4 ms·

> There's a long history of Apple using proprietary connectors to achieve performance specifications above what the currently available standardized connectors

> There's a long history of Apple using proprietary connectors to achieve performance specifications above what the currently available standardized connectors could provide. Lightning was good when it came out (compared to the various micro-USB options), but it's not held up. Even Apple knows this and they've moved away from it on their iPads.

Daniel_sk 4y ago
In the same regard it will be now hard to move from USB-C to something better due to regulation.
- mmastrac 4y ago
  As others in this thread have mentioned, the "unofficial" regulation that drove most non-apple phones to micro-USB, and then to USB-C did not prevent progress. The laws are not going to mandate USB-C of a certain revision, etc. The laws simply mandate cooperation in a market that has been mostly cooperative, save for a single participant.
  - sieabahlpark 4y ago
  - Rebelgecko 4y ago
    If I'm reading it properly the law does mandate certain USB revisions. For example devices that pull more than 15 watts but less than 100 have to support the 2021 version of IEC 62680-1-2.
    - TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
      Even if laws were written in stone, we could just get new stones, or plaster over and write new laws in to the old stones. The Personal Electronic Device Port Amendment Act 2025, and so on and so forth.
      - dlqx 4y ago
        Do you know how long this takes? Most probably it will take years to change.
        TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
        That seems reasonable. Tends to take years to develop new connectors, and longer still to develop new objectively better connectors.
        dwaite 4y ago
        The USB-C specification is 8.5 years old at this point, and we will have another year before this mandate takes effect. Hopefully future EU mandates can optimize that near-decade timespan from standardization to being legally allowed by hardware manufacturers.
    - Nullabillity 4y ago
      So… your quote boils down to "if the device operates within the parameters supported by standard X then it must comply with it"? This seems like it inherently provides wiggle room when you have a legitimate reason that you can't follow the public standards?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
DiabloD3 4y ago
Lightning was a design put forth by a company that wasn't Apple during the USB IF's design stage of USB-C. It was rejected because the pins were on the outside, not the inside, and would allow easy damage of both the cable and the connector. It was rejected purely on completely sane technical and mechanical reasons. Apple shipped it anyways, and all Lightning cables have failed or will fail for exactly the reasons it was rejected. Apple chose the cable because of how easily it fails. Lightning was never good, and Apple has a long history of fucking customers, period.
- virusduck 4y ago
  What world are you living in?
- thebruce87m 4y ago
  What on earth. Some people have an irrational hate for Apple that borders on a mental illness.
- ephimetheus 4y ago
  I’ve never had a single lightning cable fail ever since they switched to them.
- Jtsummers 4y ago
  > Lightning was a design put forth by a company that wasn't Apple during the USB IF's design stage of USB-C. Do you have some references for this? I had never heard of Lightning having been developed anywhere but at Apple and specifically for their iDevice line and a check on Wikipedia's Lightning connector page has no references to anything that can substantiate this claim. Either a great example of historical erasure, or you're making this up. TL;DR: Source?
  - no_identd 4y ago
    "during" ≠ "as part of", so technically they're as-written right either way, albeit I do suspect they did mean "as part of", so, I'll second that source request

Daniel_sk 4y ago

In the same regard it will be now hard to move from USB-C to something better due to regulation.

mmastrac 4y ago
As others in this thread have mentioned, the "unofficial" regulation that drove most non-apple phones to micro-USB, and then to USB-C did not prevent progress. The laws are not going to mandate USB-C of a certain revision, etc. The laws simply mandate cooperation in a market that has been mostly cooperative, save for a single participant.
- sieabahlpark 4y ago
- Rebelgecko 4y ago
  If I'm reading it properly the law does mandate certain USB revisions. For example devices that pull more than 15 watts but less than 100 have to support the 2021 version of IEC 62680-1-2.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
    Even if laws were written in stone, we could just get new stones, or plaster over and write new laws in to the old stones. The Personal Electronic Device Port Amendment Act 2025, and so on and so forth.
    - dlqx 4y ago
      Do you know how long this takes? Most probably it will take years to change.
      - TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
        That seems reasonable. Tends to take years to develop new connectors, and longer still to develop new objectively better connectors.
        dwaite 4y ago
        The USB-C specification is 8.5 years old at this point, and we will have another year before this mandate takes effect. Hopefully future EU mandates can optimize that near-decade timespan from standardization to being legally allowed by hardware manufacturers.
  - Nullabillity 4y ago
    So… your quote boils down to "if the device operates within the parameters supported by standard X then it must comply with it"? This seems like it inherently provides wiggle room when you have a legitimate reason that you can't follow the public standards?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

DiabloD3 4y ago

Lightning was a design put forth by a company that wasn't Apple during the USB IF's design stage of USB-C. It was rejected because the pins were on the outside, not the inside, and would allow easy damage of both the cable and the connector. It was rejected purely on completely sane technical and mechanical reasons. Apple shipped it anyways, and all Lightning cables have failed or will fail for exactly the reasons it was rejected. Apple chose the cable because of how easily it fails. Lightning was never good, and Apple has a long history of fucking customers, period.

virusduck 4y ago
What world are you living in?
thebruce87m 4y ago
What on earth. Some people have an irrational hate for Apple that borders on a mental illness.
ephimetheus 4y ago
I’ve never had a single lightning cable fail ever since they switched to them.
Jtsummers 4y ago
> Lightning was a design put forth by a company that wasn't Apple during the USB IF's design stage of USB-C. Do you have some references for this? I had never heard of Lightning having been developed anywhere but at Apple and specifically for their iDevice line and a check on Wikipedia's Lightning connector page has no references to anything that can substantiate this claim. Either a great example of historical erasure, or you're making this up. TL;DR: Source?
- no_identd 4y ago
  "during" ≠ "as part of", so technically they're as-written right either way, albeit I do suspect they did mean "as part of", so, I'll second that source request