4 ms·
To be totally fair, it's not like a phone manufacturer is going to put 2 different ports on their device, so this is essentially regulating data as well as powe
by bloppe 4y ago
To be totally fair, it's not like a phone manufacturer is going to put 2 different ports on their device, so this is essentially regulating data as well as power. But also to be fair, USB-C cables that support thunderbolt 3 are a couple orders of magnitude faster (throughput) than Apple's lightning cables (40 Gbps vs ~480 Mbps), and if Apple could possibly support such speeds without releasing a new backwards-incompatible cable, they would have done so long ago.
If Apple ever wanted to support faster than 40 Gbps, they would have to do so in concert with the rest of the tech industry and release it as an open standard. I'd like to hear somebody try to argue this is a bad thing.
- dwaite 4y ago> But also to be fair, USB-C cables that support thunderbolt 3 are a couple orders of magnitude faster (throughput) than Apple's lightning cables (40 Gbps vs ~480 Mbps) however, extremely few devices ship capable of these data rates, and many USB-C cables ship only supporting 480 mbps data transfer. > ... Apple could possibly support such speeds without releasing a new backwards-incompatible cable, they would have done so long ago. Lightning supports USB 3 (superspeed 5gbps) speeds. The lightning USB 3 camera adapter supports it for compatible devices. They did indeed figure this out long ago. They didn't do it because most people don't use lightning cables for data or even understand they _could_ use lightning cables for data. > If Apple ever wanted to support faster than 40 Gbps, they would have to do so in concert with the rest of the tech industry and release it as an open standard. I'd like to hear somebody try to argue this is a bad thing. Apple contributed to both thunderbolt iterations and to USB4. They were first adopters of both, as well as shipping the first USB-C laptop. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here.