Nope.
It is indeed a smartchip that controls the pinout.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/12...ally_assigns_pins_to_allow_for_reversible_use
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.
Apple's Lightning Authentication Reportedly Cracked, Unauthorized Third-Party Cables Coming
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nope.
It is indeed a smartchip that controls the pinout.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/12...ally_assigns_pins_to_allow_for_reversible_use
That's the basic idea.
It also had a head phone jack, so you could plug your headphones into the dock instead of the iDevice (some devices have the headphone jack on the bottom, so you couldn't have it plugged into a dock and headphones at the same time).
And that's what I'm saying is nasty.
----------
Nope, sorry, I only have that link. It doesn't make sense to me that the cable is doing pin remapping. The "negotiator" chip should sit in the phone and "remap" pins on the phone side before sending it off to the controller.
But like I said, if it's only a "pin remapping controller", then Apple won't be able to control much longer who can simply source these and 3rd party accessories using these controllers will simply appear. If it is an authentication chip, then that is bad.
http://brockerhoff.net/blog/2012/09/23/boom-pins/
Seems like it's quite a bit more than strict/simple remapping. Looks like the pins can be dynamically used for data or power or ...
B
I'd really like an iPhone 5 dock that uses a 30-pin connector to get power from the wall. That way I could use one of my many 30-pin power cords to charge my iPhone 5 by my bed every night, and could leave the supplied lightning cable by my computer, or in the car.
That's funny, as the last paragraph of that article states
The inclusion of an authentication chip in Apple's Lightning cables means consumers are advised to steer clear of cheap third-party cables that have appeared for sale online out of the Far East. According to Peter, there is "basically no way those are functional cables."
So it is a pin remapping chip AND an authentication chip. Apple gets to do whiz-bang pin remapping AND lock out 3rd party cables.
Okay, I want to play a little bit...
Well, actually, yes it does.
Except that there needs to be a smart chip in both places for the kind of dynamic pin out control that we're talking about...
Yes, what you drew were basically the same thing. But that's not reality. Reality is something more like this:
This kind of dynamic assignment of pins REQUIRES controllers on both ends for a hardware handshake. So either you need to have a proprietary port on the other end of the cable, or you need to have a control chip in the cable itself. There's just no way that a single control chip could actually identify the incoming signal, given the potential variety of possible signals. Dynamically going from 30+ channels to 8 channels is not a trivial thing, as you seem to think it is.
This may or may not be true (others have offered links that contest this). Regardless, I don't have a big issue with this, per se. What I will grant is that Apple needs to get off their collective buts and work with 3rd party manufacturers to get the Made for iPhone Lightning accessory programs in gear and on the market. Failing to do so is just generating ill will.
Well, actually, yes it does.
Except that there needs to be a smart chip in both places for the kind of dynamic pin out control that we're talking about...
Yes, what you drew were basically the same thing. But that's not reality. Reality is something more like this:
Code:
Connector (number of pins depends on the connector)
||
(at least 30 possible data/power channels)
||
Smart Chip
||
Lightning Connector (8 pins)
||
Phone Connector
||
Internal Data Controller
||
at least 30 output channelsThis kind of dynamic assignment of pins REQUIRES controllers on both ends for a hardware handshake. So either you need to have a proprietary port on the other end of the cable, or you need to have a control chip in the cable itself. There's just no way that a single control chip could actually identify the incoming signal, given the potential variety of possible signals. Dynamically going from 30+ channels to 8 channels is not a trivial thing, as you seem to think it is.
This may or may not be true (others have offered links that contest this). Regardless, I don't have a big issue with this, per se. What I will grant is that Apple needs to get off their collective buts and work with 3rd party manufacturers to get the Made for iPhone Lightning accessory programs in gear and on the market. Failing to do so is just generating ill will.
This article is confusing. I believe that the guy who did the original research concluded that "As such, he believes that dynamic Lightning pin assignment is performed by a chip included on the iPhone 5."
Then AppleInsider adds that "Dynamic pin assignment performed by the iPhone 5 could also help explain the inclusion of authentication chips within Lighting cables." I think they have no clue and are just trying to find an excuse for the existence of the authentication chip.
From a design perspective, to put pin assignment chip in the cable would be rather stupid. Why would Apple do it? It's much better to have one chip in the phone itself than to include it in each cable.
You're missing something, and I'm not quite sure how. The phone knows it's a phone. It doesn't know what's at the other end of the male Lightning connector that's just been plugged in. The smart chip/authentication chip is there to identify what the phone has just been plugged into.
In your example, with all the 'smarts' on the phone, the thing telling the phone what its connected to (being in the phone) *NEVER CHANGES*, regardless of what the phone is being plugged into. The phone doesn't have to tell the *device* what it is. The device has to tell the *phone* what it is.
Here's a fixed version (1), vs your version (2):
Code:
D: device, A: authentication chip, P: Phone, M: Male connector, F: female connector
1) D----A--M F-------P
2) D-------M F--A----PWith the authentication chip (the smarts) on the device-side, rather than the phone-side, the indicator of what it's being plugged into changes *along with the thing it's being plugged into*. The current 'device' in question is a USB sync/charge cable. One that has recently begun shipping is a Lightning to 30-pin adapter. Future devices could be any number of things.
With your version of the layout, you plug the phone into a device, and the only thing it can tell about the device is that it has a connector that fits in the socket, because every time it queries the authentication chip, it gets the *exact same* response.
With the correct version of the layout (which Apple is using), the phone can tell *what type* of device it is plugged into, and configure the pin-out accordingly. It can do this because the authentication chip sends back a different signal depending on what it's built into.
If the authentication chip is as simple as something that passes voltage onto all the lines it's wired to, there would (with the 8 non-ground pins) be up to 256 possible 'device classes' (255, if no signal means no device). If it's more complex (such as high/low voltage, or an actual value on one pin) the possible device class count could be significantly larger.
----------
It's quite simple. There's circuitry in the iPhone to allow it to dynamically remap the pin-out. There's an authentication chip in the cable (and other devices) which tells the phone what type of device it's been plugged into, so that it knows *how* to remap the pin-out.
Without the chip in the cable (or other accessory), the phone has no way to determine what pin-out it should dynamically configure.
----------
If you're going to 'negotiate', you need (at least) two parties. At the very least, there needs to be some form of feedback from the connected device that the phone can use to determine how to remap those pins. You're mistaking the 'identifier' for the 'negotiator' as you call it. The 'negotiator' *is* in the iPhone, the 'identifier' is the chip in the cable.
To drop it in to charge one-handed with less thought/effort than attaching a cable (a two-handed operation). And then grab it back again with equally little effort. It makes it easier to keep your phone charging when not in use: have a dock on your desk and its just like hanging up a land-line. You dont even think about it, but later on when you go out your phone is nicely topped-up!
Secondarily, it also looks tidier than having a cable flopping on your desk (or falling behind it) and it props the phone vertically if you like to see the time, weather, current music, or whatever.
And if you connect from the dock to your stereo system or TV, it makes that process one-hand easy too.
I dont always use a dock, but I do like them.
Yes, true. But I was responding to the more general question of "Why does everyone care about USB 3 on a phone?"
USB 3 wouldn't useless, because the iPhone isn't just a phone.
Nope.
The article is playing fast and loose with the term authentication.
Authentication.....
Identification.....
All it is a chip that identifies the device being attached to the phone and maps the pins accordingly.
We went through the same thing with the "authentication" chip in the Apple-speced headphones until it was discovered that it was simply the controller for the FF/RW, last-track, next-track iPod interface.
Besides..... the point of this thread was that the chip has already been duplicated.
So much for locking out 3rd parties.
Your argument is valid only if someone is trying to use old DVI or VGA or Camera connector with IP5. For a standard charging/sync cable the "other party" is a standard USB with Postive/Ground/Data+/Data-. Assuming there is no dynamic Positive/Ground going on only Data part is Dynamic. Even in earlier connector 28/30 ping are for proprietary use.
With OTA Activation/OTA Updates/Cloud/WiFi Sync most of the users need this cable only for charging. Those who want to connect special equipment can buy adapter rather than every one paying $19 for a cable just to charge.
Apple can also tell when your device has been toasted by a knock off. Get your wallet out.
----------
...and phones home.
hmm so if im a hardware company and i spend a couple million inventing a brand new way of connecting my products together, instead of selling them at a profit in order to recoup my R&D losses i should just....give it away for free? is that what youre saying?
interesting way to run a hardware business.
----------
except where it wouldnt, like when the onboard storage is the bottleneck.
Which shouldn't be an issue whether phone side or cable side. You and I both know that the cable is simply an extension of the pins in the phone.
The only real issue could be with space on the phone's PCB between the connector assembly and the actual lightning controller.