What's next? See (C), senor. I mean, even cheap android phone makers have switched over to USB-C. Get it done, Apple.
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 Port is Nearing Its Expiration Date, So What's Next for the iPhone?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you have the courage of your convictions, yes. Otherwise the arrogance of touting your environmental commitments while removing the port that affords the least damaging charging solution equals a big helping of hypocrisy.
Adult decisions aren't easy and Shiller & Co. are compensated well enough for us to expect them to make those decisions.
Yeah after using the ipad mini with USB-C I realized that while I might not use it very much they should really do it on the iphone as well. I mean the iphone is like a complete computer, you could dock it and operate with it using a keyboard and mouse on an external display and it would be pretty awesome. It would be more like apple though to make something that works like USB-C but uses their own proprietary plug instead
They will continue to use lightning because it makes them more money. It doesn't matter if there is a superior and more convenient way to do it.
They implemented MagSafe because it makes them more money. It doesn't matter if it interferes with a more compatible and industry standard way of wireless charging (Qi), they can charge for MagSafe compatibility, so that's why its there.
Folks need to realize Apple is 100% motivated by squeezing extra dollars out now. While Apple has always had profit motive (which it should as a company with shareholders), the level to which it squeezes profit out of every little thing has gone up to levels I haven't seen before.
They implemented MagSafe because it makes them more money. It doesn't matter if it interferes with a more compatible and industry standard way of wireless charging (Qi), they can charge for MagSafe compatibility, so that's why its there.
Folks need to realize Apple is 100% motivated by squeezing extra dollars out now. While Apple has always had profit motive (which it should as a company with shareholders), the level to which it squeezes profit out of every little thing has gone up to levels I haven't seen before.
The port doesn't need upgrading. And it is not the limitation of the port or the plug. Updating the controller inside the cable and the phone is sufficient enough for USB 3.1 or even USB 4.0 Gen 3x1 ( 20Gbps ).
The problem is these controller are expensive and large. But yes, it is sort of strange these RAW are so large and they are still doing USB 2.0 speed.
As a physical connector Lightning seems sturdier to me but USB-C has the backing of the rest of the industry and is nearly universal at this point.
Lightning already supports USB 3.2 Gen1 1x1 (hope I am getting that one right - I mean 5GBps), but only on first and second-gen 12.9" and 10.5" iPad Pros. The following versions of the iPad Pro switched to USB-C and Lightning iPads (including the 10.5" Air!) and iPhone kept rolling out with USB2 support only.
Lightning to USB 3 Camera Adapter - Apple (UK)
Last edited:
This is not inherently an Apple problem. Apple is not the only company that uses proprietary tech.
The point still stands: for individuals in the Apple ecosystem, if they have an Apple Watch, they already need to bring along the proprietary charger for that device. The argument for "a single cable for everything" is already shot. Will you advocate for the implementation of USB C ports in the Watch, next?
Don't be silly.
If a device can use a single universal port, why not? I am also not saying a single cable for everything, tho it is a noble goal. I just think with the existence of USB C, the lightning cable is a joke in 2022, and it was in 2018 too. Apple is holding on to it solely for the MFI income, nothing more.
Obviously the watch is unique case.
Going portless isn't a great idea until CarPlay is only available and works well as a wireless system. It's not always a solid connection through Bluetooth I've found, and some brands only allow CarPlay through a wired connection, like Hyundai / Kia on their larger infotainment systems. It just feels like a bad idea at the moment...
USB-C should be a no-brainer at this point in the iPhone's development. Wireless charging/MagSafe is convenient for many situations, but doesn't work at all in others and has an environmental cost. Lightning had a great run, but is an old connector at this point, and most of us have other USB-C devices (often, lots of them). And we're now neck-deep in inconvenience land since we have to carry separate cables for our phones from what we use for even moderately-recent iPads, MacBooks, other devices, and we have to pay careful attention to have the right one(s) with us since the Lightning and USB-C cables look so similar, etc. It's maddening.
USB-C is an industry standard and, unlike some previous versions of USB, is a good one that does everything Apple needs. Apple should embrace it and should ditch Lightning at its earliest opportunity.
USB-C is an industry standard and, unlike some previous versions of USB, is a good one that does everything Apple needs. Apple should embrace it and should ditch Lightning at its earliest opportunity.
I am in agreement that the Lightning port certainly feels antiquated, but having kept tabs on Apple's device history the last several years, it would not surprise me in the least if instead of USB C, they went with an alternative (a variant of MagSafe is my personal guess).
I also agree the attachment to Lightning is strictly for monetary gain. And rather than lose that income, they'll convert Lightning into some other proprietary input.
Either way, it doesn't really faze me.
Two words: Wired Carplay. The vast majority of vehicles out there today don't have wireless support (and the dongles don't work worth a damn). Either apple would have to create a wireless dongle that does (and omg I'd buy one in a cold minute), or they'll continue to have to offer devices with ports.
Plus, I have zero interest trying to sync 500GB of content over wifi.
USB-C solves both problems.
Plus, I have zero interest trying to sync 500GB of content over wifi.
USB-C solves both problems.
Apple was able to implement USB 3.0 on the iPad Pro 10.5" with the Lightning port. I think that's why it's not impossible for Apple to pull off USB 3.1 over Lightning the iPhone 14 models.
Add one more: my $300 Apple-made Beats Studio 3 headphones use micro-USB. But my $70 Sony headphones use USB-C. Go figure.
This is why--in my opinion--that there's a fairly good chance the iPhone 14 Pro models may go USB Type C with Thunderbolt 4/USB4 support. Especially now that the chip design may allow for a full Thunderbolt 4/USB 4 controller to fit inside the iPhone 14's larger case design.
Well, I really hope they never convert to USB-C. Lightning is superior. Has a nice solid click. Not the mushy half-assed feeling of USB-C. My work supports many thousands of devices, both lightning and USB-C. Lightning is better. As for portless, I really hope they never go that route. At least until there is some small device for charging that connects to the bottom where the current port is and is not significantly larger than the plug on a lightning cable. Having to have a MagSafe charger on the back just to charge would be ridiculous, not to mention far less efficient.
When Phil Schiller introduced the Lightning connector at the unveiling of the iPhone 5 in September 2012, he called it "a modern connector for the next decade," and with that 10-year mark coming up later this year, questions remain over what the future of the iPhone looks like and whether or not that future will include a Lightning port, or perhaps no port at all.
Every iPhone since the iPhone 5 has featured a Lightning port, which Apple touted in 2012 as a "smaller, smarter and more durable" port compared to the previous 30-pin connector. Even as the majority of the company's iPad line and the entire Mac line now feature USB-C, the iPhone has become the odd one out with its inclusion of Lightning.
The smartphone industry has rapidly transitioned to USB-C, with the vast majority of handsets on the market featuring the more versatile port. Apple's reluctance to follow the industry in adopting USB-C has annoyed many customers, but it appears Apple is sticking with Lightning on iPhone for the considerable future.
Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, who frequently shares accurate insights into Apple's product plans, has said the company believes the adoption of USB-C would negatively impact its Made for iPhone (MFi) program and notes that Apple is concerned about lower standards of water resistance for USB-C compared to Lightning. Given those two points, Kuo says the iPhone will continue to feature Lightning for the "foreseeable future."
Apple's ultimate goal for the iPhone is to go completely portless, relying on MagSafe and wireless connections for charging and data transfer needs. MagSafe on the iPhone, which first debuted on the iPhone 12, is still not fully matured and is so far limited to charging. Apple is highly unlikely to abandon Lightning and adopt USB-C for only a few years before going portless. Instead, it's more likely to use Lightning while continuing to MagSafe matures for a future portless iPhone.
The European Commission could, however, impact how soon we get a portless iPhone. The EC has proposed a directive that would require all consumer electronic devices, including smartphones, tablets, cameras, headphones, portable speakers, and handheld videogame consoles, to feature a "common port," aka, USB-C. If the directive does pass in 2022, companies such as Apple will have two years to transition their devices to USB-C.
There are some caveats, though. On paper, the directive would constitute a significant change for the iPhone as it would be forced to include USB-C, but the directive only applies to devices that charge via cable.
A spokesperson for the EC confirmed to The Verge that if a device exclusively charges via wireless charging, it isn't required to include a USB-C port. That, alongside the two-year transition period that the directive would allocate to companies to transition to USB-C, gives Apple ample time to mature MagSafe and abandon Lightning in favor of an all-wireless future.
Apple's confusing port lineup has not gone unnoticed. Across the latest iPhone, iPad, MacBook Pro, Apple Watch, and AirPods models, Apple offers customers four completely different types of chargers to juice up their devices. Bloomberg's Mark Gurman highlighted the inconsistency in his Power On newsletter this past August. As Gurman noted at the time, "Lightning served Apple well since 2012, but USB-C has clearly won out across the industry and has become the default connector for new devices."
Article Link: Apple's Lightning Port is Nearing Its Expiration Date, So What's Next for the iPhone?
I tend to agree with your assessment of MagSafe. While I did find it convenient on my nightstand, I tend to think the heat made the battery on my 12 Max age faster than any other device I used with even standard wireless charging. I also agree that with all of their other devices (outside of the base model iPad) being on USB-C, sticking with Lightning on the iPhone seems weird. However, I presume this is due to conservatism with Apple's cash cow. While most geeks/tech-inclined people will rejoice at a switch to USB-C, I think many/most of those with iPhones will gripe about having to buy new cables and likely view this as a cash grab as many at the time did during the 30-Pin to Lightning transition, and there were a lot more obvious gains by switching at that time.
But whatever, I'd still like for them to put the iPhone and anything with a plug on USB-C. While the standard is still a bit of a mess of versions and capabilities, it's not nearly as bad to find a reliable cable as it was 4-5 years ago.
It's a pity Apple don't make a version of the MagSafe charger that has inbuilt WiFi. Such a device could detect when it is connected to Wired CarPlay, and act as a proxy. Large numbers of cars do not have wireless CarPlay.
If such a device existed, I could hop into my car with the phone in my pocket, and get access to wireless CarPlay, even though my car (Toyota) only provides wired CarPlay.
On a longer journey I could get the phone out of my pocket and slap it onto the MagSafe puck.
I know some third parties offer a wireless CarPlay gadget, but I do not trust them and won't use those. Most seem to be from China, run very hot, and sport fake CE certification.
Lightning/USB-C... shrug... it doesn't matter that much to me either way, so long as they also release a cheap, reliable device that would add wireless-carplay to cars that only have wired-carplay. It seems like most 3rd-party options are either unreliable or simply stop working after a few months -- something I've experienced twice now.
Every time I see mention of the possibility of iPhones going portless I gnash my teeth. No. Just no. Why even bother letting us record in ProRes if it takes hours to get that footage off the phone. USB-C/Thunderbolt, please. Like yesterday.