3 ms·
IMO, Lightning was a better physical connector. But a near-universal standard is better.
by sgarland 1y ago
IMO, Lightning was a better physical connector. But a near-universal standard is better.
- brookst 1y agoLightning puts the main failure modes device-side. Apple’s learnings, which they contributed to USBIF as part of the USB-C effort, were to put the mechanical failure points in the cable, not the device.
- Uvix 1y agoUSB-C may have added a mechanical failure point in the cable, but the port is still fragile. Possibly more so than Lightning, with the delicate little tab inside.
- Shekelphile 1y agoI have no clue how you're drawing that conclusion. The lightning connector is indisputably more durable than USB-C and failures of lightning ports outside of extreme abuse is pretty much unheard of.
- 2muchcoffeeman 1y agoI think people argue this because the little pins for lightning are in your device. If these break there’s no fix. The flexible pins on USBC is in the cable. Do if the pins break, you get a new cable. Thought arguably, you now have this thin plastic flappy bit. But none of the parts that are meant to flex are in your device.