Side note: this is another purely subjective thing, but I really wish Apple would stop it with the gold stuff. I really don't like the look. It seems like they're tired of silver and want a new color, but gold is not the way I'd go. Looks chintzy to me.

When does the computer meet the tablet? MS tried that a couple years ago, but it didn't work out too well. (Wait, when was the last time MS was ahead of Apple?)

-jk

I agree with you on the gold look, but many of their customers seem to like it, I see plenty of gold iPhones.

I thought reports were that the Surface 3 was selling surprisingly well.

Windows 8. They're working on it... <fingers crossed>

-jk

E's passed on! Lightning is no more! 'E has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the iPhone 6, 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-CABLE!

Or something like that.


If Android Wear is any guide, battery life has a lot to do with how often the watch has to wake up and do things. If you've got it set to pester you every time you get an email, then battery life will be poor. The more of that stuff you disable, the better it will do. Plus, Apple seems to have been extremely limited in what they're willing to let devs do on the watch. You're not going to see particularly fancy apps right away, nor custom watch faces, as are all the rage for Android Wear. If and when that changes, your choice of apps will have an impact on your battery life.

Yes, the more I think about it, the more this seems to be the only logical trade-off. I personally still can't see any other. One single port will I am afraid cause quite some frustration, and my guess is that choice will cost Apple a little on sales. I don't think they made such a decision lightly. But I can see them going with one if a second port meant a fan: thickness, most likely, weight for sure, and battery life would be quite affected by that.

I'd be really curious about the Surface 5, in this regard. I am sure it will come in some flavor to compete with the new mb (Core M), so it will be interesting to see its design in terms of ports and fan.

I just discovered that Sandisk already makes a USB-C thumb drive

I think that's gone.

Which is good, like you I'd be really happy if USB could be the one standard for all.

Not so sure. Apple make $$$ from licence sales to peripherals makers for Lightning that they wouldn't get for USBC. Think they will keep it in iPhone at least for a while yet.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Apple finds a way to continue monetization / licensing requirements for building approved accessories. For example, "you need to pay us for a crypto key that will allow the device to send audio over the USB-C port". At least if you're traveling and you forgot your charger, you'll (hopefully) be able to buy a standards-compliant USB-C charger for the same minimal cost you spend on a current micro-USB charger, and you'd be guaranteed that it would work properly.

I'm quite looking forward to the end of the "oh, sure, it's a 2A charger, but it doesn't deliver 2A to Android devices, only iOS devices" insanity. I'm similarly jazzed that we'll, someday soon, see multi-port charging devices akin to the Anker 5-port charger that can really charge everything: your laptop, your phone, your tablet, your flashlight, your watch, your assorted medical devices, etc.

My view is that Apple found the existing micro-USB spec to fall short of its requirements and USB-C was not yet ready, so they created the Lightning port. Lightning has been around for several years now and USB-C is just coming into play now.

Certainly I find the Lightning connectors and cables to be more robust that the predecessor 30-pin iPod era connector. The Apple MFI program allows for third party Lightning cables. I have several here that were not expensive and seem well made.

I have not compared the USB-C connector against Lightning so I cannot say whether there might be constraints or durability compromises when used in very thin or small devices.
This article provides some comparisions and reasonable commentary.

I will miss the MagSafe power connector's 'yank away' feature.

I expect that confusion will occur regarding USB-C chargers. There are three voltage levels and three wattage levels within the spec.

If all USB-C cables are mechanically interchangeable, what happens when an Android phone's USB-C charger is connected to a large laptop (also with USB-C connector)? Should the user expect that all USB-C chargers and cables are compatible with all devices simply because the cable fits into the socket?

Watch for reviewers and articles that confuse or overlook the voltage and wattage differences between the USB-C spec levels.
This article suggests that Google's 60 watt USB-C power source would be plug and play into the new Apple MacBook. What about the converse?

Apparently the new Apple MacBook charger has a USB-C port so the cable is a separate item.

I hope they can address this as a branding exercise. Already, the USB battery charger I bought has two ports, one labeled "1A" and the other labeled "2.1A" (but not labeled "ha ha, only 1A for Android"). Presumably, they could either have the wattage numbers, or maybe they'll do something clever like one, two, or three lightning-bolt icons.

I suspect that'll be the case.
I also think its proprietary connectors won't disappear tomorrow, but i think they will sooner than later.

I found this very funny...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHZ8ek-6ccc

Cheers

Cris

That video has been on my second monitor in the office since yesterday, so I can watch it and laugh as I need it during the day.

I know it is silly, but I think I am addicted.

Sounds like Spanish, I wish I could understand what he is really saying

Cheers

Cris

It is Spanish. That I can tell you. What he is saying, I can't. I only understand those few words I know, plus those that sound similar to Italian ones.

That video is the new "Hitler reacts." It's been used for all sorts of stuff already. I think I heard that he's talking about fishing or something...

Uh-oh.
Not just the charging is confusing. USB committee strikes again!

Arstechnica; Explaining the “USB 3.1 Gen 1” port in the Retina MacBook

And this comment post...
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2015/03/exp...&mode=quote

It seems that the new macbook's power adaptor should include an integral hub.

Btw. Doesn't the new std implement daisy chaining? That suould reduce the need for hubs.

Went to an Apple store last night to try out the new trackpad on the MacBook Pro. It's, interesting. The haptic feedback is done really well. Clicks do feel a little different then the real clicks on the older trackpads, but it's only really noticeable with both next to each other. The newer one seems nicer since a click works everywhere equally, not just the lower half.

The haptic feedback is in firmware on the trackpad, as it clicks properly even before OS X boots. Rebooted the laptop at the store a few times just to compare when the trackpad is powered vs off.

The force part I tried out in Quicktime. The haptic feedback uses a lower powered vibration as you press down, letting you feel each speed level when video seeking. It will take a bit to get used to this, I was going through multiple speeds at first till I learned to feel out each step.

The store mentioned that on April 10th they will have the new Macbook on display, along with the watches. I'm curious to try out the new keyboard on the Macbook. Input to machines seems to be something frequently overlooked by many reviewers.

I really do wish the 15" machine had the new touchpad, but this one is long enough in the tooth that I don't think I'll be waiting for it to come.

15 inch ones are held back waiting on quad core Broadwell chips, though if the release ends up being close enough to Skylake, I could see Apple just skipping the 15s a generation. Ship timeframe for Broadwell is "mid 2015" with Skylake at a "second half 2015".

This is exactly the sort of crap I was afraid of. Particularly this:
Uggh. I had this vain hope that having the type C port would imply a higher baseline level of functionality. Instead, no. We don't even have the subtle cue of the blue bit of plastic in a USB port that distinguishes USB3 from USB2.

Sigh.

Meanwhile, I was chatting with a Google buddy and he showed me a cable they have, internally, that's a USB-A-to-micro-B cable with an inline button. When you first plug it in, it's "charge only" but you can press the button to make it a data cable. This doesn't seem to be available anywhere online.

Needless to say, when you've got one connector for all things, you want some way of saying "I don't trust your charger but I want power from it." I wonder if these sorts of things will catch on.

I would expect that inline adapters would appear with just that sort of isolation.

I suspect the adapter would need a chip inside to negotiate the power available signaling with the power source and then provide the appropriate signaling to the device on the other side wishing to be charged. A firewall of sorts, but limited to passing power info between the two ends.

Even better would be integrating this 'firewall' into the USB facility in the device. Of course, the USB spec guys have been messing with this sort of thing for a while now and the result is still all over the floor.

This new world of untrustworthy external devices and potentially harmful external injection vectors is turning simple usability into a huge liability. Wired connections used to be the gold standard for 'good' connectivity. Now it is turned upside down...

Honest question: why is there all this confusion about the USB spec in the first place? Why not just finalize it and release it, saving any changes for the next version? Is it a technical problem?

All I know is that nobody - not a single end user - wants this kind of confusion about what charger to use and all that other stuff. I can't believe we've gotten so close to a usable standard and they're still pulling this kind of nonsense.

As best I can tell the USB group is a member/marketing/committee driven weird beast.

They seem to want to include everything, then as new use cases (or marketing opportunities) arise they just keep adding. When you look at the vast array of oddball stuff that has been stuffed into the various USB specifications over the years, it beggars belief.

Users want what USB seemingly promises, painless device connections without concern about compatibility. What they get falls far short of the mark, again and again.

Just look at the names and logos they come up with for the various speed and use scenarios. They create confusion, even among semi-technical users.

Is USB Superspeed faster or better than USB On the Go? What about High Speed?

This sort of thing is widespread, Rev 1 is newer/faster than Rev 2. Cause 3.0

Even those pages whilst being pedantic about terminology etc get it wrong themselves. e.g. logo for what they want to just call "USB" and not "low speed" or "full speed" has "Basic-Speed" next to it.

The problem with starting with "full speed" is that it limits how much higher you can go, hence low < full < high < superspeed < superspeed 10