7 ms·

I'm disappointed Apple hasn't dropped Lightning and just made all their devices use standard USB-C. I could see their motivation for developing their own connec

by Zak 6y ago

I'm disappointed Apple hasn't dropped Lightning and just made all their devices use standard USB-C. I could see their motivation for developing their own connector when everyone else was using micro-B, which has a number of disadvantages, but now USB-C is used to power virtually every other phone and tablet, and many laptops including Apple's own.

Shivetya 6y ago
USB-C would have been the true environmentally friendly move
- samatman 6y ago
  Throwing away a billion devices worth of accessories isn't the environmentally friendly move. I'm always confused how people talk themselves into believing this. It is obviously not the case.
  - joshl325 6y ago
    Unless Apple decides to ditch the port entirely in the near future, your argument doesn't make sense. Sure, there will be some minor pain during the transition, but the world did not end when Apple transitioned from the 30-pin to Lighting transition, nor did it end when phone manufacturers transitioned from micro-USB to USB-C. You can use USB-C to lightning adapter, like how they have 30-pin to lightning adapter earlier. Nobody will throwaway their lightning accessories. iPhones and its accessories have a strong used market, and it will find good homes to older iPhone users.
    - colejohnson66 6y ago
      Does no one remember the uproar when Apple first introduced Lightning? Everyone I talked to hated that their old 30-pin connector cables wouldn’t work anymore. With how much more popular the iPhone is now compared to over half a decade ago, it’d be even worse.
      - dzhiurgis 6y ago
        There’s a ton less accessories nowadays. Everything is Bluetooth. USB-C versions already exist for Android. Lightning is waste.
  - dzhiurgis 6y ago
    What accessories? Everything is bluetooth now.
samatman 6y ago
I'm indifferent. On the one hand, yeah, USB-C works great, and everything else I own takes it. On the other hand, Lightning also works great, USB-C isn't an improvement on the merits, and iPhone users have a bunch of accessories for it. Like in my car, I have a 12v charger with one USB-A port and a built-in Lightning cable, and I'd have to either junk it or just ignore the built in cable if they went USB-C. I'm pretty sure the writing is on the wall with MagSafe: Apple intends to ditch the port entirely. That makes me nervous, frankly, and there are people out there who use an SD card reader who would be furious. But I think that future is more likely than one in which Apple ditches the Lightning port for USB-C. We'll see.
- jbombadil 6y ago
  My concern with them removing the port is what what would happen to everyone whose car's entertainment unit supports CarPlay but not wireless CarPlay?
  - jen20 6y ago
    Does anyone other than BMW have wireless CarPlay?
    - r1nkgrl 6y ago
      I have an aftermarket Pioneer head unit with wireless CarPlay
    - Schiendelman 6y ago
      I think new Fords do. We’re right at the tipping point.
  - saurik 6y ago
    I guess they either buy a new car or they buy a dongle they plug into their car as a wireless bridge (same as every change Apple makes ;P).
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    I’ve always seen it as a usb cable that you can swap out with any other usb cable.
tiernano 6y ago
Hold on there sparky... If they did that, they would loose money on both the new chargers they sell people, plus every other adapter seller would need to change products, and then buying a charger that works with both iPhone and Android on one cable!?! Sacrilege! /s
petre 6y ago
USB-C is great but the Lightning connector is still better designed. Oh and you can downvote me all you want, I'm an electrical engineer, not an Apple fanboy. Don't like the phone. Anyway, they should at least include a cable.
- fastball 6y ago
  Disagree. I have had frequent issues with lint and other detritus collecting in Lightning ports, causing the device to no longer be able to charge until it is cleaned out. I haven't had that with USB-C (or any other type of port for that matter). Also USB-C can charge my computer. Lightning cannot. The entire reason I want something like USB-C is so that I can do everything with one cable. Lightning is not up to the task.
  - petre 6y ago
    Well, with USB-C you've got two holes that can fill up with junk, not just one. The Lightning port is at least easy to clean with common household items: toothpick and ear swabs.
- Aloha 6y ago
  I agree with you, the Lighting connector is more mechanically durable in general.
- blackguardx 6y ago
  I disagree and think the USB-C connector is better designed. Exposing electrical contacts to the environment like on the Lightning connector is bad for several reasons, including increased risk of static electricity damage and wear on the exposed electrical contacts. Apple has gone to great lengths to reduce or eliminate the static electricity risk by integrating a special IC into the cable. The contact wear issue has not been addressed by them. Many of the cables I have show signs of eroded contacts and I think that is the main reason why some cables of mine have failed. The USB-C connector surrounds the contacts with a mechanical shield that protects them from fingers or anything else. This is a standard connector design that has been used on pretty much every connector. It is boring, but it works. The Lightning is great engineering, but is ultimately let down by the radical design IMHO. BTW, I am also an electrical engineer that has designed MFI accessories and uses iPhones.
throwanem 6y ago
I'd take the power brick out of the box and introduce the new wireless charging stuff first, too. Let people finish yelling about that first, then set off the inevitable rehash of the "but none of my dock connector accessories will work with my new phone! Apple just wants more money argh argh argh" fussing.
- dexterdog 6y ago
  Not to mention the problem with wireless charging you find with thick cases, pop sockets and ring stand thingies.
fastball 6y ago
The theory I've heard is that they're planning to remove the charge port entirely in the iPhone 13, and therefore it would be a massive engineering waste to make only a single generation of phones with USB-C. But yeah, I really wanted USB-C. Bought the phone anyway though.
- joshl325 6y ago
  I can see that happen. Which will suck if you use your phones for camping trips or vacation where you need to charge on the fly. Maybe in a few years wireless charging will be efficient enough that you don't have to bring a larger power bank to compensate for power loss.
  - fastball 6y ago
    My own addendum to the theory is that this is why they've introduced MagSafe charging – if you have a power bank in your bag that is supposed to be charging your phone, but its wireless charging its just gonna fall off / come away from the charger. With magnetic attachment that is still more likely than an actual cable, but much less so.
  - Talanes 6y ago
    Power-bank usage is clutch in professions that involve both a lot of phone communication and movement. Event staff an politician's offices (which have a surprising amount of overlap) both will run on multiple power banks a day during "Go" time.
  - judge2020 6y ago
    If it weren’t for the issue of charging at 15w without Apple’s own usb-c base, I’d say that it already is sufficient for charging on the go. https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/jiul9p/magsafe_charger_only_charges_at_full_15w_speeds/ https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/jiul9p/magsafe_charg...
- grishka 6y ago
  They already make iPads with USB-C, so I presume most of the engineering work has already been done.
e40 6y ago
Given the amount of discussion USB-C gets here on HN, maybe it's not such a clear decision? I think the biggest risk in USB-C, for me, it makes me really nervous when I buy a cable, and even then I'm not 100% confident. When I buy a lightning cable, I have no fears. And they're not even more expensive anymore. Some of those USB-C cables are just as expensive.
- zamadatix 6y ago
  No matter one's take on generic USB type C cables even if you only used an Apple branded USB type C charging cable at least you'd be able to use the cable with other devices too. I.e. it's always a lose situation to have the non-standard cable. Either a generic USB cable would be better or the Apple brand cable would be better for more than just your Apple device. That being said USB C cables for phone charging aren't where people usually run into the USB C standard confusion anyways.
rootusrootus 6y ago
I mostly agree, but I'd whine a little about having to buy more charging bricks. I don't really need fast charging, but I have a bunch of little devices to charge and almost all of them support USB-A. AFAICT all current USB-C charging bricks are limited to 3 (maybe 4?) ports. And those are expensive. I've already got a few of the 6-port bricks. I suppose this is because USB-C is potentially faster (PD) so they can't support more than a few ports per charger. Still, it's been a hassle with my iPad Pro. It's kind of the bastard child of my collection, and it just barely agrees to be charged with a USB-A to USB-C cable (it doesn't always agree to charge from a completely drained state, but it does charge if it's already got enough juice to turn on).
ksec 6y ago
There are more Lightning Cables within the iPhone users than there are USB-C cables. There are 1Billion iPhone users, That is at least 1 Billion Lightning Cable, ( not counting possible tens if not hundred of millions sitting in the drawer ). How many of those has USB-C Devices? Most of the complain where from Mac users, Ahah, why cant I charge my iPhone with USB-C just like MacBook Pro? There are 100M Active Mac Users, and I willing to bet there are at least 20M on Mac which dont have an USB-C port. What you are asking is to change the port to something that barely gives any benefits for the convenience of a small group of users. ( an iPhone with USB-C Port does not automatically mean it will support faster transfer, or higher Wattage charging, both can be done with Lightning Port, should Apple feels the need. ) I just dont understand it.

by Zak 6y ago

Shivetya 6y ago

USB-C would have been the true environmentally friendly move

samatman 6y ago
Throwing away a billion devices worth of accessories isn't the environmentally friendly move. I'm always confused how people talk themselves into believing this. It is obviously not the case.
- joshl325 6y ago
  Unless Apple decides to ditch the port entirely in the near future, your argument doesn't make sense. Sure, there will be some minor pain during the transition, but the world did not end when Apple transitioned from the 30-pin to Lighting transition, nor did it end when phone manufacturers transitioned from micro-USB to USB-C. You can use USB-C to lightning adapter, like how they have 30-pin to lightning adapter earlier. Nobody will throwaway their lightning accessories. iPhones and its accessories have a strong used market, and it will find good homes to older iPhone users.
  - colejohnson66 6y ago
    Does no one remember the uproar when Apple first introduced Lightning? Everyone I talked to hated that their old 30-pin connector cables wouldn’t work anymore. With how much more popular the iPhone is now compared to over half a decade ago, it’d be even worse.
    - dzhiurgis 6y ago
      There’s a ton less accessories nowadays. Everything is Bluetooth. USB-C versions already exist for Android. Lightning is waste.
- dzhiurgis 6y ago
  What accessories? Everything is bluetooth now.

samatman 6y ago

I'm indifferent. On the one hand, yeah, USB-C works great, and everything else I own takes it. On the other hand, Lightning also works great, USB-C isn't an improvement on the merits, and iPhone users have a bunch of accessories for it. Like in my car, I have a 12v charger with one USB-A port and a built-in Lightning cable, and I'd have to either junk it or just ignore the built in cable if they went USB-C. I'm pretty sure the writing is on the wall with MagSafe: Apple intends to ditch the port entirely. That makes me nervous, frankly, and there are people out there who use an SD card reader who would be furious. But I think that future is more likely than one in which Apple ditches the Lightning port for USB-C. We'll see.

jbombadil 6y ago
My concern with them removing the port is what what would happen to everyone whose car's entertainment unit supports CarPlay but not wireless CarPlay?
- jen20 6y ago
  Does anyone other than BMW have wireless CarPlay?
  - r1nkgrl 6y ago
    I have an aftermarket Pioneer head unit with wireless CarPlay
  - Schiendelman 6y ago
    I think new Fords do. We’re right at the tipping point.
- saurik 6y ago
  I guess they either buy a new car or they buy a dongle they plug into their car as a wireless bridge (same as every change Apple makes ;P).
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  I’ve always seen it as a usb cable that you can swap out with any other usb cable.

tiernano 6y ago

Hold on there sparky... If they did that, they would loose money on both the new chargers they sell people, plus every other adapter seller would need to change products, and then buying a charger that works with both iPhone and Android on one cable!?! Sacrilege! /s

petre 6y ago

USB-C is great but the Lightning connector is still better designed. Oh and you can downvote me all you want, I'm an electrical engineer, not an Apple fanboy. Don't like the phone. Anyway, they should at least include a cable.

fastball 6y ago
Disagree. I have had frequent issues with lint and other detritus collecting in Lightning ports, causing the device to no longer be able to charge until it is cleaned out. I haven't had that with USB-C (or any other type of port for that matter). Also USB-C can charge my computer. Lightning cannot. The entire reason I want something like USB-C is so that I can do everything with one cable. Lightning is not up to the task.
- petre 6y ago
  Well, with USB-C you've got two holes that can fill up with junk, not just one. The Lightning port is at least easy to clean with common household items: toothpick and ear swabs.
Aloha 6y ago
I agree with you, the Lighting connector is more mechanically durable in general.
blackguardx 6y ago
I disagree and think the USB-C connector is better designed. Exposing electrical contacts to the environment like on the Lightning connector is bad for several reasons, including increased risk of static electricity damage and wear on the exposed electrical contacts. Apple has gone to great lengths to reduce or eliminate the static electricity risk by integrating a special IC into the cable. The contact wear issue has not been addressed by them. Many of the cables I have show signs of eroded contacts and I think that is the main reason why some cables of mine have failed. The USB-C connector surrounds the contacts with a mechanical shield that protects them from fingers or anything else. This is a standard connector design that has been used on pretty much every connector. It is boring, but it works. The Lightning is great engineering, but is ultimately let down by the radical design IMHO. BTW, I am also an electrical engineer that has designed MFI accessories and uses iPhones.

throwanem 6y ago

I'd take the power brick out of the box and introduce the new wireless charging stuff first, too. Let people finish yelling about that first, then set off the inevitable rehash of the "but none of my dock connector accessories will work with my new phone! Apple just wants more money argh argh argh" fussing.

dexterdog 6y ago
Not to mention the problem with wireless charging you find with thick cases, pop sockets and ring stand thingies.

fastball 6y ago

The theory I've heard is that they're planning to remove the charge port entirely in the iPhone 13, and therefore it would be a massive engineering waste to make only a single generation of phones with USB-C. But yeah, I really wanted USB-C. Bought the phone anyway though.

joshl325 6y ago
I can see that happen. Which will suck if you use your phones for camping trips or vacation where you need to charge on the fly. Maybe in a few years wireless charging will be efficient enough that you don't have to bring a larger power bank to compensate for power loss.
- fastball 6y ago
  My own addendum to the theory is that this is why they've introduced MagSafe charging – if you have a power bank in your bag that is supposed to be charging your phone, but its wireless charging its just gonna fall off / come away from the charger. With magnetic attachment that is still more likely than an actual cable, but much less so.
- Talanes 6y ago
  Power-bank usage is clutch in professions that involve both a lot of phone communication and movement. Event staff an politician's offices (which have a surprising amount of overlap) both will run on multiple power banks a day during "Go" time.
- judge2020 6y ago
  If it weren’t for the issue of charging at 15w without Apple’s own usb-c base, I’d say that it already is sufficient for charging on the go. https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/jiul9p/magsafe_charger_only_charges_at_full_15w_speeds/ https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/jiul9p/magsafe_charg...
grishka 6y ago
They already make iPads with USB-C, so I presume most of the engineering work has already been done.

e40 6y ago

Given the amount of discussion USB-C gets here on HN, maybe it's not such a clear decision? I think the biggest risk in USB-C, for me, it makes me really nervous when I buy a cable, and even then I'm not 100% confident. When I buy a lightning cable, I have no fears. And they're not even more expensive anymore. Some of those USB-C cables are just as expensive.

zamadatix 6y ago
No matter one's take on generic USB type C cables even if you only used an Apple branded USB type C charging cable at least you'd be able to use the cable with other devices too. I.e. it's always a lose situation to have the non-standard cable. Either a generic USB cable would be better or the Apple brand cable would be better for more than just your Apple device. That being said USB C cables for phone charging aren't where people usually run into the USB C standard confusion anyways.

rootusrootus 6y ago

I mostly agree, but I'd whine a little about having to buy more charging bricks. I don't really need fast charging, but I have a bunch of little devices to charge and almost all of them support USB-A. AFAICT all current USB-C charging bricks are limited to 3 (maybe 4?) ports. And those are expensive. I've already got a few of the 6-port bricks. I suppose this is because USB-C is potentially faster (PD) so they can't support more than a few ports per charger. Still, it's been a hassle with my iPad Pro. It's kind of the bastard child of my collection, and it just barely agrees to be charged with a USB-A to USB-C cable (it doesn't always agree to charge from a completely drained state, but it does charge if it's already got enough juice to turn on).

ksec 6y ago

There are more Lightning Cables within the iPhone users than there are USB-C cables. There are 1Billion iPhone users, That is at least 1 Billion Lightning Cable, ( not counting possible tens if not hundred of millions sitting in the drawer ). How many of those has USB-C Devices? Most of the complain where from Mac users, Ahah, why cant I charge my iPhone with USB-C just like MacBook Pro? There are 100M Active Mac Users, and I willing to bet there are at least 20M on Mac which dont have an USB-C port. What you are asking is to change the port to something that barely gives any benefits for the convenience of a small group of users. ( an iPhone with USB-C Port does not automatically mean it will support faster transfer, or higher Wattage charging, both can be done with Lightning Port, should Apple feels the need. ) I just dont understand it.