[jsingleton]

Only just realised from this that MacBook Pro's no longer have an Ethernet port! When did that happen?

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.

[coob]

You don't 'need' the thunderbolt adaptor. Any old USB NIC will do. Like this $15 USB3 Gigabit ethernet adaptor:

http://www.amazon.com/TRENDnet-Ethernet-Chromebook-Specific-...

[jsingleton]

Good point. That will be compatible with other computers too. Apart from the new MacBooks which you'll need a USB-C to USB adaptor for.

[rkroondotnet]

If you stay within the Apple ecosystem like they really want you to, then you don't need that because your thunderbolt display has an ethernet adapter as well as some extra usb ports. The Apple monitor is their replacement for the docking station. Power and connectivity, as well as a place to put the laptop for reasonable space efficiency.

[skuhn]

You don't need the thunderbolt adapter, but if you want gigabit Ethernet it's either thunderbolt or USB3 (as you mentioned). One of the perks of the thunderbolt adapter is that it doesn't require any third party drivers, which tend to be hit or miss with the USB3 adapters.

[jsmith0295]

Well the MacBook Pro's are ultra portable and super thin now. The laptop would probably have to be at least 20% thicker to make for enough room for an ethernet port. And since 90% of MBP Retina owners probably rarely if ever use ethernet, it's a good tradeoff to make. The Retina model is much lighter and easier to carry (especially with one hand) than it's predecessor.

[jsingleton]

I think Apple could have come up with a solution without compromising on this. What about a neat folding Ethernet port that flips out and is flush when not in use? I remember some old ThinkPads had something like that but it might have been a modem port (RJ11/RJ14 not RJ45).

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.

[astrodust]

These flip-out connectors were always the first thing to break on your notebook and would render your only useful connection (modem, ethernet) completely useless.

The Thunderbolt widget is less than ideal, but it fits. Hopefully USB-C will introduce more options with a lower price-point.

[dsfyu404ed]

Taking someone else's widget, tweaking it, rolling it out across their product line and claiming to have built it from scratch isn't exactly a foreign concept to them...

[astrodust]

Are you going to make baseless accusations or are you going to cite an example we can debate?

[Kequc]

Ethernet cables are huge.

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.

[roflchoppa]

One con to doing that is how relatively large that would be inside the computer. Have you seen the inside of these computers? There is almost no space to spare.

although adding the 3.5mm headphone jack to an auxiliary board was super smart. people keep dropping them with headphones inside.

[s73v3r]

They did come up with a solution. Thunderbolt. As a bonus, it can be used for several other things when not being used for ethernet.

[bane]

My desktop is basically filled with an octopus of dongles these days. It's ugly and annoying, and increases the footprint of my laptop 2x.

I guess USB-C is supposed to help with this?

[onion2k]

an octopus of dongles

Who do we need to talk to for that to be the official collective noun?

[indrax]

Consistently talk to many people in publicly available texts over a period of a few years. That should do it.

[jgeorge]

Tell me where to vote and I will.

[deanstag]

i am interested in this query as well

[FractalNerve]

I wish I knew why Apple's top quality engineers didn't embed or bundled a USB-C to 60GHz WiGIG Dockinstation. Having only a single USB-C port is absolutely cool, if you have a wireless 7GBps dockingstation.

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 😌 This is the reason I loved the original Ubuntu Phone (with it's powerful specs).

[fit2rule]

Docking stations are awesome.

[falcolas]

And pretty freaking expensive too. $250 for a thunderbolt docking station, give or take. Despite the fact that the company will freely provide a $2,000 laptop and a $600+ monitor, getting them to pony up for a docking station has proven to be remarkably difficult.

[snuxoll]

As a WFH employee I have the opposite issue, I've got a ~$2,000 ThinkPad W540 and matching dock, but I have to provide my own monitor (which honestly is fine, due to amblyopia of the left eye I had as a child I lack peripheral vision for large displays - it's easier for me to just shop for my own).

[ryanthejuggler]

Docking stations ARE awesome. Seems like USB-C is going to kill docking stations though. Already they feel a bit like a relic from the 00's.

[kijin]

Bad news: Ethernet ain't going anywhere in the foreseeable future. So you'll still be stuck with a USB-C-to-Ethernet dongle :(

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.

[jwr]

Yeah, I was disappointed by that, too. It's not about the cost, I don't care about the extra $40 or so, but now there is one more "dongle/cable" I need to worry about.

[jsingleton]

You're right that it's more about not having it with you when you need it. However it does add up.

£25 for Ethernet and then another £25 if you want FireWire too. And £25 for VGA and £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!

[pilif]

A $30 adapter for a $2000+ machine isn't what I would call expensive. It does make the machines a lot thinner though and normally, you don't need wired Ethernet any more.

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.

[snorrah]

It's not expensive, it's inconvenient. Being able to quickly jack in to a gigabit network and not have to worry about fiddling about with wifi keys and unreliable speeds is something you should get with a high end laptop like an MBP.

[hrrsn]

I've been using (and carting) a Thunderbolt to Ethernet adapter since I bought my first Retina in 2012 and it's really not all that bad. If you're constantly using it daily then carrying it around isn't a huge ask.

[Daishiman]

When you work in an actual office with several dozen machines besides you, interference becomes important.

Also, the profit margin on those adapters is pretty astounding.

[pilif]

In the office, all I plug into my MacBook Pro is the Thunderbolt connector to the monitor and the power adapter. The monitor is connected via wired ethernet.

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.

[rch]

There have been about 10 times in the last few years when I have walked into a meeting someplace where there wasn't any guest wifi, or we needed the internal network for other reasons.

[pilif]

Here in Switzerland companies stopped granting guest access over the last few years. You're expected to bring your own infrastructure which usually boils down to tethering your mobile.

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.

[coldtea]

>Here in Switzerland companies stopped granting guest access over the last few years.

Why, they don't have the skills to create a private wi-fi network for guests?

[tudborg]

Why bother when your own 4G connection could be significantly faster than sharing a 100/100Mbit with 80 other people?

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.

[rogeryu]

4G tethering using your mobile! It's probably a lot faster as well, and no stupid company restrictions and logging.

[melling]

The MacBook Pro I bought last year was the first that didn't have one. I seldom used Ethernet but I still miss it. Apple probably wouldn't use it but can't they develop a small connector for the next generation thin laptops? Microsoft Surface form factor is going to become prevalent in the PC world.

[fit2rule]

I'm more miffed about Apples' USB Type-C strategy.. but on the other hand, Docking stations have their value .. I was disappointed in this as well, but nevertheless am an rMBP user .. so until Henge upgrade this to include Ethernet:

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.

[rogeryu]

That USB type-C strategy is for a laptop that is thinner than the Macbook Air. I don't think they will pull that trick for the normal Macbook Pro.

[coldtea]

What trick? Of course they'll add USB type-C to MBP.

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.

[rogeryu]

The trick - having only one connector. For normal macbooks they will probably have multiple USB-C (for power and other stuff), maybe one USB-B, a card reader, video etc.

[fit2rule]

What seems to be happening is that we are re-inventing PCI.

[macns]

Another problem, very slow to actually connect to the wired network. I'm using it almost every day for different networks, I just can't get used to the wait.

[motoboi]

This os probably an Yosemite problem rather than a hardware problem. Olders macbook have it too.

[rocky1138]

This is a constant frustration in the office.

[kawsper]

We had to buy ethernet dongles for everyone in our office.

[coldtea]

Or, you know, you could buy a wifi router...

[falcolas]

One AP per 5 active devices, give or take. Plus positioning them and managing their power and ensuring they do proper hand-off as you move around the office, plus...

Providing reliable wifi for multiple people with multiple devices is a hard challenge.

[jalons]

It's shocking the amount of people that don't grasp this. "It works in my home, why isn't it the same in the office." Is it misinformation? Have people become so used to things "just working" in home they don't think of the technical differences between a couple devices and a couple hundred devices?

[falcolas]

> Have people become so used to things "just working" in home they don't think of the technical differences between a couple devices and a couple hundred devices?

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.

[coldtea]

>Have people become so used to things "just working" in home they don't think of the technical differences between a couple devices and a couple hundred devices?

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...

[coldtea]

>One AP per 5 active devices, give or take.

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.

[falcolas]

Try doing the math. Take your bandwidth expectations from such a connection, and divide the total bandwidth provided by an AP by that value. The answer is typically between 5 and 10; less if you're in an office building where each floor is providing their own WiFi network and you have to contend with interference.

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.

[ytdht]

For the ethernet port, it is very much Apple's style... but either way, using consumer Apple devices for servers only make sense if you get them for free (civil forfeiture for example)...

[hrrsn]

Retina models ditched the Ethernet port, so 2012 is when that happened.

[zimpenfish]

At least since the mid-2012 Macbook Pro Retina (which is what I have.)

[AhtiK]

If your laptop and wireless router supports 802.11ac then what are the most common reasons to still prefer Ethernet port?

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.

[brianwawok]

Depends where you are. In my house in Chicago next to some high rises I could see 200-300 access points. My own fully powered 802.11ac access point had a range of about 12 feet. Worked for some rooms, but not for others. And the signal was jumpy. Was super nice to have a hardwire at my desk so I could go full speed.

[falcolas]

> what are the most common reasons to still prefer Ethernet port?

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.

[tudborg]

reliable network, consistent (low) latency and the security aspect. At least that is my top 3.