4 ms·

I don't think this is in any way authoritarian, no one's personal freedom is at stake here. The regulation is for hardware companies, not you. There is no "unf

I don't think this is in any way authoritarian, no one's personal freedom is at stake here. The regulation is for hardware companies, not you. There is no "unfair advantage" to USB-C patent holders, it's a standard that the industry settled on in a cooperative fashion in which Apple was itself a major player. No one prevented the industry from working on a "patent-free" different standard. Point is, you can't and shouldn't promote _different brands of connectors_ as it defeats the purpose of having less waste if in a household iPhone users are gonna use a different charger from the others.

frankfrankfrank 4y ago
It never crossed your mind that there may be a reason that Apple does not want to use the USB-C standard for all its disadvantages over the lightning connector that they have now had for 11 years. Apple has had two types of plugs over 20 years now. Can you say that about Nokia? Samsung? Etc?
- kibwen 4y ago
  > It never crossed your mind that there may be a reason that Apple does not want to use the USB-C standard The reason is extremely obvious: cementing user lock-in to the Apple ecosystem.
  - ralfd 4y ago
    Lightning is smaller than USB-C. That alone makes it more desirable for space-obsessed Apple. I think it is more robust and easier to clean too.
    - Moldoteck 4y ago
      And lightning is usb2.0 and what it can do to be backwards compatible and offer 240w or more for charging and gigabits of data transfer like latest usb-c is unknown. But what we do know? Usb c is superior and it has been for years and Apple didn't switch to it on phones to sell users proprietary accestories that connect only by that port
    - kibwen 4y ago
      The thinnest smartphone ever sold was the Vivo X5 Max, which was 4.75 mm thick, and it still managed to squeeze a headphone jack into it, despite Apple's feeble protests that such things are impossible. USB-C (2.5 mm) is significantly thinner than a standard headphone jack (3.5 mm). Between the screen, the circuit board, the battery, and the back cover (including the camera lenses), you're never, ever going to see a smartphone so thin that it couldn't fit a 2.5 mm port. This is a non-excuse.
- microtonal 4y ago
  You mean the great connector that is so bandwidth-deprived (and doesn't support alt-modes) that Apple has to send lower-than 1080p video with bad artifacting down the cable? https://panic.com/blog/the-lightning-digital-av-adapter-surprise/ https://panic.com/blog/the-lightning-digital-av-adapter-surp... https://panic.com/blog/the-lightning-digital-av-adapter-surprise/#comment-16841 https://panic.com/blog/the-lightning-digital-av-adapter-surp...
- epolanski 4y ago
  Why would I care? USB-C is perfectly good for the moment in time we live in. Imagine if goddamn power plugs in your wall were starting to be different because some company thinks a different format is better. Or if they started to pull some "you can only charge your car with this very specific type of connector, but not others" and cars are much more impacted and sensitive by arguments like yours.

frankfrankfrank 4y ago

It never crossed your mind that there may be a reason that Apple does not want to use the USB-C standard for all its disadvantages over the lightning connector that they have now had for 11 years. Apple has had two types of plugs over 20 years now. Can you say that about Nokia? Samsung? Etc?

kibwen 4y ago
> It never crossed your mind that there may be a reason that Apple does not want to use the USB-C standard The reason is extremely obvious: cementing user lock-in to the Apple ecosystem.
- ralfd 4y ago
  Lightning is smaller than USB-C. That alone makes it more desirable for space-obsessed Apple. I think it is more robust and easier to clean too.
  - Moldoteck 4y ago
    And lightning is usb2.0 and what it can do to be backwards compatible and offer 240w or more for charging and gigabits of data transfer like latest usb-c is unknown. But what we do know? Usb c is superior and it has been for years and Apple didn't switch to it on phones to sell users proprietary accestories that connect only by that port
  - kibwen 4y ago
    The thinnest smartphone ever sold was the Vivo X5 Max, which was 4.75 mm thick, and it still managed to squeeze a headphone jack into it, despite Apple's feeble protests that such things are impossible. USB-C (2.5 mm) is significantly thinner than a standard headphone jack (3.5 mm). Between the screen, the circuit board, the battery, and the back cover (including the camera lenses), you're never, ever going to see a smartphone so thin that it couldn't fit a 2.5 mm port. This is a non-excuse.
microtonal 4y ago
You mean the great connector that is so bandwidth-deprived (and doesn't support alt-modes) that Apple has to send lower-than 1080p video with bad artifacting down the cable? https://panic.com/blog/the-lightning-digital-av-adapter-surprise/ https://panic.com/blog/the-lightning-digital-av-adapter-surp... https://panic.com/blog/the-lightning-digital-av-adapter-surprise/#comment-16841 https://panic.com/blog/the-lightning-digital-av-adapter-surp...
epolanski 4y ago
Why would I care? USB-C is perfectly good for the moment in time we live in. Imagine if goddamn power plugs in your wall were starting to be different because some company thinks a different format is better. Or if they started to pull some "you can only charge your car with this very specific type of connector, but not others" and cars are much more impacted and sensitive by arguments like yours.