You need to buy an expensive thunderbolt adapter. I can understand removing it from the ultra portable super-thin models but not from the top end professional model.
http://www.amazon.com/TRENDnet-Ethernet-Chromebook-Specific-...
The rare use is what makes it a problem. It's not worth the investment to buy and always carry an adaptor for that one time you really need it.
although adding the 3.5mm headphone jack to an auxiliary board was super smart. people keep dropping them with headphones inside.
The Thunderbolt widget is less than ideal, but it fits. Hopefully USB-C will introduce more options with a lower price-point.
I welcome not longer having a gaping hole in the side of my computer. Wifi has come a long way and if people want to use ethernet it can be run through a multi purpose more modern port with a smaller footprint.
I guess USB-C is supposed to help with this?
But at least you'll be able to hide all the dongles behind some wall and just have a single USB-C cable running from your laptop to a powered hub.
Who do we need to talk to for that to be the official collective noun?
Is there some reason why Apple doesn't promote WiGIG?
Here's an overview over the technology:
http://ultrabooknews.com/tag/wigig/
http://www.slashgear.com/intel-wigig-docking-station-in-2015...
http://www.cnet.com/news/60ghz-tech-promises-wireless-dockin...
Personally I wish they used Ultrabroadband-Radio (>500MHz Bandwith). There are numerous reasons fellow RF enthusiasts will recognize in UWB radio. But I am happy with whatever technology allows me to have a cable-free desktop 馃槍 This is the reason I loved the original Ubuntu Phone (with it's powerful specs).
拢25 for Ethernet and then another 拢25 if you want FireWire too. And 拢25 for VGA and 拢25 for DVI (though to be fair you can get this from the HDMI port). But you can only have 2 of these plugged in at a time. Other laptops of this price come with all the adaptors in the box if the ports aren't integrated.
I like having the option of Ethernet available easily. For example, BT have been having big internet issues for the last few days and it's handy to rule out the WiFi. Also with a previous ISP (sadly not with BT) the WiFi was the limiting factor and I had to plug in to get full speed. Then the HDD was the limiting factor!
I easily reach 60+ MB/s now over WiFi, so for the times where I really need the additional power I don't care about having the additional dongle with me.
Also, the profit margin on those adapters is pretty astounding.
This way I only have to plug in two cables instead of an array of cables. This is why I really don't miss the Ethernet port directly on the machine. For me personally, the gains in portability due to smaller size (and weight) are way more relevant than the theoretical ability to plug in an ethernet cable which I never need.
I can see that this is very much country dependent (we have truly unlimited plans that allow tethering), but at least for me, the smaller size of the machine trumps the ability to plug ethernet cables due to the general lack of available cables to plug.
Why, they don't have the skills to create a private wi-fi network for guests?
I never use guest networks for that exact reason. I know that my traffic and my connection is my own, and works. Way easier imo.
http://hengedocks.com/pages/vertical-macbook-pro-retina
I've been doing quite fine with the DOCK as my 'need ethernet at my desktop' solution:
http://www.landingzone.net/products/for-the-macbook-pro/
I'm sure there are other options; it is a hassle that Apple removed it, but on the road I rarely need Ethernet, and at the desktop, its kind of easy to just plug-in.
If you ask whether they'll keep regular USB or thunderbolt, perhaps but just for a few releases more. E.g. both could be gone by 2018.
That said, MPB will of course have > 1 USB C ports.
Providing reliable wifi for multiple people with multiple devices is a hard challenge.
Until bitten by a problem, yes, that's exactly the thinking. In theory, a single AP can handle two thousand plus simultaneous connections. Most users have found this number, and don't think beyond it.
However, most APs don't have the memory to manage more than 40 or 50 keys for encrypted connections. Throw in shared bandwidth on this maxed out AP, and suddenly the (again theoretical) 1 Gb+ connection is down to less than 20 Mbps per user, or 1/5 that of a wired connection of ten years ago.
That's obviously not acceptable, so the best way to bring up the average bandwidth per user is to have fewer devices on each access point. And when each user is bringing 2-3 wifi capable devices with them everywhere they go...
The math is not very forgiving.
Are people so used to working in inept and el-cheapo companies that they cannot fathom a company wide Wi-Fi with APs (professional, not your home router free with your cable connection) serving "a couple hundred devices"?
Is that considered IT voodoo in some companies?
Heck, your $30/night Motel 8 can manage that...
Compared to using plain Ethernet drops, the cost is hardly negligible, to the point where it isn't worth it for many companies.
My company has been going through the process of implementing this for a new office to hold around 100 people, and the amount of planning required to provide good coverage at a reasonable price has been enlightening to observe.
> Heck, your $30/night Motel 8 can manage that...
Not in my experience. At least not well enough to support bandwidth above the 100Kbps range.
Probably never heard of professional office routers. You can have several times that.
Even if working in a 100+ person company, all such companies I've been already have all the company wide wi-fi and APs the need, so I don't see why the parent's company couldn't.
As for "ensuring they do proper hand-off as you move around the office", it's much easier with APs than plugging and unplugging ethernet cables -- which was the alternative we were discussing.
Working with docker containers, virtual machines, streaming, and VOIP/hangouts... bandwidth becomes the main limiter to the number of users per AP, not the memory or other capabilities of that device.
> it's much easier with APs than plugging and unplugging ethernet cables
For the user, and only when the handoff actually occurs smoothly. When it goes wrong, folks have to power cycle their WiFi, or their entire machine. Compared to picking up a nearby Ethernet cable and plugging it in, this isn't that challenging usually. Of course, having to also pull out a dongle can get aggravating, but we were discussing that as well.
Is it mostly about spectrum getting full or security concerns?
I just noticed that I haven't used Ethernet cable for the last few years.
Attempting to provide wireless coverage for a densely populated open office gets pretty expensive pretty quickly. It also can cause degraded signals for everyone in the office. The ethernet port just becomes more feasable way to get stable internet at your desk.