7 ms·

Those are very fair points. (Also acknowledging the sister comment that the particular adapters in my link are charge-only and wouldn't be helpful for your situ

Those are very fair points. (Also acknowledging the sister comment that the particular adapters in my link are charge-only and wouldn't be helpful for your situation). What I find annoying is that lighting cables are rent-seeking proprietary Apple tech, and not even universally used in their own product. Apple already on their own makes people have to re-buy peripherals when they change standards, so it's not like they have a high ground. And since you bring it up, I do actually hope that the USB-C form factor connector winds up being a permanent connector. Consider: AC mains power connector form factors, while they vary from country to country, are basically "finished" and don't have to keep getting revised every half decade. USB-C has proven to be tremendously scalable and imo is good enough that it could well be the final form for its use case for the foreseeable future.

xoa 3y ago
Thanks for the reply. A few thoughts/niggles, though again this is not a huge deal, more of a "pour one out" moment. >What I find annoying is that lighting cables are rent-seeking proprietary Apple tech I don't think this is a fair description frankly. Lightning was developed years before USB-C, which itself was heavily influenced by Apple, and the USB situation before that sucked. They themselves came up with something useful, better than what came before or the other options at the time. Sure, ideally they would have standardized it voluntarily and made it open for all, but by the same token why couldn't the rest of the industry be bothered to do a decent non-directional plug connector years before hand instead of monstrosities like the USB-3 Micro Type B? I think using "rent seeking" to mean "anything proprietary anyone develops and sells" starts feeling a little too expansive? >and not even universally used in their own product It's been universally used across what it was developed for though, the handheld devices. And in terms of raw performance capability and flexibility it's obviously much, much worse than Thunderbolt/USB-C which came later. I don't see why things would be better if it was on Macs? >Apple already on their own makes people have to re-buy peripherals when they change standards, so it's not like they have a high ground. Lightning has been around though 11 years, and the 30-pin connector 9 years before that. And would likely have been around years more without this. I don't think you can reasonably say they haven't had pretty decent runs when it comes to handheld/ultra portable devices? Apple has definitely been far, far faster moving when it comes to Macs for better and for worse. But again, I think that's not an apples-to-apples comparison, because computers almost always are connecting to things via cables not anything form fitting, they have plenty of space to work with. Which in turn means adapters really can be an acceptable (if suboptimal and disliked) solution. Reasonable minds can differ of course! >I do actually hope that the USB-C form factor connector winds up being a permanent connector. I really, really don't. It stinks so much having to use copper vs fiber. >USB-C has proven to be tremendously scalable I can use the same OS2 I got a decade ago for a 10gbps to run 200 Gbps now. Same cable. For a few bucks per meter. And can do it over anywhere from 1 meter to kilometers. Much better designs are possible then USB-C, and stuff could use it.
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  > I think using "rent seeking" to mean "anything proprietary anyone develops and sells" starts feeling a little too expansive? They charged a lot of money to make compatible devices. That makes it rent-seeking. > It's been universally used across what it was developed for though, the handheld devices. iPads are handheld aren't they? > I really, really don't. It stinks so much having to use copper vs fiber. Are you suggesting fiber couplings inside the plug? That sounds very delicate and prone to dirt, not good at all for a phone. If you want a fiber cable with transceivers on each end, there's plenty of those. But the price should tell you a lot about why we rarely use fiber for minor connections.

xoa 3y ago

Thanks for the reply. A few thoughts/niggles, though again this is not a huge deal, more of a "pour one out" moment. >What I find annoying is that lighting cables are rent-seeking proprietary Apple tech I don't think this is a fair description frankly. Lightning was developed years before USB-C, which itself was heavily influenced by Apple, and the USB situation before that sucked. They themselves came up with something useful, better than what came before or the other options at the time. Sure, ideally they would have standardized it voluntarily and made it open for all, but by the same token why couldn't the rest of the industry be bothered to do a decent non-directional plug connector years before hand instead of monstrosities like the USB-3 Micro Type B? I think using "rent seeking" to mean "anything proprietary anyone develops and sells" starts feeling a little too expansive? >and not even universally used in their own product It's been universally used across what it was developed for though, the handheld devices. And in terms of raw performance capability and flexibility it's obviously much, much worse than Thunderbolt/USB-C which came later. I don't see why things would be better if it was on Macs? >Apple already on their own makes people have to re-buy peripherals when they change standards, so it's not like they have a high ground. Lightning has been around though 11 years, and the 30-pin connector 9 years before that. And would likely have been around years more without this. I don't think you can reasonably say they haven't had pretty decent runs when it comes to handheld/ultra portable devices? Apple has definitely been far, far faster moving when it comes to Macs for better and for worse. But again, I think that's not an apples-to-apples comparison, because computers almost always are connecting to things via cables not anything form fitting, they have plenty of space to work with. Which in turn means adapters really can be an acceptable (if suboptimal and disliked) solution. Reasonable minds can differ of course! >I do actually hope that the USB-C form factor connector winds up being a permanent connector. I really, really don't. It stinks so much having to use copper vs fiber. >USB-C has proven to be tremendously scalable I can use the same OS2 I got a decade ago for a 10gbps to run 200 Gbps now. Same cable. For a few bucks per meter. And can do it over anywhere from 1 meter to kilometers. Much better designs are possible then USB-C, and stuff could use it.

Dylan16807 3y ago
> I think using "rent seeking" to mean "anything proprietary anyone develops and sells" starts feeling a little too expansive? They charged a lot of money to make compatible devices. That makes it rent-seeking. > It's been universally used across what it was developed for though, the handheld devices. iPads are handheld aren't they? > I really, really don't. It stinks so much having to use copper vs fiber. Are you suggesting fiber couplings inside the plug? That sounds very delicate and prone to dirt, not good at all for a phone. If you want a fiber cable with transceivers on each end, there's plenty of those. But the price should tell you a lot about why we rarely use fiber for minor connections.