[mcphage]

> The competition can run multiple displays.

That’s a fair point, but also a narrow need. If that’s your need, then absolutely, look elsewhere. But the reason that it isn’t a major problem for Apple is that it isn’t a very common need—the laptop’s screen plus one external display is probably what the vast majority of people—even pros—need.

[tonynator]

Yes surely any time they gimp a product it's because nobody needs the feature they removed. It's never just to save money because they know people will buy even if its inconvenient.

Every single person at my large software company uses at least 2 displays + laptop, that's the standard setup. It's just objectively better for productivity to be able to look at multiple things at once without having to cram them into a single monitor.

Terminal, Slack, IDE, and browser each deserve their own monitor ideally. Personally, 2x vertical monitors side by side is a nice to have for programming so one can be for IDE and the other for reading docs/articles.

[mcphage]

> Yes surely any time they gimp a product it's because nobody needs the feature they removed.

You're tilting at windmills here—nobody claims that nobody needs it. Just that it's an engineering trade off, of who needs it.

> Every single person at my large software company uses at least 2 displays + laptop, that's the standard setup.

That's pretty cool. The standard for my medium software company is... not that.

> It's just objectively better for productivity to be able to look at multiple things at once without having to cram them into a single monitor.

I agree with you there. I'm pretty happy with 2 screens—and getting an extra wide monitor for my second screen was also a step up in a lot of ways.