potustheplant

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.

There is a lot of empty PCB in that design. They could at the very least add 1 more port on each side if they wanted to. The audio solution is also taking up quite a bit of space.

Agai with the TB5. Those hubs cost $200+ and some even require external power. It's a good option to have. It's bad if it's your only option.

If they could do it in 2010, they can do it in 2024. And no, it wouldn't significantly increase the footprint.

About TB5 you're right. Most laptops don't have it but you're also conveniently ignoring that the first laptops with those ports were released literally a few months ago.