5 ms·

Good riddance. Apple created so much e-waste by refusing to play ball with USB-IF despite starting to use usb-c 8 years ago. Praise to the EU for forcing thei

Good riddance. Apple created so much e-waste by refusing to play ball with USB-IF despite starting to use usb-c 8 years ago. Praise to the EU for forcing their hands. If they really wanted to they could have always waited for USB-C to mature to jump straight from the iPod connector straight to USB-C. Or they could have made Lightning an open standard. They did neither.

Simulacra 3y ago
They will find another way to make it up
sebazzz 3y ago
> Praise to the EU for forcing their hands. The Brussels effect once again.
someonehere 3y ago
Lightning connector was introduced in 2012. Probably sat in the lab being developed for a year or two before publicly announced. It made it easy for someone to plug in no matter which way the cable was seated. It also provided phones, iPads, and iPods quicker speeds. USB-C was published and finalized in August 2014.
- SllX 3y ago
  Lightning was a better, smaller, simpler and reversible electrical connector, but for almost all devices that ever used it (the very first iPad Pro is the exception), it unfortunately offered no improvement in USB transfer rates over 30-pin. Pour one out though. It’s still a fine connector. 11-12 years-ish ain’t too bad, shame that Apple never prioritize data transfer rates though and to be honest, still don’t seem to care that much judging by the base models.
  - matthewtse 3y ago
    I loved lightning when it first came out. And, perhaps a contrary opinion, but the I still think lightning is easier to insert than usb-C. The curved edges and smaller size mean you can begin inserting it at an odd angle and finish the insertion easily. Whereas you need to insert usb-C nearly straight on for it to get in. Also because the lightning cable's male end is solid, there's no way for dust to collect in there, unlike USB-C where dust can collect inside both the cable end and the peripheral end. Though overall I would trade that for 1 fewer cable/port that I need to manage in my life.
    - quitit 3y ago
      You raise all good points, the sturdiness of lighting is understated by the industry, and this audience is perhaps not familiar enough to have that impression. As testament to the durability, the lightning connector was sufficiently durable that Apple would display the iPhone on a spike with nothing more than the lightning connector at the very tip to hold up the phone, constantly being handled and replaced by curious store visitors - this approach was also mirrored in the lightning dock design, where the phone was held in place (at an angle no less) with no other secondary support, only the singular lightning connector holding up the phone with such robustness that one could interact with the phone without concern. Lightning is and remains to be incredibly durable and sturdy, far exceeding the spec of the type-C connection standard. For a phone or accessories it's a much more pragmatic connector, and a pity to see it go. USB-C because is not engineered for this level of abuse. From a fatigue perspective USB-C is absolutely a step backwards, tongued designs are weaker, there is no getting around that. I will be interested to see how apple show USB-C iPhones in store, if they keep the lightning-plinth or utilise a design with a back support to limit the wear on the plinth's connector. -- From this point is a commentary on the politics that helped influence this change, feel free to skip it. tl,dr: The laws surrounding USB-C are short-sighted, focused on the wrong aspects of computing waste, and create a future problem. -- The dogmatic persistence in unifying the world on the cable of the day is short sighted and disappointing politicking to me. Type-C will be superseded, but getting the critical mass to transition to a new standard will be muted because manufacturers can't legally move major products to it. Legislators have created a problem for the not-too-distant future, there will be temporary harmony on type-C, and then invariably we will have country-to-country inconsistencies in legislation as newer, better, connectors emerge. It's clear to me that regulation is focusing on the wrong aspects of phone design. Instead of mandating for year on year support, long term security software updates, clean manufacturing standards, appropriate materials & labour sourcing, plus a minimum performance benchmark to prevent cheap junk phones entering the market (and thus fast-tracked to landfill) we have the introduction of laws asking what cable an Apple user pulls out of their satchel when wireless charging isn't available. The idea seems to be that now a person would have one cable instead of two(?) Here's a common example: When I signed up for my internet package, it included a free tablet computer - there was no way to opt out of receiving it, it came pre-installed with software that had known security vulnerabilities, it used microUSB, and its performance was too poor to hold any modern function. Even the person I gave it to had let me know that it was put into electronics recycling after less than a year. This product's manufacture, materials, and shipping created significantly more waste than any amount of lightning cables that a person could feasibly use in an entire lifetime. It's utter insanity that legislators haven't attempted to address the real sources of environmental damage, human rights abuses, and the very real security issue that these junk devices present. Fixation on the connector has been nothing more than political hand waving. I'm not against type-C, I prefer it, but it's clear to me that people who think this is a real issue are blindsighted.
  - someonehere 3y ago
    According to this https://www.cultofmac.com/790897/today-in-apple-history-lightning-replaces-30-pin-dock-connector/ https://www.cultofmac.com/790897/today-in-apple-history-ligh... it was supposed to be USB 3.0 but there was only one device that utilized USB3.0 speeds: "Apple’s connector supported USB 3.0 host, but the only accessory that fully supported this feature was the camera adapter that includes a USB-A port. Most Lightning cables to this day support only USB 2.0, with a maximum data transfer speed of 60MBps." I seem to recall when lightning was announced, someone (probably Steve) said it was faster than the 30 pin. Then again Steve was known to blow smoke of products (remember, FaceTime was open source according to Steve when announced).
    - lxgr 3y ago
      Lightning supports two data lanes, so it's theoretically capable of USB 3 speeds. However, that would have required active/negotiating Lightning-to-USB-3 cables or adapters, since USB 3 requires three lanes, i.e. one more (two for SuperSpeed connections, and one for legacy USB 2.0 high speed connections), and the adapter/cable would have to figure out which one the connected host wants to speak and wire accordingly. At least one iPad does support USB 3 speeds over Lightning, but only in the other direction, i.e. when acting as an USB host using the "Lightning to USB camera adapter", which was really a generic USB host adapter and supported many more types of devices like audio interfaces, hard drives etc. – I suspect that adapter must be doing just that.
      - Dylan16807 3y ago
        > the adapter/cable would have to figure out which one the connected host wants to speak and wire accordingly There are two straightforward ways to avoid that and allow passive adapters/cables. 1. Use the two "Identification/control" pins to run the low speed lane. 2. Use both sides when supporting USB 3.
bananapub 3y ago
? lightning predates usb-c.
tzs 3y ago
> Apple created so much e-waste by refusing to play ball with USB-IF despite starting to use usb-c 8 years ago How much e-waste was actually created? All my several Lightning cables from various Apple device purchases are sitting in my excess cable pile [1], along with a bazillion USB cables from all my non-Apple device purchases, because usually the only times I need a new cable when I get a new device is when every prior device I've purchased that uses the same cable is still in use. If my Apple devices had used USB I'd still have the same number of cables in my excess cable pile. From an e-waste perspective what we need to do is stop including cables with everything. [1] My phone gets charged wirelessly. My iPad does get charged by cable, but I use an Anker 3-in-1 cable that has a USB micro-B end with a couple captive adaptors for USB C and Lightning. I use another of the Anker cables for charging my wireless mouse and keyboard.
- faeriechangling 3y ago
  In a hypothetical world where Apple started using USB-C with say, the iPhone 6 or 6s, we would have gotten to the point consumers had a surplus of cables much sooner. I have no doubt this would have encouraged a few more Android OEMs to stop shipping cables, in addition to the ones that already don't ship one like FairPhone. It's a pretty significant savings between lower BOM, being able to ship the phones in smaller boxes, and simplifying logistics. Having more of one cable type reduces the need for people to buy replacements for damaged cables because there are more spares available. A significant amount of consumers have only 1 usb-c or lightning cable lying around. Cables also aren't the only issue, various accessories are designed to be lightning compatible like AV adapters. The e-waste between all these factors is significant just because over a billion smartphones are shipped yearly. Even a little unnecessary waste adds up quick at that scale. Which justifies the course of action the EU took.
  - philistine 3y ago
    USB-C did not even exist when the iPhone 6 came out in 2014. It was unveiled but not finalized until 2016, and Apple themselves were at the forefront of its adoption. You're saying steam trains in the 1800s would have produced less global warming if they had used diesel. When the gas engine did not yet exist. Apple probably chose to stick to Lighting specifically because they did not want to switch their connector so quickly.
jmull 3y ago
Aren't we all going to start throwing away perfectly good lightning cables now? It's switching connectors that's wasteful, and the EU thing is causing more switching sooner. A better idea would have been to require Apple and others to switch to the standard connector the next time they change the connector for a product line, without a specific timeline. Oh well. It may not be good for the planet, but at least we get to dunk on Apple!
- Simulacra 3y ago
  They literally just switched from lightning to USB-C. Did you not notice?
  - jmull 3y ago
    Um, yes. Let’s follow the thread here… Apple’s decision to switch to USB-C now might have to do with the EU mandated deadline to switch to USB-C. If the EU had not set a deadline, then Apple might have waited longer. The longer between switches, the less overall switching in a given period of time, and therefore a reduced rate of switching-generated ewaste. I guess this stuff is a little too complex for the average voter to follow and the EU politicians saw an opportunity for an easy win, never mind the extra ewaste generated.
bobbylarrybobby 3y ago
What e-waste? I've been using the same lightning cables since forever.

Simulacra 3y ago

They will find another way to make it up

sebazzz 3y ago

> Praise to the EU for forcing their hands. The Brussels effect once again.

someonehere 3y ago

Lightning connector was introduced in 2012. Probably sat in the lab being developed for a year or two before publicly announced. It made it easy for someone to plug in no matter which way the cable was seated. It also provided phones, iPads, and iPods quicker speeds. USB-C was published and finalized in August 2014.

SllX 3y ago
Lightning was a better, smaller, simpler and reversible electrical connector, but for almost all devices that ever used it (the very first iPad Pro is the exception), it unfortunately offered no improvement in USB transfer rates over 30-pin. Pour one out though. It’s still a fine connector. 11-12 years-ish ain’t too bad, shame that Apple never prioritize data transfer rates though and to be honest, still don’t seem to care that much judging by the base models.
- matthewtse 3y ago
  I loved lightning when it first came out. And, perhaps a contrary opinion, but the I still think lightning is easier to insert than usb-C. The curved edges and smaller size mean you can begin inserting it at an odd angle and finish the insertion easily. Whereas you need to insert usb-C nearly straight on for it to get in. Also because the lightning cable's male end is solid, there's no way for dust to collect in there, unlike USB-C where dust can collect inside both the cable end and the peripheral end. Though overall I would trade that for 1 fewer cable/port that I need to manage in my life.
  - quitit 3y ago
    You raise all good points, the sturdiness of lighting is understated by the industry, and this audience is perhaps not familiar enough to have that impression. As testament to the durability, the lightning connector was sufficiently durable that Apple would display the iPhone on a spike with nothing more than the lightning connector at the very tip to hold up the phone, constantly being handled and replaced by curious store visitors - this approach was also mirrored in the lightning dock design, where the phone was held in place (at an angle no less) with no other secondary support, only the singular lightning connector holding up the phone with such robustness that one could interact with the phone without concern. Lightning is and remains to be incredibly durable and sturdy, far exceeding the spec of the type-C connection standard. For a phone or accessories it's a much more pragmatic connector, and a pity to see it go. USB-C because is not engineered for this level of abuse. From a fatigue perspective USB-C is absolutely a step backwards, tongued designs are weaker, there is no getting around that. I will be interested to see how apple show USB-C iPhones in store, if they keep the lightning-plinth or utilise a design with a back support to limit the wear on the plinth's connector. -- From this point is a commentary on the politics that helped influence this change, feel free to skip it. tl,dr: The laws surrounding USB-C are short-sighted, focused on the wrong aspects of computing waste, and create a future problem. -- The dogmatic persistence in unifying the world on the cable of the day is short sighted and disappointing politicking to me. Type-C will be superseded, but getting the critical mass to transition to a new standard will be muted because manufacturers can't legally move major products to it. Legislators have created a problem for the not-too-distant future, there will be temporary harmony on type-C, and then invariably we will have country-to-country inconsistencies in legislation as newer, better, connectors emerge. It's clear to me that regulation is focusing on the wrong aspects of phone design. Instead of mandating for year on year support, long term security software updates, clean manufacturing standards, appropriate materials & labour sourcing, plus a minimum performance benchmark to prevent cheap junk phones entering the market (and thus fast-tracked to landfill) we have the introduction of laws asking what cable an Apple user pulls out of their satchel when wireless charging isn't available. The idea seems to be that now a person would have one cable instead of two(?) Here's a common example: When I signed up for my internet package, it included a free tablet computer - there was no way to opt out of receiving it, it came pre-installed with software that had known security vulnerabilities, it used microUSB, and its performance was too poor to hold any modern function. Even the person I gave it to had let me know that it was put into electronics recycling after less than a year. This product's manufacture, materials, and shipping created significantly more waste than any amount of lightning cables that a person could feasibly use in an entire lifetime. It's utter insanity that legislators haven't attempted to address the real sources of environmental damage, human rights abuses, and the very real security issue that these junk devices present. Fixation on the connector has been nothing more than political hand waving. I'm not against type-C, I prefer it, but it's clear to me that people who think this is a real issue are blindsighted.
- someonehere 3y ago
  According to this https://www.cultofmac.com/790897/today-in-apple-history-lightning-replaces-30-pin-dock-connector/ https://www.cultofmac.com/790897/today-in-apple-history-ligh... it was supposed to be USB 3.0 but there was only one device that utilized USB3.0 speeds: "Apple’s connector supported USB 3.0 host, but the only accessory that fully supported this feature was the camera adapter that includes a USB-A port. Most Lightning cables to this day support only USB 2.0, with a maximum data transfer speed of 60MBps." I seem to recall when lightning was announced, someone (probably Steve) said it was faster than the 30 pin. Then again Steve was known to blow smoke of products (remember, FaceTime was open source according to Steve when announced).
  - lxgr 3y ago
    Lightning supports two data lanes, so it's theoretically capable of USB 3 speeds. However, that would have required active/negotiating Lightning-to-USB-3 cables or adapters, since USB 3 requires three lanes, i.e. one more (two for SuperSpeed connections, and one for legacy USB 2.0 high speed connections), and the adapter/cable would have to figure out which one the connected host wants to speak and wire accordingly. At least one iPad does support USB 3 speeds over Lightning, but only in the other direction, i.e. when acting as an USB host using the "Lightning to USB camera adapter", which was really a generic USB host adapter and supported many more types of devices like audio interfaces, hard drives etc. – I suspect that adapter must be doing just that.
    - Dylan16807 3y ago
      > the adapter/cable would have to figure out which one the connected host wants to speak and wire accordingly There are two straightforward ways to avoid that and allow passive adapters/cables. 1. Use the two "Identification/control" pins to run the low speed lane. 2. Use both sides when supporting USB 3.

bananapub 3y ago

? lightning predates usb-c.

tzs 3y ago

> Apple created so much e-waste by refusing to play ball with USB-IF despite starting to use usb-c 8 years ago How much e-waste was actually created? All my several Lightning cables from various Apple device purchases are sitting in my excess cable pile [1], along with a bazillion USB cables from all my non-Apple device purchases, because usually the only times I need a new cable when I get a new device is when every prior device I've purchased that uses the same cable is still in use. If my Apple devices had used USB I'd still have the same number of cables in my excess cable pile. From an e-waste perspective what we need to do is stop including cables with everything. [1] My phone gets charged wirelessly. My iPad does get charged by cable, but I use an Anker 3-in-1 cable that has a USB micro-B end with a couple captive adaptors for USB C and Lightning. I use another of the Anker cables for charging my wireless mouse and keyboard.

faeriechangling 3y ago
In a hypothetical world where Apple started using USB-C with say, the iPhone 6 or 6s, we would have gotten to the point consumers had a surplus of cables much sooner. I have no doubt this would have encouraged a few more Android OEMs to stop shipping cables, in addition to the ones that already don't ship one like FairPhone. It's a pretty significant savings between lower BOM, being able to ship the phones in smaller boxes, and simplifying logistics. Having more of one cable type reduces the need for people to buy replacements for damaged cables because there are more spares available. A significant amount of consumers have only 1 usb-c or lightning cable lying around. Cables also aren't the only issue, various accessories are designed to be lightning compatible like AV adapters. The e-waste between all these factors is significant just because over a billion smartphones are shipped yearly. Even a little unnecessary waste adds up quick at that scale. Which justifies the course of action the EU took.
- philistine 3y ago
  USB-C did not even exist when the iPhone 6 came out in 2014. It was unveiled but not finalized until 2016, and Apple themselves were at the forefront of its adoption. You're saying steam trains in the 1800s would have produced less global warming if they had used diesel. When the gas engine did not yet exist. Apple probably chose to stick to Lighting specifically because they did not want to switch their connector so quickly.

jmull 3y ago

Aren't we all going to start throwing away perfectly good lightning cables now? It's switching connectors that's wasteful, and the EU thing is causing more switching sooner. A better idea would have been to require Apple and others to switch to the standard connector the next time they change the connector for a product line, without a specific timeline. Oh well. It may not be good for the planet, but at least we get to dunk on Apple!

Simulacra 3y ago
They literally just switched from lightning to USB-C. Did you not notice?
- jmull 3y ago
  Um, yes. Let’s follow the thread here… Apple’s decision to switch to USB-C now might have to do with the EU mandated deadline to switch to USB-C. If the EU had not set a deadline, then Apple might have waited longer. The longer between switches, the less overall switching in a given period of time, and therefore a reduced rate of switching-generated ewaste. I guess this stuff is a little too complex for the average voter to follow and the EU politicians saw an opportunity for an easy win, never mind the extra ewaste generated.

bobbylarrybobby 3y ago

What e-waste? I've been using the same lightning cables since forever.