3 ms·
Except if, you know, microUSB specs don't cover everything they need the adapter to do.
by batista 14y ago
Except if, you know, microUSB specs don't cover everything they need the adapter to do.
- ars 14y agoThey should have had two connectors, linked together. That way you can plug in just a standard microUSB, or a larger cable with microUSB right next to extra pins.
- CamperBob2 14y agoAnd there's already a connector that does exactly that, namely a USB 3.0 SuperSpeed connector ( http://www.coolgear.com/images/USB3-Micro-3FT.jpg http://www.coolgear.com/images/USB3-Micro-3FT.jpg ). Since they don't need SuperSpeed transfer rates, they could have used the SuperSpeed pins for their own purposes. NIH wins every time at Apple, it seems.
- taligent 14y ago>NIH wins every time at Apple, it seems. No not really. All of the ports on a Mac are standard.
- batista 14y ago1) The head of that "micro" cable is huge. 2) Does it have the same power characteristics, is it suitable for other needs (video, audio, etc)? Is the chipset needed to drive it small and capable enough or does it tax the main CPU? I'm pretty sure there's more to the story. >NIH wins every time at Apple, it seems You mean like: USB3, Firewire and Thunderbolt ports (cross industry standards)? The only thing Apple does custom and change all the time is their monitor interfaces.
- CamperBob2 14y ago1) The point is, a standard connector that does what they needed already exists. Given Apple's history, I'm guessing they won't use the bulky $1.99 cable from Monoprice.com. Instead, they will ship a $19.99 cable with a much smaller connector, and with half the quality and durability of said $1.99 Monoprice cable. 2) Any part that can handle 5 Gb/s Superspeed differential signals is guaranteed to have the necessary electrical characteristics to handle any conceivable A/V and control stream formats used by a phone. Physical-layer connectivity is not handled by the main CPU in any case. It's just a matter of selecting or designing the appropriate bus controller, which they will have done anyway in the course of switching to their new proprietary connector.
- gte910h 14y agoThe point of the 30 pin adapter is to make it easy as sin to make 3rd party components. The rewiring to go from the old 30pin to the new lightning doesn't appear to be very large. To go from analog/multichannel digital to USB is a relatively large change.
- CWIZO 14y agoWhat does microUSB not provide that they need?
- _djo_ 14y agomicroUSB has 4 ports, Lightning has 8 ports. Since only two of the microUSB ports are for data (the others are power and ground), that means Lightning has an additional 4 ports that can be dedicated to non-USB data I/O.
- pooriaazimi 14y agoLightening has 9 pins. The ninth is the outer metal strip.
- bryanlarsen 14y agoMicroUSB has 5pins, not 4. The additional pin is for USB host Mode switching. No more type a / type b nonsense. USB/mhl can do audio and video quite nicely, so there's absolutely no need for additional data pins. Multiplexing works quite nicely. The additional pins and aren't analog audio, apple said it was entirely digital. I suspect the additional pins are there solely to support the reversibility of the connector.
- _djo_ 14y agoThanks, sorry, my mistake. I was working on memory, been some time since I read up on this. I appreciate the explanation. It's certainly possible that the additional pins are for reversibility only, that's something I hadn't considered. I guess we'll have to wait until the first tear-downs and pin-out diagrams surface.
- _djo_ 14y agoLooking at the connector again it's pretty clear that there are 8 pins on either side, plus the 9th pin on the side. So they're definitely not there for reversibility. So whatever the purpose of the additional ports, the Lightning connector does have more ports than microUSB.
- 14y ago
- ja27 14y agoThen extend the microUSB port, similar to what HTC did with ExtUSB. That would allow charge / sync with a microUSB cable but still allow extended features through the same port.