3 ms·
> It’s wild to think this would have shipped with lightning without government pressure. Is this true? I heard that Apple was planning the switch regardless (o
by christophilus 3y ago
> It’s wild to think this would have shipped with lightning without government pressure.
Is this true? I heard that Apple was planning the switch regardless (or at least an adapter change). The only reason it took so long was that they had committed to keeping the adapter stable for a few generations to avoid the appearance of churn. I can’t remember where I heard this, though, so I may be completely wrong.
- whywhywhywhy 3y agoThink it's obvious that isn't the case otherwise why would they have launched the AirPod Pro 2 without it. Don't non-pro iPads still ship without it?, Recent iMac refresh that required all custom cabling for the peripherals still shipped lightning.
- kgermino 3y agoYa there’s obviously a balance between backwards compatibility and jumping to the new best thing. When they launched the lightning port in 2012 they said it’d be the connector for the next decade, and changing too quickly would have upset people who have a bunch of lightning stuff but no, or not as many, USB-C cables. There’s a balance. They’ve been rumored to be heading to USB-C for a few years (before EU action) and the EU doesn’t require the switch until next year, so this was technically not required by the new rules. My best guess is that they were moving to USB-C anyway and at most the EU rule moved it up a year or two but who knows