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 to 30-Pin Adapter Torn Apart, Reveals Several Chips and Copious Glue
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's just a frickin' adapter. If this was priced at say, $15, no-one would give a rats ass, never mind have entire threads and breakdowns devoted to its internals. Insane.
It'll go even more crazy when they bring out the HDMI version and add another $20 on top of the $39.
It'll go even more crazy when they bring out the HDMI version and add another $20 on top of the $39.
If you think designing a connector that does what this has to without needing accessory makers to somehow get drivers onto the iPhone, then you probably also believe that Apple 'should just have jused a mini USB.'
The cable replaces drivers by having specific pins that the acc. makers talk over.
But I guess its just easier to throw out the 'Apple is greedy' meme and light up another bowl.
#3 - Really? Why should it be on the bottom? When I have my phone in my pocket, I want to be able to plug in my headphones from the top - not at the bottom where the cable would have tension and eventually break or ruin the connector. It also interferes with most car cradles and general mp3 accessories that use a phone plug instead of the dock connector.
The headphone jack placement is one of the many reasons why I am not upgrading my phone this cycle.
Until APple demonstrates that Lightning provides any benefit to the consumer, the criticism is justified. Upgrading from an iPhone 4 to 5 would cost me something like $100-150 in connectors and cables (car charger, adapter, extra cable for the office, etc.) on top of the phone cost. For that additional cost I expect something other than having the headphone jack on the bottom.
Thinner? Who cares? The iPhone 4 was a nearly perfect size. If they'd left the 5 at the same thickness, they could have included more battery life.
Symmetrical? Again, who cares? Was this really an issue for anybody?
Functionality? Right now it's a negative. Where's the HDMI output for Lightning? Supposedly it will be possible, but it's not there now, unlike the 30-pin connector.
Maybe this will all be different in another year. Maybe Lightning will provide all sorts of tangible benefits and additional functionality. But right now it's an extra cost that obsoletes old accessories and decreases functionality. So yes, criticism is justified.
I see it does a lot of "fancy" things. But are they necessary and could they have been done in a manner which didn't reply on all the gadgetry?
I didn't say Apple was greedy. I said that the solution they came up with was profitable. Are you suggesting the solution they came up with isn't?
the 30-pin port could have been redesigned to be smaller without needing this level of complex circuitry. the extra cost solely was done to lock down accessory cables. it is foolish to think Apple did this because it would give the consumer unlimited future possibilities
you act like it was the 30-pin connector or the Lightening connector...or nothing. that is what Apple has led you to believe and it has worked in your case
What's the advantage of 'intelligent' cables?
First we had Thunderbolt, now we have Lightning: Cables that are no longer just wires and plugs, but (more or less) sophisticated integrated circuits. As a consequence, they actually cost money to make and therefore are expensive to buy.
I can't really see the advantage of putting so much 'intelligence' into the cables if you could just as well have it in the sockets, ie in the devices. in that case, all the ICs would required just once (in the iPhone or the Mac) and then of course in each accessory or device. In the end, less ICs woudl be required because usually I have one cable for each accessory or device (and therefore 2 ICs), while I only need 1 IC for each accessory / device if it was included there. Furthermore, maybe no discrete ICs would be required in the device/accessory because there is sufficient electronics in there anyway that could take over the respective tasks.
Or am I missing something here?
First we had Thunderbolt, now we have Lightning: Cables that are no longer just wires and plugs, but (more or less) sophisticated integrated circuits. As a consequence, they actually cost money to make and therefore are expensive to buy.
I can't really see the advantage of putting so much 'intelligence' into the cables if you could just as well have it in the sockets, ie in the devices. in that case, all the ICs would required just once (in the iPhone or the Mac) and then of course in each accessory or device. In the end, less ICs woudl be required because usually I have one cable for each accessory or device (and therefore 2 ICs), while I only need 1 IC for each accessory / device if it was included there. Furthermore, maybe no discrete ICs would be required in the device/accessory because there is sufficient electronics in there anyway that could take over the respective tasks.
Or am I missing something here?
So do you turn your phone upside down every time you put in your pocket? When I hold my phone the headphone jack is on the bottom which when I slide it into my pocket is then on top and the cable comes straight out. Much better than previous generations.
It reminds me of the 80s.
Remember when, if you bought a printer, you needed a cable AND an interface? This is a throwback to that. Just that the interface is built into the cable.
Quite frankly - I'd rather have an extra app or driver have to be installed and have "dumb" cheap cables vs expensive smart cables.
none of the above 3 "benefits" you mention are specific to the proprietary Apple Lightening connector. Apple could have achieved all of that without this ridiculous level of circuitry complexity and cost, solely implemented to monopolize accessory cables
we have intelligence in the cable
pay us more!!!
it is not even faster than the older cable it replaces. who cares? I am happy with old cable and how it performed.
making it smaller - Yes!
making it expensive and incompatible - NO!
pay us more!!!
it is not even faster than the older cable it replaces. who cares? I am happy with old cable and how it performed.
making it smaller - Yes!
making it expensive and incompatible - NO!
Are you inferring my device is defective? That would suck, as it's my second (my first had wifi issues, whereas this one does not).
You can put the phone in your pocket upside down, it's not as if you're looking at the screen ...
But, seriously, I feel you. I've one of those headphone jack to cassette adapters in my car (yes, old enough to have a cassette player). With my iPhone 3G, it was no problem to put the phone in the drink holder and have the cord out the top. With my iPhone 5, I'm having to put it in the drink holder upside down and I can't see the album art.
Micro USB is not a good solution. Every Micro USB device I've had is finicky as can be. I don;t know if the cable connectors aren't made well or what but I've never had one that was 100% reliable.
Plus Apples dynamically switches pin assignments making much more versatile.
??? No, which is exactly my point. I slip it into my pocket, right side up. The top of the phone, as well as the jack, are faced towards me where I can easily plug in the headphones, or hit the button to mute the ringing.
Right now the only thing that's versatile about it is that you can plug it in in either direction. Yay.