How are they “awesome” if their usability is worse. In my opinion it adds absolutely nothing and sometimes palm rejection fails so you end up with unintended inputs. There are literally no benefits.

It wom’t look as beautiful if you meed to replace it and find out that it costs about the same as buying a new phone. Personally I also find that they’re worse, usability wise.

If you don’t need them they’re just more cost

Yeah, tell me another joke. the cost is negligible. Literally from cents to a few dollars for the manufacturer.

more holes where water/debris can get into the machine

This literally never happened to me or anyone I know.

more wrong holes to plug the charger into

If you plug in your usb-c/barrel jack charger into an ethernet/hdmi/displayport input, you deserve to have a broken laptop xD

If you do need them, then buy a machine that has them - there are plenty.

Not really true, but ok. Keep on preaching for companies that screw over consumers :)

Why move the goalpost though? I’m not narrowing it down to a specific user in a specific setting. I’m just saying that more flexibility == more better.

Why would you make up a specific scenario to justify getting a inferior product (from a usability standpoint) than we used to?

Yeah, **one **HDMI port and no DisplayPort.

Yeah and most don’t have a lot of ports. Hence, this post and the issue.

You misunderstood. They use those monitors when actually working in a stationary place with their desktop setup. However, it’s very common to then have to go to your client’s office to show them said work or discuss future steps. At which point having multiple port options comes in handy if you have to plug in to a tv, monitor or projector.

You can’t seriously consider asking for hdmi and displayport on a laptop a “specific need”.

A couple more ports wouldn’t make your laptop “chonky”.

Congrats for you. However, if you consider that other people use their computer in a different way, would it really be that bad if your computer were imperceptibly heavier so that everyone could use use it how they prefer?

Well, that sucks. Mine came with an hdmi, a displayport cable ans a usb-a to usb-b 3.0 cable for the monitor’s hub (it has an integrated kvm). To me it makes 100% sense to include at least 1 cable for each type of input in the monitor. If you’re fine with getting short-changed by manufacturers then good for you, I guess.

Technically, yes. However, show me a monitor that comes with a dp to usb-c cable. Included cables are 99% the same connector on botj ends. That means that you’d need to buy extra cables (or a hub) for all of you non usb-c ports/devices.

Which is unnecessary and also precisely my point.

If you’re worried about 50-100gr then you should hit the gym my friend.

Also, that hub you’d have to carry around weighs more than just having the ports on the laptop.

Straight from the integrated nic is not something common but here’s an example.

However, my point was that more ports means that you have more bandwidth. If you plug in a 10gbe adapter to one tb3 port, you’re añready using up 25% of your bandwidth and you could no longer plug in 2 high resolution monitors to that same port for example. Not to mention that I don’t think there are hubs with 10gbe (they’re adapters exclusively for ethernet). So that means that you plug in 1 adapter and you already lose like half of youe available ports.

I don’t know why you keep coming up with excuses for being upcharged. You’re giving me strong Stockholm Syndrome vibes.

That’s a very lazy, short-sighted and first world problem way of looking at this issue.

Why would having the option of using either a hub or plugging things on separately be worse than only being able to use a hub?

I don’t see how that’s so terrible. It would slightly phisically bigger (if that) but it wouldn’t weight more and you wouldn’t need to carry around a hub.

4k120 panels weren’t even available in 2017 afaik. But you could do dual 4k120 with one hdmi 2.1 and 1 displayport 1.4 so just need 2 video outputs from your laptop (which used to be pretty common).

Please note that we’re having this discussion in 2024 and I’m talkimg about use cases in 2024. I don’t really see the point in talking about what you would theoretically do 6 years ago with panels that weren’t even available.

Is this a joke? That’s literally the definition of an adapter.

Talking about the first part, of course. Adapting from usb- a to b is not adapting anything other than the physical connector. It’s not the same as usb-c to hdmi or dp, for example.

You don’t need to explain why it’s expensive but you do need to explain why it’s suddenly necessary instead lf an option.

Common according to who? Also, do you think that’s a coincidence? It’d be like saying that user “chose” to use primarily tws earphones instead of cabled ones. Manufacturers just removed the option and forced people to use rheir devices the way they wanted to.

Regarding ethernet, please show me an inexpensive dock with 10gbe. You also don’t need to be a network engineer to take advantage of those speeds. For example, you could be editing video directly from a NAS.

You have a pretty selfish viewpoint. Why would it be so bad to have more connectivity options? If you don’t want to use them, don’t.

Kudos to you.

What you could do now is step out of your bubble and consider that other people have different use cases and might need or prefer to have more native ports.

You literally lose nothing by having more connectivity options.