3 ms·

This is just a repost of a blog post discussed on HN last week. And it's not clear if that blog post was even correct: it's quite likely that the poster confus

by gumby 4y ago

This is just a repost of a blog post discussed on HN last week. And it's not clear if that blog post was even correct: it's quite likely that the poster confused the USB C e-marker with the MFI program and chips. Not that Apple might not put some restrictions in place -- there is plenty of opportunity -- but on the power side there's no win for them beyond defending against dangerous power supplies.

jononomo 4y ago
How much of a problem are dangerous power supplies likely to be?
- gumby 4y ago
  Could be a big one: these days you can ask for (or a PS can just try to push) as much as 240W. And there are tons of frightening teardowns of dodgy power supplies available online. I can imagine Apple treating any non-e-marked cable as a 3 Amp cable and requesting old USB 2 power. And attempting to clamp or refuse anything outside that (though your phone still could get mighty hot in the process!)
cubefox 4y ago
Presumably the win would be to sell licensed products.
- stouset 4y ago
  Can we just all agree for like, five minutes, that Apple probably has not decided that making peanuts on certification of licensed cables is worth aggravating the customer base of the product responsible for the lion’s share of their revenue and profits? Even if this rumor ends up being true, surely we can agree there’s at least a plausibly defensible business case to be made here.
  - sudosysgen 4y ago
    Peanuts? They make 4$ in pure profit per cable. That means billions.
    - stouset 4y ago
      Apple reported $65.78Bn in revenue from iPhone sales in Q4 2022. Their entire “wearable / home / accessories” revenue was $13.5Bn. That includes the wildly successful Apple Watch as well as the HomePod and Apple TV. All of which sell for hundreds of dollars. That’s to say nothing of first-party accessories like cables that Apple sells directly and makes 100% of the revenue on. Third parties would have to sell ~200 MFi-licensed cables for every single disgruntled iPhone user who jumps ship for Android or decides to sit out an upgrade cycle. It’s even worse if you factor in the halo of other purchases people make after buying a new phone. You are absolutely out of your mind if you think Apple has any desire to cannibalize iPhone sales for $4 of licensing revenue on third-party cables. This isn’t even a rounding error in Apple’s quarterly financials.
      - SR2Z 4y ago
        It would not be unreasonable to say that cables might make up $1B of that $13.5B - and given how stupidly profitable this scheme is, it's definitely not a "rounding error." A billion dollars is a billion dollars.
        stouset 4y ago
        Okay, so let’s agree for the sake of argument that cables make up $1bn of Apple revenue. What share of that is MFi cables in general? And what share of that is hypothetical MFi USB-C cables? At $4 a pop, you’re talking 125 million licensed third-party USB-C cables. Per quarter. That seems like an absurdly high number to me given the fact that most people will buy first-party cables. And hell, most people I know still use USB-A to Lightning cables to charge their phones at excruciatingly slow speeds. But sure. Fine. Half a billion licensed third party USB-C cables per year. Half a billion in revenue over a holiday quarter. To put some share of your $200Bn/yr cash cow at risk? Plus risking the downstream halo purchases of other highly-profitable products in the ecosystem, including first-party cables? You. Are. Out. Of. Your. Mind. If this rumor is true, there’s undoubtedly a plausible business reason. Cannibalizing their most popular product to make pocket change on licensing fees does not even pass a basic smell test.

by gumby 4y ago

jononomo 4y ago

How much of a problem are dangerous power supplies likely to be?

gumby 4y ago
Could be a big one: these days you can ask for (or a PS can just try to push) as much as 240W. And there are tons of frightening teardowns of dodgy power supplies available online. I can imagine Apple treating any non-e-marked cable as a 3 Amp cable and requesting old USB 2 power. And attempting to clamp or refuse anything outside that (though your phone still could get mighty hot in the process!)

cubefox 4y ago

Presumably the win would be to sell licensed products.

stouset 4y ago
Can we just all agree for like, five minutes, that Apple probably has not decided that making peanuts on certification of licensed cables is worth aggravating the customer base of the product responsible for the lion’s share of their revenue and profits? Even if this rumor ends up being true, surely we can agree there’s at least a plausibly defensible business case to be made here.
- sudosysgen 4y ago
  Peanuts? They make 4$ in pure profit per cable. That means billions.
  - stouset 4y ago
    Apple reported $65.78Bn in revenue from iPhone sales in Q4 2022. Their entire “wearable / home / accessories” revenue was $13.5Bn. That includes the wildly successful Apple Watch as well as the HomePod and Apple TV. All of which sell for hundreds of dollars. That’s to say nothing of first-party accessories like cables that Apple sells directly and makes 100% of the revenue on. Third parties would have to sell ~200 MFi-licensed cables for every single disgruntled iPhone user who jumps ship for Android or decides to sit out an upgrade cycle. It’s even worse if you factor in the halo of other purchases people make after buying a new phone. You are absolutely out of your mind if you think Apple has any desire to cannibalize iPhone sales for $4 of licensing revenue on third-party cables. This isn’t even a rounding error in Apple’s quarterly financials.
    - SR2Z 4y ago
      It would not be unreasonable to say that cables might make up $1B of that $13.5B - and given how stupidly profitable this scheme is, it's definitely not a "rounding error." A billion dollars is a billion dollars.
      - stouset 4y ago
        Okay, so let’s agree for the sake of argument that cables make up $1bn of Apple revenue. What share of that is MFi cables in general? And what share of that is hypothetical MFi USB-C cables? At $4 a pop, you’re talking 125 million licensed third-party USB-C cables. Per quarter. That seems like an absurdly high number to me given the fact that most people will buy first-party cables. And hell, most people I know still use USB-A to Lightning cables to charge their phones at excruciatingly slow speeds. But sure. Fine. Half a billion licensed third party USB-C cables per year. Half a billion in revenue over a holiday quarter. To put some share of your $200Bn/yr cash cow at risk? Plus risking the downstream halo purchases of other highly-profitable products in the ecosystem, including first-party cables? You. Are. Out. Of. Your. Mind. If this rumor is true, there’s undoubtedly a plausible business reason. Cannibalizing their most popular product to make pocket change on licensing fees does not even pass a basic smell test.