3 ms·
> I understand that they have additional revenue streams by licensing lighting to accessories manufactures, but still... Bingo. It's not the charging, it's th
by Majromax 4y ago
> I understand that they have additional revenue streams by licensing lighting to accessories manufactures, but still...
Bingo. It's not the charging, it's the port itself. But the fee and lock-in also apply to data-using accessories.
Wired iPhone headphones aren't compatible with other phones, for example, and if you've purchased (e.g.) an expensive FLIR phone-mounted thermal camera, then you're less likely to jump to the Android/USB-C ecosystem at your next phone upgrade.
- darklion 4y agoI always enjoy seeing the “Apple doesn’t want to give up the money” takes. How much money does Apple make from their licensing? Point me to even one estimate that shows me the money that Apple makes on the Lightning port licensing, and what fraction of its overall profit, loss, or even revenue, that the Lightning licensing comprises.
- rootusrootus 4y agoI don't think it's fees. Relative to what they earn directly from customers, fees are a pittance. I figure they have exactly two reasons, both plausible, to be reluctant to switch the phone over to USB-C. The first is size -- lightning is thinner than USB. But other phones have USB-C, so this is probably not that big a hassle. The second is their customers. For every customer that wants USB-C on their new phone, a dozen more want all their existing accessories and cables to continue to work when they upgrade their phone.
- badwolf 4y ago2 is a big point. This is supposedly about e-waste, but will force everyone to trash all their old cables and accessories even faster now.