Satechi Debuts New Slim 4K Multi-Port USB-C Adapter

What is "4K HDMI"?
Is it 1.4 or 2.0 or what?

It should be able to carry either signal, but AFAIK in the MacBook's case it would be 1.4.

(2.0 signals can be carried on 1.4 cables.)
[doublepost=1472759272][/doublepost]

These are PRECISELY the ports, the MacBook should have had from the beginning...

For many people, those ports are as unnecessary as your comma. ;)

These are PRECISELY the ports, the MacBook should have had from the beginning...

These are PRECISELY the ports, the MacBook should have had from the beginning...

I like it's bold design decisions. The MacBook has an unapologetic vision of all wireless accessories with a powerful dock when needed. If this doesn't work for you, then you have the whole rest of the market to choose from.
It's ok that this one product doesn't meet your specific needs.
For the record, I don't find the MB right for me either. The Pro line suits my needs better. But it is perfect for my wife. The slim size is very important for her and in the year she has had it, I don't think she even noticed that it lacked ports.

Good point. Well, they could make it a centimeter or two thicker. There’s a point where thinness is nice but useless. This is where the computer becomes a piece of art instead of being a tool. Aesthetics are nice, but utility is far more important.

Then don't buy a "car" when what you want is a "truck." It's that simple. If I wanted a thicker computer I would have kept my MacBook Pro.

Still no love for new displays and a Mac Pro. The spec's for a late-2013 Mac Pro starting around $4K are embarrassing (4096x2160 at 24 Hz, 3840x2160 at 30 Hz via HDMI), with limited SST and MST display support. My "current gen" $6k+ 8-Core Mac Pro6,1 with 32GB's RAM and dual D700's can't even support "pro" level dual/tri display setups without adapters.

Numerous display prototypes have been in production with the possibility of returning to a full display lineup again (re: CCFL 20"/23"/30" Cinema Displays circa 2004), yet it's always been a "maybe". Ironically, many on the design teams are using some prototypes for daily work. Cooks decision (not Jobs') to drop the full CCFL display line in '08 for a single 24" then 27" LED LCD display using the then current gen iMac LG or Sharp LED panel was purely profit driven. We already had the panels and form factor, using USB 2.0 ports and cables too short to reach a desktop system added insult to injury.

The false notion that the "pro" market is niche irks me. The amount of money studio's, professional photographers (Annie Leibovitz would drop an easy 6 figures a year), etc. spent annually on hardware (30" displays, PowerMac's/Mac Pro's/etc) and editing suite licenses was substantial. Many erroneously assumed the pro market was small and thus lacked demand and profit.

Two things wrong with this misinformed belief:

1. Studio's and pro's invested substantially in annual systems and "pro"-grade editing suites (FCP7, Aperture, etc)
2. Cutting "Pro" line systems and editing suites first then claiming the market wasn't profitable after the fact is ludicrous.

Demand was always there. Studio's invested elsewhere after the fact and their annual marketshare sum was substantial. Apple dropped the ball. They have succeeded in the consumer markets yet lost a substantial amount in professional markets. They drove those to other platforms and suites, and the time and money invested in switching will not bring those back given Apple's current focus. They shot themselves in the foot and claimed the market was the reason, it wasn't. Market saturation and a severely outdated Mac line have investors worried about Apple's future, especially pushing into new markets in China and India in which sales are far below projected conservative estimates.

Cook needs to revisit Jobs' "Quadrant" as product fragmentation within our R&D divisions would make John Sculley proud. Focus and innovation are lacking and it's disconcerting for many of us.

These are PRECISELY the ports, the MacBook should have had from the beginning...

Where would you place them in the current casing?

Good point. Well, they could make it a centimeter or two thicker. There’s a point where thinness is nice but useless. This is where the computer becomes a piece of art instead of being a tool. Aesthetics are nice, but utility is far more important.

So what do you say to all those who actually like the MB One, in particular its slim build, and are perfectly happy with the amount of ports? That they should not be able to buy such a product because it violates your personal principles of what is sensible?

Looks much better than the plastic crap I have from apple

Well, they could make it a centimeter or two thicker.

A CENTIMETER OR TWO? I sure hope you meant millimeter. The MacBook is only 0.35–1.31 cm to begin with. That would make it thicker than a G4 PowerBook! o_O

Guess soon we will see monitors with a Type-C port and those can then also provide additional USB ports and power for the Mac. One cable, no adapters.