It's been done before, I don't see how you've called them out beyond being completely wrong.
----------
What competitor has faster I/O on their NAND? Maybe you should actually do a little research before you make these claims.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Another Image of New Lightning Cable with Reversible USB Connector Surfaces
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's been done before, I don't see how you've called them out beyond being completely wrong.
----------
What competitor has faster I/O on their NAND? Maybe you should actually do a little research before you make these claims.
Please point to any fact's you have.
Cambrookpro's pic:
vs original usb connector below:
It's obvious that the piece with the contacts is much thinner, leaving a gap on both sides, with contacts on both sides. If you have any proof of this design failing, as they have been around, then please post it. Since I have never actually used one I make no claims either way.
PS: It's not hard to get this info by looking around.
Last edited:
Good question, I'm still trying to put in a USB cable into my MBP the wrong way
This is for us:
Just because a new standard is coming doesn't mean it's going to be adopted the next day. 2016/2017 you will see them everywhere, until then, people still need to plug in their devices.
Infact many manufactures plan to offer USB legacy and the new C standard.
With any Mac. This is just a reversible cable, it has nothing to do with usb 3.0
Last edited:
If you had read any of my other posts, you would have seen that I agree with you.
In other words, I was joking.
For the love of god please, Apple, don't patent this.
I want all my cables to do this now.
Apple's patent application for this connector can be found here. However, as many posters have pointed out, these reversible Type-A plugs have been around for quite some time and patent applications for them extend back as far as 2004. Apple's patent is simply more specific to their particular implementation and manufacturing processes.
How embarrassing that Apple did this before USB will with Type C...
P.S: Am I the only one who wonders how that cable will physically fit into ordinary USB slots on laptops, etc. ?
The center tongue is thin and can deflect slightly, the shield is the same as any USB Type-A plug. There are 18 Apple employees listed as contributors to the Type-C specification. They helped make it, and they will certainly use it. That will in no way cause the billions of Type-A receptacles in use to suddenly change form. Type-A will be around and supported for at least another 10 years.
Considering Apple put a fair amount of effort into helping shape the Type-C spec, I wonder at what point they might abandon Lightning on iOS devices. I'm not sure standardizing trumps the benefits that come with being able to control the MFi ecosystem through a proprietary connector.
Yes. That's the point. It's a USB Type-A male plug.
Apple designed this particular connector. The USB 3.0 Promoter Group never specified a reversible Type-A male plug.
So close, up until that last last line. The USB 3.1 specification, which was finalized last year, called for the same plugs and receptacles as USB 3.0, which are also backwards compatible with USB 2.0 and by extension previous specs. The Type-C connector specification was just completed, and supports USB 2.0 as well as SuperSpeed / Enhanced SuperSpeed operation. Like Power Delivery or Battery Charging, it's a separate spec from USB 2.0/3.0/3.1 and can apply to ports with a range of capabilities.
The NAND in iPhones has been capable of faster than USB 2.0 speeds for years. In order for an iOS device to support SuperSpeed transfer rates, Apple would need to license a USB 3.x xHCI IP block from somebody and integrate it into their custom SoC designs, whereas it's fairly trivial for OEMs using Qualcomm SoC's that already have USB 3.0 controllers to implement that feature. I'm guessing that it ultimately comes down to a cost/benefit analysis and Apple feels the increase in TDP and die area aren't yet worth it for this particular feature.
This is not a Type-C connector. Neither USB 3.0 "SuperSpeed" or USB 3.1 "SuperSpeedPlus" require a Type-C connector. Those specs were originally designed to use several plug and receptacle styles including Type-A with 9 contacts, which is the most common for host port connections on PCs.
On a Type-A plug, the 5 additional contacts used for SuperSpeed / SuperSpeedPlus signaling are located on the tongue behind the four contacts used for legacy USB 2.0 signals and VBUS. Annoyingly, all of the photos made public thus far of this new Apple connector fail to show the area where the SS contacts would be. However, judging by Apple's recently filed patent application, I'd be willing to wager this is a USB 2.0 only connector.
USB 3.1, Power Delivery 2.0 and the Type-C spec are actually really well done in my opinion, and I was a vocal critic of both USB 2.0 and 3.0. Read the actual specs. They fixed a multitude of sins with these revisions and finally created something that satisfies existing requirements as well as being considerably more flexible and forward-looking.
The Type-C connector will eventually replace Type-A for PC's, Type-B for devices, and Micro-A/B for portable devices, which will be awesome. This is also very likely to be the new Thunderbolt connector when Alpine Ridge and Skylake drop.
Last edited:
I wouldn't be surprised to see it show on the iphone6. It's a simple enough thing to produce
Too expensive at the moment. (Not to mention they aren't being produced in vast quantities...or any quantities.) Especially if we want Apple to upgrade capacity, which has been stagnant for way too long.
That was my point.
(To the one I replied to, -Hustler1337-the same you replied to.)
It's his conspiracy theorist motivation that undercuts him. Look, companies analyze cost versus benefit benefit when deciding how to make their product. You wanna know why lots of PC are made out of plastic? Because it's cheaper. But to go from the reasonable and uncontroversial notion that companies take costs into account when designing products to the assertion that Apple intentionally holds back battery capacity in the iPhone in a devious scheme to subconsciously goad people to replace their phones two years later is the kind of leap in logic typical of armchair conspiracy theorists. There's no evidence of this while there's plenty of counter-evidence for this which of course, is ignored by the conspiracy theorists. For example, why does Apple offer a battery replacement program for your iPhone and iPad if it wants you to get a new device? It's not free but it's $79-$99 depending on the device which is a lot less than buying a new iPhone or iPad. Doesn't this undercut Apple's plot to get people to carrying out worn out phones that lose their juice in an hour, forcing them to run to their nearest Apple Store and purchase a new iPhone or iPad? Or why has Apple and Intel improved the battery life of Macbook Air/Pro with each new generation? Wouldn't it be more consistent with the conspiracy theory if laptop battery life remains unchanged or dropped? Or is only the iPhone division signed up for this plot?
I could go on and on but suffice it to say that the level of paranoia you need to believe this **** is tiresome but then, people still think the Cubans killed Kennedy and Monroe. Yes, Apple does nickel-and-dime people all the time (I just noticed the Mac Pro doesn't come with a mouse or keyboard, you have to buy it separately) and its prices are padded to produce industry-leading margins but that is NOT the same thing as "Apple uses lower capacity batteries so their lifespan ends faster and you buy a new phone quicker." And when Apple DOES do exactly what these conspiracy theorists say it won't next month by putting in bigger batteries? The conspiracy theorists will move onto their next big conspiracy (most likely, iOS 8 has been intentionally designed to be a bigger battery drain than iOS 7 to offset the longer life from a bigger battery). It never ends with these people.
Do you chew on yours?
Family of five, here. All with iPhones, four with iPads, extra lightning cables in each of our three cars for convenient charging, etc. Not one cable has come apart on us.
Seems very un-apple to implement and design a cable that people will undoubtedly try to force in the wrong way and break their computer... Always remember "it just works" is possible only by stripping out as many breakable things as they can... And a moving part on a *cable*? Seems a little far-fetched to me.
----------
Probably because no one cable is getting used all that much. One device, one cable and you'll find out how well they stand the test of time.
For the love of god please, Apple, don't patent this.
I want all my cables to do this now.
Doubtful they could, since TrippLite has had these for a few years now...
If it's thin enough it should be good. It won't have to bend very much at all. Here's a USB 2.0 drive I have:
The alignment is not perfect, but it gives an idea. It was harder to get the dead center shot with minimal shadow casting than I thought.
I wonder why they just hadn't designed the A connector this way in the first place.