5 ms·

> Why do people think it is a good thing to have this enforced by law is beyond me. It's not, we're glad SOMEONE is forcing them to take this direction, but it

by Hamcha 4y ago

> Why do people think it is a good thing to have this enforced by law is beyond me. It's not, we're glad SOMEONE is forcing them to take this direction, but it's really sad (and potentially damaging) it had to come to this. > As to lightning port limitations, I question whether usb-c will give average iPhone users any other advantage other than charging their phone. What are people gonna do with it other than charge their phones or transfer files? Lightning itself is also used for audio (analog audio dongle) and video. The one benefit USB-C could bring to the table is higher transfer speed since Lightning is stuck on USB2 speeds, USB-C doesn't imply USB 3 but they might as well try.

vladvasiliu 4y ago
Is the USB2 speed a limitation of the Lightning connector, or is it that Apple just doesn't care to improve this? Because if it's the latter, as you say, there's no guarantee we'll see improved speeds because of the port change.
- colejohnson66 4y ago
  The Lightning connector has 8 pins: 2 for power, 2 for ID/control, and 4 for 2 differential lanes of anything. Those 2 differential lines are used for all data transfer, and, IIRC, are bidirectional. So, in theory, the Lightning connector could carry USB 3.0's differential RX/TX lanes no problem. My guess as to why Apple hasn't implemented that is a lack of demand. Syncing/backup is expected to be handled on the device now, and USB 2.0 gives enough bandwidth for the majority of the other cases. And on iPads where more bandwidth might be required (eg. external data storage), they already have USB-C connectors supporting the higher speeds.
  - philjohn 4y ago
    Except the free tier on iCloud is miniscule so you're forced to stump up cash if you actually want to backup. Plus iCloud is stubbornly not E2EE.
    - theshrike79 4y ago
      You need to fork up all of $0.99 a month for 50GB.
      - colejohnson66 4y ago
        It does seem petty. “I just paid for a $1000 phone with a massive markup and you mean I have to pay an extra $12 to get a decent amount of storage?” It’s not like the 99¢ gets you a terabyte; you only get 50 GB. They could just swallow the cost, but they don’t.
        theshrike79 4y ago
        Continuous services are taxed and accounted differently from one-time costs. They hook you in with the $1 option, you see how useful iCloud is and then you'll fork up even more. Then you notice that your whole family can share the subscription and soon you'll be paying $10 for the 2TB option and are an Apple One subscriber. That's just good business nowadays. All companies _could_ just sell stuff with an one-time fee and provide a service forever, but it's not fiscally responsible in the long run.
      - philjohn 4y ago
        It's still an extra cost, and 50GB when you've got 30GB of message history, 60 GB of photos and other data doesn't cut it.
        theshrike79 4y ago
        Then you can pay the immense cost of $3/mo for 200GB. Subscriptions are what guarantees quality, you are paying for the service so you can expect a certain level of quality.
- mrunkel 4y ago
  Apple wants to do away with all external connectors on that phone. My guess is that they won't have any ports once they get rid of the lightning connector.
  - stingraycharles 4y ago
    Not so sure about that, they already added USB-C to many devices, and there are still plenty of use cases where wireless charging is tricky. I really need a cable to charge my phone while driving, for example. Additionally, charging wirelessly is much slower, sometimes you just need to be able to charge quickly.
    - vladvasiliu 4y ago
      > I really need a cable to charge my phone while driving, for example. Am I to understand you're having issues with wireless charging while driving? I was having high hopes for this for riding my motorbike because plugging everything in and routing cables is quite the pain...
- ClassyJacket 4y ago
  The lightning connector supports USB3 and it is implemented on some models of iPad Pro when used with the Lightning to USB3 Camera Adapter: https://www.apple.com/uk/shop/product/MK0W2ZM/A/lightning-to-usb-3-camera-adapter https://www.apple.com/uk/shop/product/MK0W2ZM/A/lightning-to... Apple never made a USB3 to lightning cable.
  - ClassyJacket 4y ago
    I wonder whether you could achieve USB3 transfer speeds from a computer to a usb3 iPad Pro with the Camera Adapter and a usb A to A cable like this: https://amzn.eu/d/37zSB6e https://amzn.eu/d/37zSB6e
    - dmitrygr 4y ago
      That adapter acts like usb host IIRC. So does your computer. Connecting two hosts with a A-to-A cable is not going to do anything good (and might cause harm). This is why A-to-A cables aren't supposed to exist as per usb spec.
donatj 4y ago
Transfer speed seems like a non-issue. Wi-Fi 6 is faster than the the internal SSDs read speed. There's no reason to even plug it in for data.
- zdw 4y ago
  Comparing a shared RF medium to a fairly guaranteed point to point connection is one of those things that in theory works great, but in practice, not so much...
- moffkalast 4y ago
  Plugging the phone into a laptop seems far easier than connecting both to a shared network and then trying to find the right IPs to connect to. Worse case you even have to make an access point which isn't a gui operation on most laptops.
  - donatj 4y ago
    I'm guessing you don't use Apple devices. AirDrop. Seamless adhoc direct connection. Easier than plugging in a cable.
    - moffkalast 4y ago
      God forbid you'd ever want to transfer to a non-Apple device amirite? Most of the people that I know that use iPhones don't have Macs. And those with Macs don't have iPhones lol.
    - TakeBlaster16 4y ago
      I don't think "seamless" is a common word people use to describe it. https://old.reddit.com/r/applehelp/comments/un9rjb/airdrop_has_been_very_unreliable_on_iphonemacbook/ https://old.reddit.com/r/applehelp/comments/un9rjb/airdrop_h...
- staringback 4y ago
  Wi-Fi 6 is faster than the internal SSDs read speed when there is direct line of sight and absolutely no cross channel interference*
dubya 4y ago
Better transfer speed would be a benefit to USB-C. It comes up using an iPhone as a camera when wifi is congested or just not available, e.g. a college campus with device registration required. Dongles for phone to HDMI could work without needing compression as well.
- jiveturkey 4y ago
  That might be a fair point -- no comment. This shouldn't be legislated. That's absurd.

by Hamcha 4y ago

vladvasiliu 4y ago

Is the USB2 speed a limitation of the Lightning connector, or is it that Apple just doesn't care to improve this? Because if it's the latter, as you say, there's no guarantee we'll see improved speeds because of the port change.

colejohnson66 4y ago
The Lightning connector has 8 pins: 2 for power, 2 for ID/control, and 4 for 2 differential lanes of anything. Those 2 differential lines are used for all data transfer, and, IIRC, are bidirectional. So, in theory, the Lightning connector could carry USB 3.0's differential RX/TX lanes no problem. My guess as to why Apple hasn't implemented that is a lack of demand. Syncing/backup is expected to be handled on the device now, and USB 2.0 gives enough bandwidth for the majority of the other cases. And on iPads where more bandwidth might be required (eg. external data storage), they already have USB-C connectors supporting the higher speeds.
- philjohn 4y ago
  Except the free tier on iCloud is miniscule so you're forced to stump up cash if you actually want to backup. Plus iCloud is stubbornly not E2EE.
  - theshrike79 4y ago
    You need to fork up all of $0.99 a month for 50GB.
    - colejohnson66 4y ago
      It does seem petty. “I just paid for a $1000 phone with a massive markup and you mean I have to pay an extra $12 to get a decent amount of storage?” It’s not like the 99¢ gets you a terabyte; you only get 50 GB. They could just swallow the cost, but they don’t.
      - theshrike79 4y ago
        Continuous services are taxed and accounted differently from one-time costs. They hook you in with the $1 option, you see how useful iCloud is and then you'll fork up even more. Then you notice that your whole family can share the subscription and soon you'll be paying $10 for the 2TB option and are an Apple One subscriber. That's just good business nowadays. All companies _could_ just sell stuff with an one-time fee and provide a service forever, but it's not fiscally responsible in the long run.
    - philjohn 4y ago
      It's still an extra cost, and 50GB when you've got 30GB of message history, 60 GB of photos and other data doesn't cut it.
      - theshrike79 4y ago
        Then you can pay the immense cost of $3/mo for 200GB. Subscriptions are what guarantees quality, you are paying for the service so you can expect a certain level of quality.
mrunkel 4y ago
Apple wants to do away with all external connectors on that phone. My guess is that they won't have any ports once they get rid of the lightning connector.
- stingraycharles 4y ago
  Not so sure about that, they already added USB-C to many devices, and there are still plenty of use cases where wireless charging is tricky. I really need a cable to charge my phone while driving, for example. Additionally, charging wirelessly is much slower, sometimes you just need to be able to charge quickly.
  - vladvasiliu 4y ago
    > I really need a cable to charge my phone while driving, for example. Am I to understand you're having issues with wireless charging while driving? I was having high hopes for this for riding my motorbike because plugging everything in and routing cables is quite the pain...
ClassyJacket 4y ago
The lightning connector supports USB3 and it is implemented on some models of iPad Pro when used with the Lightning to USB3 Camera Adapter: https://www.apple.com/uk/shop/product/MK0W2ZM/A/lightning-to-usb-3-camera-adapter https://www.apple.com/uk/shop/product/MK0W2ZM/A/lightning-to... Apple never made a USB3 to lightning cable.
- ClassyJacket 4y ago
  I wonder whether you could achieve USB3 transfer speeds from a computer to a usb3 iPad Pro with the Camera Adapter and a usb A to A cable like this: https://amzn.eu/d/37zSB6e https://amzn.eu/d/37zSB6e
  - dmitrygr 4y ago
    That adapter acts like usb host IIRC. So does your computer. Connecting two hosts with a A-to-A cable is not going to do anything good (and might cause harm). This is why A-to-A cables aren't supposed to exist as per usb spec.

donatj 4y ago

Transfer speed seems like a non-issue. Wi-Fi 6 is faster than the the internal SSDs read speed. There's no reason to even plug it in for data.

zdw 4y ago
Comparing a shared RF medium to a fairly guaranteed point to point connection is one of those things that in theory works great, but in practice, not so much...
moffkalast 4y ago
Plugging the phone into a laptop seems far easier than connecting both to a shared network and then trying to find the right IPs to connect to. Worse case you even have to make an access point which isn't a gui operation on most laptops.
- donatj 4y ago
  I'm guessing you don't use Apple devices. AirDrop. Seamless adhoc direct connection. Easier than plugging in a cable.
  - moffkalast 4y ago
    God forbid you'd ever want to transfer to a non-Apple device amirite? Most of the people that I know that use iPhones don't have Macs. And those with Macs don't have iPhones lol.
  - TakeBlaster16 4y ago
    I don't think "seamless" is a common word people use to describe it. https://old.reddit.com/r/applehelp/comments/un9rjb/airdrop_has_been_very_unreliable_on_iphonemacbook/ https://old.reddit.com/r/applehelp/comments/un9rjb/airdrop_h...
staringback 4y ago
Wi-Fi 6 is faster than the internal SSDs read speed when there is direct line of sight and absolutely no cross channel interference*

dubya 4y ago

Better transfer speed would be a benefit to USB-C. It comes up using an iPhone as a camera when wifi is congested or just not available, e.g. a college campus with device registration required. Dongles for phone to HDMI could work without needing compression as well.

jiveturkey 4y ago
That might be a fair point -- no comment. This shouldn't be legislated. That's absurd.