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 Cable Contains TI Chip 'Likely' to Have Security Features
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And CRC is *neither* DRM, nor a 'security' feature. It's a *data-integrity* feature.
----------
Read the quotes from the article, where the author conflates CRC with 'security' features.
The article here is based on an article where the author mistook CRC for a security feature. CRC *is not* a security feature. There's no evidence presented that the chip in question (or any related design) has *security* features.
Simply put, the headline is misleading.
Tim goofed
Accessories are a major influence for purchase of iStuff.
Accessory makers are like software makers, the more one has on board, the more exposure iStuff gets.
Very likely the lack of compatibility caused many customers to not be first week iPhone 5 buyers, knowing they had no replacement or adapters for current equipment.
Jobs always announced major device introductions weeks or months ahead of going on sale, first iMac, iPhone, and iPad as examples, so accessory makers would have compatible products on the shelves.
Tim needs to screw this secrecy and give more vender access to certain aspects of the new models a few weeks ahead of official announcements.
Accessories are a major influence for purchase of iStuff.
Accessory makers are like software makers, the more one has on board, the more exposure iStuff gets.
Very likely the lack of compatibility caused many customers to not be first week iPhone 5 buyers, knowing they had no replacement or adapters for current equipment.
Jobs always announced major device introductions weeks or months ahead of going on sale, first iMac, iPhone, and iPad as examples, so accessory makers would have compatible products on the shelves.
Tim needs to screw this secrecy and give more vender access to certain aspects of the new models a few weeks ahead of official announcements.
If they are blatantly copying Apple's cable it is the same thing. You think this copying is ok because you will save a few bucks. Yet the Samsung lawsuits and the others has no effect on you at all but you think Apple should go after them. Quite hypocritical, isn't it? How can you be both for and against copying?
Not to be one of those irritating D's on this site... But didn't the iPhone 5 have record breaking 1st weekend sales? One that was only slowed down, really by supply...
They sold 5 million phones in 2 days. How many people do you think didn't buy because of the cable?
why you have to pay over £100 (that would be $160) for few adaptors??? (speakers, car, work, home)
or you "noting but Apple" or you , never mind
what else would it be about? They are a business?
Personally, I think having a new cable was brilliant on their part and was surprised it didn't come sooner.
Uggg, more techo-illiterate BS
"All use a single wire SDQ interface [snip] and all have some basic security features such as CRC [cyclic redundancy check] generation."
CRC is *not* a security mechanism, it *is* a communications mechanism.
A chip that contains a wired communications interface includes CRC is "yeah, duh".
"All use a single wire SDQ interface [snip] and all have some basic security features such as CRC [cyclic redundancy check] generation."
CRC is *not* a security mechanism, it *is* a communications mechanism.
A chip that contains a wired communications interface includes CRC is "yeah, duh".
Not just the cable, all types of accessories.
I would estimate the different connector and limited compatibility with older 30 pin caused 10% less initial sales.
Despite some bashing of Chipworks in a few other comments, they finally gave us proper photos of the PCB and even the die in the primary chip. And not surprisingly, that chip is related to a battery monitoring IC. (And not made by NXP which some had initially rumored due to the chip markings beginning with "NX20P3".) So kudos to them, and to Peter Bradstock: that's how it's done.
The USB D+,D- and GND all appear to pass right through the Apple Lightning to USB cable, so any signal switching for the data lines is likely handled entirely by the iDevice. The VBUS is not passed through, and is probably switched and or managed by the components in the Lightning connector. This seems rather reasonable and not terribly over-complicated, and far from DRM in any sense of that term. I think that Lightning only working with certain vendor specific hardware is more of a side effect rather than a primary intent.
And to all those hoping for $3 cables within the first month of a new interface's release, you might want to look into some basic economic trends. As long as supply is outstripped by demand, prices tend to remain high. Yes adding more production from third parties could potentially alleviate some of the supply pressure, but only if production isn't already limited by the availability of certain key components. Simply waiting for the initial demand to subside will lead to wider availability and eventually subsequent discounting. In other words, I'll be really surprised if everyone is still saying "Tim blew it" and "Apple failed completely" come January. Well at least regarding the availability of Lightning cables and accessories.
The USB D+,D- and GND all appear to pass right through the Apple Lightning to USB cable, so any signal switching for the data lines is likely handled entirely by the iDevice. The VBUS is not passed through, and is probably switched and or managed by the components in the Lightning connector. This seems rather reasonable and not terribly over-complicated, and far from DRM in any sense of that term. I think that Lightning only working with certain vendor specific hardware is more of a side effect rather than a primary intent.
And to all those hoping for $3 cables within the first month of a new interface's release, you might want to look into some basic economic trends. As long as supply is outstripped by demand, prices tend to remain high. Yes adding more production from third parties could potentially alleviate some of the supply pressure, but only if production isn't already limited by the availability of certain key components. Simply waiting for the initial demand to subside will lead to wider availability and eventually subsequent discounting. In other words, I'll be really surprised if everyone is still saying "Tim blew it" and "Apple failed completely" come January. Well at least regarding the availability of Lightning cables and accessories.
Demand for accessories is a side effect for the demand on electronic devices, not the other way around.
The average consumer does not have a clue about most accessories after the fact and usually after they buy their device. Except for the very small group who actually like to keep up with these things like on Macrumors.
I would say less then 1%, not 10%.
Fix this post
Can someone that actually knows anything about electronics please fix this garbage post. CRC has nothing to do with security. Guess what, USB itself uses CRC, along with almost every other serial transmission protocol known to man.
The SDQ interface appears to just be TI's serial interface similar to I2C, and SPI. Of course it would use CRC. These slow/cheap serial interfaces are very common to interconnect chips.
I have yet to see any evidence that there is any type of security or authentication at all in these cables. There is complexity, but complexity is not the same thing a security.
Can someone that actually knows anything about electronics please fix this garbage post. CRC has nothing to do with security. Guess what, USB itself uses CRC, along with almost every other serial transmission protocol known to man.
The SDQ interface appears to just be TI's serial interface similar to I2C, and SPI. Of course it would use CRC. These slow/cheap serial interfaces are very common to interconnect chips.
I have yet to see any evidence that there is any type of security or authentication at all in these cables. There is complexity, but complexity is not the same thing a security.
pretty simple: because they dont feel like selling one.
why wont you be able to get a third-party dock when theyre released?
"Digital Restrictions Management" and "Digital Rights Management" mean the same thing. DRM (when it works correctly) allows you to exercise your rights, but nothing more.
What you should complain about is the term "copy protection", where I really cannot figure out how it would protect any copies, and which should be called "copy prevention". If you figured out a way to make sure that copied CDs last longer, that should be called "copy protection".
----------
From experience, I bought a cheap Mini Display Port to VGA adapter, and it only works up to 1600 x 1200 pixels, so I had to buy an Apple one as well.
Didn't save a penny.I think a major reason for this program was to reduce the number of iDevices that people want Apple to repair under warranty. (And if you tell a customer "No, we are not going to repair your iPod because you damaged it yourself by using this rubbish cable that fried the innards of the iPod", you may be right, but you still have an unhappy customer).
...which is why youre not an electrical engineer. are you. just a hunch.
oh lawd. 4 pins isnt enough to do it all: charging, digital out, ipod contols, cover art, video out, external display support, tap events on external display, etc... the 30-pin dock supported a lot more functionality than you personally used.
----------
thats heart-breaking, bro.
ya think?
well, when you get a job in electrical engineering and manufacturing, maybe then you can tell us how long it should take to license, design, develop, test, and deploy brand new auxiliary products into the supply chain.
They should have just made a port where you can plug in any garden-variety mini-USB cable plus slots on each side of that to accept their own, wider connector.
OR make the whole thing CHEAP and OPEN so everyone else can adopt it.
It IS a nice connector, but it will generate equal amounts of FAIL as thunderbolt.
What's next?
A combined power-/ethernet-plug?
OR make the whole thing CHEAP and OPEN so everyone else can adopt it.
It IS a nice connector, but it will generate equal amounts of FAIL as thunderbolt.
What's next?
A combined power-/ethernet-plug?
Originally, USB requires a USB device to either be host or peripheral only, as you mentioned.
In USB 2, there was an addition to the standard where a device can be dual-role. As in, it can be a host or a peripheral by switching controller modes. (obviously, not simultaneously.) It's called OTG, short for On-The-Go.
USB OTG mode is what makes the iPad Camera Connection Kit work. The accessory ID chip in the camera connection kit dongle tells the iPad to switch this USB controller to host mode in order to connect the camera. There isn't any logic along the USB lines in the camera connection kit.
This is different from the other iPhone-compatible SD card readers like the zoomMedia, which do act as a host to the iPhone in the manner which you describe. From what I can gather, iPhones can enable OTG mode, but they don't have the necessary OS software to mount cards directly using the iPad Camera Connection Kit. So the accessory manufacturer does it their own way through their own accessory's controller and the app.
For more information, see docs like this:
http://www.gaw.ru/pdf/interface/usb/otg1_0_english.pdf
----------
Urk. TI isn't being taken over by Amazon. That'd be even dumber than Google buying Motorola.
The rumors are that Amazon want to buy TI's mobile processor business. Not the entirety of TI. The battery ID chips that may be related to this forum article wouldn't be part of that.
It's actually equivalent to Apple buying PA Semi.
----------
As numerous people have mentioned before, Apple isn't trying to secure the cable. The chip isn't for security.
----------
The iPhone does do the reassigning itself. But how does it know what to assign?
Answer: chips in the cable.
Technically, you could do without the chips in the cable and use sense resistors. But then you'll be lowering the reliability due to noise and limiting your expandability. From a strictly engineering point of view, the chips are slightly more expensive but a better solution.
Technically, you could also just use the 4 pins for USB. But you'd give up the ability to connect devices like SD card readers. (need 5 pins for that) And every accessory you attach would require even more expensive microcontrollers because they need to support host mode. You'd lose the ability to use the smaller, cheaper, and lower power consumption microcontrollers for all devices. This ends up increasing the costs for both the consumer and device manufacturer compared to Lightning.
I understand there are plenty of 30 pin accessories that are not under the MPI, that wasn't the question I posted.
Main reason I've told people to consider holding off on the new iPhone
My 4S is perfectly fine, but I might have upgraded were there not the hassle and expense of cables & adapters.
I understand Apple changing thier cable, sooner ior later change happens but I think they should have done everything they could to keep the cost down on the cables/adapters and made them more widely available.
I think it is hurting their sales of the new iPhone.
My 4S is perfectly fine, but I might have upgraded were there not the hassle and expense of cables & adapters.
I understand Apple changing thier cable, sooner ior later change happens but I think they should have done everything they could to keep the cost down on the cables/adapters and made them more widely available.
I think it is hurting their sales of the new iPhone.
Ecosystem is not just for contacts, apps, music, and videos.
Ecosystem is everything, including accessories.
the personal nature of smartphones today makes personalization accessories almost a necessity.
Estimates of iPhone 5 sales where 6 to 8 million on first weekend, Apple announced 5 million, and while 6 to 8 was over expectation, it was not wild.
I bet the second quarter drop for iP5 will not be as great as for past iPhones.