HandITOVER
macrumors 6502
SMH.
Last edited:
European Lawmakers Want to Force All Smartphones to Have Same Charging Port, Apple Defends Lightning
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
beanbaguk
macrumors 65816
Another cable type?!
You guys are not following, don't understand, or are missing the point.
This is EXACTLY what the EU wants to avoid. More cables.
So no. My prediction is Lightning 2 will not happen, and Apple will move to USB-C.
Well, "500 million" people already voted for the European Parliament and their countries' governments.
I7guy
macrumors Westmere
This isn’t as complex as taxes, so it won’t drag on long. Say goodbye to lightning
It’s been emotional!View attachment 888891
in my opinion lightning is a better connector as well.
USB-C's can still be broken, caved in etc (not as bad a USB-A) or have debris go inside them I think having a solid connector like lightning in those regards is better.
however lightning cables (especially Apple's)tend to be weak at the joints even with MFI certified brands that tout the strength of there cables this usually becomes an issue, USB-C especially on cheap cables isn't immune to this but being a larger connector it physically can have stronger connectors that are less bulky and is less prone to the issue.
another downside to lightning is lack of pins 8 on each side while being reversible means trickery for USB 3 and that's only going to get worse as specs move forward
.
i think its a large reason the iPad pro was the 1st to support USB 3 (having a port that could recognize and address the 16pins independently.)
hypothetically Apple could get USB 3 on older devices treating the shrowd as the 9th pin to ground so it could meet the minimum needed for 3.0 but apple tends to push for upgrades not innovating on previously released products.
so both have pro's and cons but lightning has some technical downsides with literally no upsides vs USB-C
considering USB-Cs growing prevalence in most industries i want that switch to happen sooner rather than later
the other main reason even if lightning was functionally as capable as usb-c would be hopefully in the next few years pro models can move from USB-C to thunderbolt in hopes of faster transfer speeds and hypothetical features like partitioning off sections to create "Target Disk Mode 2.0" (yeah i know unlikely with Tim Cook's Apple but i can dream)
DeepIn2U
macrumors G5
mans that’s the real reason: Apple sells a licensefor 3rd parties to use the connector to lightning as well as the cables and dongles!
Apple is protecting their revenue streams.
can a heavily invested investor please ask Apple how much it makes from lighting cables, adapters and licensing? Very curious if this is included within “other” category?!
brixtonboy
macrumors newbie
I brought though the internet a pair of Apple EarPods none original. They were a fraction of the price.
And much to my surprise came with a lightning cable. These copies normally use usb, this is the first time l've seen it. However I have no intention of using it with my iPhone 8 just in case.
Maybe the Chinese or Japanese know the outcome of the EU decision already?
And much to my surprise came with a lightning cable. These copies normally use usb, this is the first time l've seen it. However I have no intention of using it with my iPhone 8 just in case.
Maybe the Chinese or Japanese know the outcome of the EU decision already?
I7guy
macrumors Westmere
The port technology is transient like other tech; floppies big and small, vhs and beta, laser disc, 8 track, cassette etc. it will come and go. Even if it’s a bunch of smart connectors, there has to be consensus.
This is a slippery slope. Is the EU going to regulate the port that is used or the smart connector.
Government shouldn’t be in the port business, it should be driven by economics and technology.
The government is in the environment and competition business.
I agree which is why i pointed out when they started attempting to legislate around it it was USB micro-B now its USB-C.
atleast USB-C makes more sense the increased usability, the adoption by manufacturers being higher, the fact its utilized by other specifications like TB not just USB, it has a alot more going for it and feels like it could become one of those ubiquitous standards that stands the test of time, who knows...
while i agree, similar to right to repair bills industry doesnt always do what its majority wants.)
its not the good old days of local builder builds what "I" the client pays for (which is understandable that doesnt scale as much as pumping out mass-produced stuff i get it.) but OK so they dont allways do what the customer wants.
if they had their way we'd all be mindless consumers, they already act like they are entitled to our money regardless of what they pump out.
its also not allways the best tech that wins out, or else we'd still have headphone jacks (because theres no downside to including it and its not a binary choice of bluetooth or headphone jack so more options is better)
not to mention USB won, if superior-tech won out every time then as a example we would have mass adopted FW400 then 800 and they would have actually pushed for the theoretical specs of FW1600 and later FW3200 before presumably moving to thunderbolt but that didnt happen.
heck with thunderbolt they didnt even stick to the initial proposal of it being only optical cables, it was the superior version but more costly than copper. so... we know how that turns out.
i guess this is just my long-winded ramble to say well if companies don't do what their customers want and they dont do what is technologically best while not ideal its sometimes refreshing that someone's big enough to hold them to account.
i wish it wasn't necessary I hate regulations but if we were in the ideal world Apple wouldnt make as many anti-customer decisions as they do and I would have less to nitpick.
HandITOVER
macrumors 6502
SMH.
Last edited:
I7guy
macrumors Westmere
Government should stay out of this and let the consumer (and hence sales) decide.
That is the bad American way.
I7guy
macrumors Westmere
That’s the best way. Consumerism.
That is ****.
HandITOVER
macrumors 6502
SMH.
Last edited:
compwiz1202
macrumors 604
And then they took forever to come out with new accessories that took Lightning. Think I finally just got a Bluetooth iHome because it was taking so long. USB-C would have no effect on me since I have plenty of all kinds of cables in big Ziploc bags.
[automerge]1579541393[/automerge]
What successors are in the works other than going full wireless?
You missed the point here. All major gadget company already implement type-C. Even now Apple are slowly implement the type-C (like Ipad Pro and Mac lineup). So you asked for the majority to follow the minority? I'm working with a gadget company and every day I heard a customer complaining about the lightning cable especially when they owned Apple products such as Ipad.
I7guy
macrumors Westmere
It’s called “voting with your dollars”, and very effective.
HandITOVER
macrumors 6502
SMH.
Last edited:
I7guy
macrumors Westmere
That’s exactly how it works. Corporate revenue is based on product popularity. My opinion has been stated previously and don’t expect everyone to agree.
HandITOVER
macrumors 6502
SMH.
Last edited:
Abazigal
Contributor
I just feel that the move, while probably well-intentioned, is quite misguided and the government is not really equipped to make judgement calls when it comes to dealing with technology.
Let me just raise a hypothetical scenario. Let's say that the law passes tomorrow, Apple capitulates by having the iPhone 12 sport USB-C and every smartphone, tablet and laptop uses USB-C for charging henceforth. All's fine and dandy.
What happens if a few years down the road, someone comes up with a new charging standard (say Apple with lightning 2.0) which he feels is superior to USB-C in some way? Is that company not allowed to implement said standard if no one else wants to hop on the bandwagon? What if some smartphone manufacturer decides to do away with the charging port altogether and have the phone charge via pogo pins or something? Say I have a charging standard that's inferior to USB-C in terms of charging speed or data transfer, but has a unique design which is necessary to allow for some revolutionary form factor in a smartphone? Am I stuck with USB-C?
It just seems very short-sighted to assume that USB-C is going to be the be-all-and-end-all of charging standards. In time, a new port / standard is going to appear, and we are going to have the same problem all over again. Will this ruling potentially stifle innovation by limiting how readily new charging standards can be adopted because no one is allowed to break rank?