It's crazy. At the local best buy these sell for $39. At that price it better flippin do my laundry for me too.
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 Connector Uses Adaptive Technology to Dynamically Assign Pin Functions
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You must be looking at the wrong part because they are $19.
Edit: Sorry, just realized you aren't living in the US. My apologies.
In my country, students design their own data transport protocols, write software for FPGAs, controller chips and so on. We have a very high average education level. That's probably the difference, and the reason why you are not able to understand, what i say. You are probably too young (not a student at a university). That's ok. But please do not tell us, Apples work is above the average, regarding a simple active cable. It is not the first active cable in the world, and therefore not revolutionary.
This is why apple thinks wireless charging is a bad idea. Not because it is a bad idea (it isn't) or that it would exclude wired charging aswell (it doesn't) but because together with NFC pairing it would make the entire accessory market non-device specific. Accessories would simply work with everything. Android, iOS or Windows Phone. It wouldn't matter. Apple makes loads of money selling licenses for their proprietary connectors and standards and selling the cables with a high margin. A classic apple 30-pin iphone connector costs 10 times as much as a microusb cable. Does not cost 10 times as much to make.
Sound check
Ah yes, new connector...nice.
But how does it SOUND? Over on the digital audio sites (etc). There is quite a bit of complaining regarding the THUNDERBOLT killing sound quality.
The major complaint is that the smarter cables, connectors, what have you, screw up the music files (?) Please understand that this is the same group that will not upgrade to Lion for the same reason.
Will this new connector have any adverse quality issues when music files are transferred or when we use our new devices as a source for more critical listening?
Ah yes, new connector...nice.
But how does it SOUND? Over on the digital audio sites (etc). There is quite a bit of complaining regarding the THUNDERBOLT killing sound quality.
The major complaint is that the smarter cables, connectors, what have you, screw up the music files (?) Please understand that this is the same group that will not upgrade to Lion for the same reason.
Will this new connector have any adverse quality issues when music files are transferred or when we use our new devices as a source for more critical listening?
Not buying it. If that was really all that was stopping them, they'd throw in some sort of verification chip on the inductive chargers as well.
That's a rather naive and narrow-minded way of looking at innovations.
Even if it's not the first active cable, it can still be innovative in many ways; just like the iOS and Android are not the first smartphone OS but they can still be innovative today and tomorrow.
Here's your cue samsung!
Image
With Apple's new Lightning connector on the iPhone 5 dropping to just eight contact pins from the 30 pins seen in the original dock connector and gaining the ability to be inserted in either orientation, many have wondered just how Apple has been able to maintain most of the functions of the original dock connector. Others have wondered why Apple simply didn't shift to micro-USB, an existing standard in a comparable form factor.
Developer Rainer Brockerhoff has been examining Lightning's technical features and over the weekend outlined his thinking on how the "adaptive" nature of the Lightning connector highlighted by Apple during the technology's introduction at the iPhone 5 media event has enabled flexible functionality with a minimum of pins. Brockerhoff notes that the Lightning connector appears able to sense what kinds of devices are being connected and to use chips embedded in the cable to assign pin functionalities appropriate for each situation.Double Helix Cables has now shared with AppleInsider a mapping of the pins on the two sides of the Lightning connector, demonstrating that this adaptive assignment of pin functions is required for the reversible nature of the plug.The adaptive nature of the Lightning connector may explain to some degree the rather high cost of cables and adapters for the new standard, as the $29 and $39 adapters for connecting 30-pin dock accessories to Lightning-equipped devices are required to contain hardware capable of working with the dynamically assigned pin functions. In addition, the adaptive nature indicates that the same Lightning interface could evolve over time to support new technologies within existing hardware.
Article Link: Apple's Lightning Connector Uses Adaptive Technology to Dynamically Assign Pin Functions[/QUOTE]
Image
With Apple's new Lightning connector on the iPhone 5 dropping to just eight contact pins from the 30 pins seen in the original dock connector and gaining the ability to be inserted in either orientation, many have wondered just how Apple has been able to maintain most of the functions of the original dock connector. Others have wondered why Apple simply didn't shift to micro-USB, an existing standard in a comparable form factor.
Developer Rainer Brockerhoff has been examining Lightning's technical features and over the weekend outlined his thinking on how the "adaptive" nature of the Lightning connector highlighted by Apple during the technology's introduction at the iPhone 5 media event has enabled flexible functionality with a minimum of pins. Brockerhoff notes that the Lightning connector appears able to sense what kinds of devices are being connected and to use chips embedded in the cable to assign pin functionalities appropriate for each situation.Double Helix Cables has now shared with AppleInsider a mapping of the pins on the two sides of the Lightning connector, demonstrating that this adaptive assignment of pin functions is required for the reversible nature of the plug.The adaptive nature of the Lightning connector may explain to some degree the rather high cost of cables and adapters for the new standard, as the $29 and $39 adapters for connecting 30-pin dock accessories to Lightning-equipped devices are required to contain hardware capable of working with the dynamically assigned pin functions. In addition, the adaptive nature indicates that the same Lightning interface could evolve over time to support new technologies within existing hardware.
Article Link: Apple's Lightning Connector Uses Adaptive Technology to Dynamically Assign Pin Functions[/QUOTE]
But then they wouldn't follow the widely accepted Qi standard and it wouldn't work in public places, such as airports and such.
Sure, they could develop their own standard for wireless charging aswell, but I don't think they could sell proposition, since there is nothing really wrong with the Qi standard that needs to be changed.
But that's exactly what you are arguing, that they developed their own standard to sell accessories. You can't argue both sides. Doesn't work that way.
Sorry, but this is one of those situations where Apple saw a problem and came up with an innovative solution. And I also agree with inductive charging. I was tempted several times to get a Qi setup, but I never really found that it offered enough of a benefit. There are too many other times I need to plug in the device. Carrying around an inductive mat just wasn't realistic. So why have 2 different charging solutions? It's a waste.
Edit: AND, the drawbacks of inductive charging FAR outweigh the benefits. Works great for a toothbrush, but not a highly mobile communication device.
Hahaha, I guess that depends on the listener and how phile-ish they are
I have friends that make $5K purchases that "improve" the SQ, and I can't tell the difference.I figured the high end audio crowd would use FLAC and some kind of exotic outboard DAC ... probably with a tube amp
Because they wanted the patent? They have a patent for round corners (iPad; Apple-Samsung lawsuit), why not for this nonsense?
Because it is superfluous, incompatible, non-EU, non-World-standard nonsense. They want a closed systems like iTunes, App Store and the Retina MBP.
A personal attack on some person is not an argument. You should know that.
Or the much more logical reason:
Wireless charging is a gimmick. Until Witricity - or something akin to it - becomes mainstream, wireless charging won't be any more convenient than wired charging therefore Apple doesn't feel the need to waste space in the device for it.
The new connector is nothing more than a forward thinking change that needed to made so they could decrease the overall thinness of the device/add more components inside. I'm not sure if there are any widely used connection standards that haven't changed at all in the last 10 years.
I just moved and went through a box yesterday and found 4 different types of micro/mini USB cables....have no idea what ones go with what device (devices I no longer have).
Apple's change in the connector is not some attempt at money-grabbing (I doubt they are terribly concerned with their profit margins from spare cables). Simply they needed to reduce the size of the adapter and decided to come up with a connector that will adapt with changing technologies over time - without needing to change the physical cable itself.
I don't know what you people have to complain about....
Read a few articles on the subject. While battery technology HAS advanced, it's widely regarded as the slowest advancement in most mobile technology. It is the bottleneck.
The idea that somehow Apple's app store is the only one of the major app stores to somehow be closed (when last I checked I can't install my Android apps on my iPhone or W8 device either) is ridiculous. That's the whole point of having multiple OSes competing in the marketplace. Each one offers a different ecosystem/user experience. Of course one's stuff isn't going to work with the other....
So you make the argument that we shouldn't be impressed/engineers shouldn't innovate unless it is World-compatible? Apple should've just used the inferior microUSB standard instead of creating a better solution because the better solution hadn't been adopted (or invented as you've offered no proof a cable like this is being used by any major mobile device maker) by the world?
That's a ridiculous proposition.
EDIT: And for anyone curious, the new Lightning connector costs Apple 8x more to make than the original 30-pin. Just some info.
I usually sync wirelessly... and in regards to everyone else's posts... I don't see how data transfer speeds make a huge deal... Even if my computer could transfer a million songs/videos in 10 seconds, I would still need to leave it plugged in much longer to charge it, if that's the selling point over wireless sync.
I understand faster is better, but I don't really think it's necessary... or at least a ground to make it a deal breaker or an issue.