Has Apple ever removed a hardware feature, only to resurrect it in a later refresh by popular demand?
(Yes, I'm still mourning the loss of matte.)
(Yes, I'm still mourning the loss of matte.)
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Has Apple ever backpedaled on feature removal?
- Thread starter Phrasikleia
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
FW800 wasn't on the original MacBook Pro.
The original MacBook Pro was a first generation product so Apple could not of removed FW800 prior to the first generation product never existing.
So the PowerBook G4 with its FireWire 400 and 800 ports doesn't count?
The original MacBook Pro only shipped with a FirewWire 400 port and the Core 2 Duo revision brought back the much missed FireWire 800.
Lets not even talk about my adventures as a Mac administrator with Target Disk Mode. This is before all the audio and video people show up.
No because it was not a MacBook Pro.
You said it again, the original MacBook Pro only came with FW400 and with the second generation MacBook Pro FW800 was added.
Prior to the first generation MacBook Pro there never was a MacBook Pro with FW800 so the feature was never removed.
Eh. Let's not split hairs over the product name. The "pro" notebook line lost and then regained a particular port. That qualifies.
So there's hope for the return of matte screens!
Sigh - for the love of God, the MacBook Pro evolved out of the Powerbook ok? I'd say that definitely qualifies as them backpedaling on technology. The MBP & PB have much more in common w/ each other than the last FOUR iMac models combined. Its not all about the name.
The iBook = MacBook as well. If a woman gets married & changes her surname is she a totally different person? All these women are vanishing, must all be in the witness protection program.
The iBook = MacBook as well. If a woman gets married & changes her surname is she a totally different person?
All these women are vanishing, must all be in the witness protection program.The Macbook Pro was just a Powerbook with an Intel processor inside of it.
...oh, and a laptop that was also suddenly missing Firewire 800.
So in other words, this no-firewire agenda has been a long time coming. When they put it back in the MBP (most likely due to pressure) they've probably just been waiting for the right time to start phasing it out again.
I forget the original reason, but it was more of a technical one on Apple's parts.
Given the fact that FW800 is second only to eSATA, and an Apple creation them removing it had to be for very good reason on the first Intel Pro book.
The removal of FW400 I hear is for the same level of technical reasons, but also because it's backward compatible, so a 9 pin to 6 pin or 4 pin FW cable will work just fine.... save for those with a MacBook
And to brand:
STOP IT !!! Just stop it dude...
Technically spring loaded folders are still around in OS X....
I did say technically.
Not exactly, but ADB sort of...
I vaguely recall when the original iMac was introduced without an ADB port, the presumption was that it would soon be removed from all models. When the B&W G3 came out, it was expected to lack the ADB, but (at the last minute?) showed up with one anyway.
I know this isn't exactly comparable, because the iMac and G3 are different lines (consumer vs. pro), but it did seem odd to bring back a port that seemed doomed.
(It also allowed me to continue using the fantastic SE/30 keyboard, which I retired only last year.)
I vaguely recall when the original iMac was introduced without an ADB port, the presumption was that it would soon be removed from all models. When the B&W G3 came out, it was expected to lack the ADB, but (at the last minute?) showed up with one anyway.
I know this isn't exactly comparable, because the iMac and G3 are different lines (consumer vs. pro), but it did seem odd to bring back a port that seemed doomed.
(It also allowed me to continue using the fantastic SE/30 keyboard, which I retired only last year.)
Not exactly a "feature," but ...
Due to outcries from education customers over the LCD-based iMac G4's replacement of the CRT-based iMac G3's Apple released the eMac with a built-in CRT monitor. This despite publicly stating CRT's were dead and wouldn't be included in future products.
Due to outcries from education customers over the LCD-based iMac G4's replacement of the CRT-based iMac G3's Apple released the eMac with a built-in CRT monitor. This despite publicly stating CRT's were dead and wouldn't be included in future products.
They were a features Apple didn't bother with during the Mac OS X transition, so were technically lost, and added back as people cried over it -- as with some other Finder stuff.
Those were some of the few I can see a backpeddle on, as far as some hardware deletes ... not too much.
What could schools possibly be upset about w/ no CRTs? I always wondered why they launched those ugly eMacs after the iMac had moved on to the lamp-style.
Price, heft (as in "harder to steal"), and that a CRT is far more rugged in an abusive environment with fingers and pencils poking at the screen.
The 3.5mm analog audio input jack was dropped on the G4 Power Mac introduced january 2000.
A 3.5mm/USB adapter was needed (about $AU75) to get audio in, (if you weren't using a pro/firewire audio input). Annoyed lots of people.
Apple relented and put back the 3.5mm analog audio input jack in the August 2002 G4 Power Mac.
Took 18 months but it went back in.
A 3.5mm/USB adapter was needed (about $AU75) to get audio in, (if you weren't using a pro/firewire audio input). Annoyed lots of people.
Apple relented and put back the 3.5mm analog audio input jack in the August 2002 G4 Power Mac.
Took 18 months but it went back in.
But Apple helped create Firewire! I still don't understand why they would abandon it like this.
Has Apple ever backpedaled on feature removal? You could say Apple backpedaled on the 3G iPod nano fatty design with the 4G iPod nano.
As for the glossy screen, wouldn't an anti-glare film work?
Has Apple ever backpedaled on feature removal? You could say Apple backpedaled on the 3G iPod nano fatty design with the 4G iPod nano.
I'd say they backpedaled on the 2G design by making the fatty nano. They just made it good again with the 4G skinny nano.
Even if one ignores the problems of adding a relatively thick film to a screen, the Glassbook has a glossy screen behind a glossy piece of glassfront.
Similarly, this happened with iBook. Once the MacBook was introduced, audio-in came back.
<inhale>
For the love of dogs, adding a discrete layer of plastic adds two refractive surfaces (back of film + front of film) plus light distortion from the thickness of the substrate itself. And that is on top of whatever adhesive substance is used to keep the darn sheet from bubbling from heat distortion. Great option for people wanting best chance for portable colour accuracy.
I want the choice of the matte surface applied directly to the panel surface. Or, if I had my own way, only matte screens. You want glossy, and don't care about colour distortion? Get a glossy add-on film.
<exhale>
Still the debate rolls on.
Firewire is gone from the MacBook because:
- The chipset doesn't support it (apparently)
- It's mainly of use to creative professionals, who'll be better off with the MBP anyway
Matte screens are gone because the whole design of the MacBook/Pro would need to be changed. You ever seen clear, matte glass?
- The chipset doesn't support it (apparently)
- It's mainly of use to creative professionals, who'll be better off with the MBP anyway
Matte screens are gone because the whole design of the MacBook/Pro would need to be changed. You ever seen clear, matte glass?