now, my Macbook at work hooks up to my screen via Thunderbolt and a provided power cable, and said screen has USB, FireWire, etc. ports. It would be very nice to reduce that to one cable, and that's precisely what can be done now with the new port. That said, I agree that only one such port is limiting. I currently have my eye on the new Chromebook Pixel (which has two such ports), and I look forward to seeing what other PC manufacturers reveal.

Well, the use case for this laptop is for portability. Why would you need a million ports if you're gonna be traveling or at the coffee shop?. The only time I use an additional port is to charge my iphone, and I could easily do that with the wall charger. This is not a work laptop

outworlder 12y ago
And, if the iPhones eventually get a type-C as well (and there's a high probability), you'll be able to feed up to 100W to it, according to the specifications. Also by the specs, it could even work backwards, in theory.
jkubicek 12y ago
Except for the processor speed, this could easily be my work laptop. I would prefer having only one thing to plug-in at my desk, as opposed to the power / USB hub / monitor setup that I currently have. Even with an Apple Thunderbolt monitor I would still have 2 things to plug in. At all other points in the day I'm running on battery power, so I don't need any ports.
thinkmassive 12y ago
Maybe not a million, but TWO is far more reasonable than one. Here is a brief list of wired accessories likely to be used at least 2 at a time: headphones, mouse, flash drive, mobile device.
baddox 12y ago
Still, why not two USB-C ports, like some of the recent comparable Windows laptop designs?

yequalsx 12y ago

I can't remember the last time I had more than one port in use. With battery life as good as it is in modern laptops one port is all I need. I like that there is no fan in Macbook and it is thin and highly portable. By the time my Retina Macbook Pro dies I think the Macbook will have a powerful enough processor and enough ram for my needs. At that time I will get a Macbook. I like that there is only one port and that I don't have to fiddle with getting the connector the right side up to plug it into the port. My only concern regarding the Macbook is the new touchpad. Does it allow click and hold for copying/pasting text? This wasn't clear to me from the videos I've seen. I'm guessing that these will replace the Macbook Air in a couple of years.

pervycreeper 12y ago

The designers are trying to "make a point", but what that point is, exactly, is unclear.

ctdonath 12y ago
Apple has a long history of dramatic changes in ports, which is usually met with derision yet, not long after, becomes the industry norm. I've seen such "why is unclear" rhetoric when Apple dropped floppy drives, RS-232 ports, Centronix printer ports, prior keyboard/mouse ports, VGA, etc and went exclusively (or nearly) to CDs, USB, FireWire, assorted video (jumping to the best as available), and other connectors. USB has done well, but is lacking: high power (both directions), extremely high data rates, flippable, and generally able to hub a bunch of wires into a single connector (power included). Yeah we can live without the USB-C's aggregation of all that, but for the target market (leading-edge ultraportable) it's a good improvement.
- yellowapple 12y ago
  Much of that early difference in port availability relative to IBM-compatibles is because Apple's computers weren't IBM-compatibles; in that context, things like PS/2 ports for one's keyboard or mouse wouldn't make sense, whereas USB would. In other words, Apple never really "dropped" those things (other than floppy disks and maybe VGA); rather, it simply never adopted them because their computers weren't in the same class as those which had adopted them.
  - ctdonath 12y ago
    They did, however, drop other ports which were in use. The Mac did have a wired keyboard, using some quasi-proprietary connection - and it was dropped, preventing further use of old keyboards on new devices. Centronix and RS-232 (both 25- and 9-pin) connectors were ubiquitous, what with a great many devices available which could very well have been connected (printers, modems) and had been included on Apple products. Macs weren't _that_ different as to make strange the notion of attaching common peripherals to them.

eropple 12y ago

I'm just guessing, but perhaps the mainboard doesn't have the lanes for two.

ctdonath 12y ago

When I do "plug everything in" (some combination of 2-4 hard drives, DVD drive, charger, two Lightning cables) I'd like very much to have all that mostly-not-going-anywhere stuff attached to a single multi-port box so I can attach it all with just one plug. That's the reasoning: if you're part of a very large subset of mobile users, you're likely not bringing all that with you, and when you're at home-base desk you can plug it all in with just one cable. Bonus: that USB-C port provides significant power. If I do want to run a bunch of stuff while mobile, I can drive a powered-ports mobile USB hub with it.

pbreit 12y ago

Because more ports are unnecessary. It's really that simple. And Apple has a strong track record of breaking from the past to bring us into the future.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

Pxtl 12y ago

I assume the plan is hubs as docking stations. USB 3 allows to host and draw power at the same time, right?

yellowapple 12y ago

Because that's all you really need (in theory at least). That one USB Type-C port can drive your monitor(s), a keyboard/mouse, and various other peripherals (by hooking up a USB hub), all while charging your device. Right now, my Macbook at work hooks up to my screen via Thunderbolt and a provided power cable, and said screen has USB, FireWire, etc. ports. It would be very nice to reduce that to one cable, and that's precisely what can be done now with the new port. That said, I agree that only one such port is limiting. I currently have my eye on the new Chromebook Pixel (which has two such ports), and I look forward to seeing what other PC manufacturers reveal.