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.
I wonder why Apple chose a headphone port instead of a 2nd USB
- Thread starter FrozenDarkness
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think Apple has no other choice if they really do drop the headphone jack from the iPhone. and since they've already stuck their neck out with one port, they're in a position to market the replacement of the 3.5mm Jack with Lightning as a "headphone" port, which you can also charge from and provide some additional data functions -- in much the same way they marketed the single USB-C data features as a bonus since they decided to include a power port (rather than slower inductive charging).
Add to that Apple has pretty much made Lightning their de facto charging connector across a wide array of products, including desktop Mac peripherals. And the iPad Pro just introduced Lightning 2 which offers USB 3 speeds. It also gives them a way to distinguish desktop and iOS peripherals, some of which may be compatible with both platforms.
Ultimately it allows Apple to solve a problem without admitting there is one. They could have made the single 3.5mm Jack similar to the iPod Shuffle where the headphone jack also provids a way to charge and pass USB data. But then that acknowledges a need for such an unusual feature that only exists on one other Apple product, and perpetuates the use of the 3.5mm Jack which they might intend to depreciate only 18 months later. They might have designed the rMB specifically for a Lightning connector, but delayed their plans as they weren't ready to roll out Lightning audio yet and remove the 3.5mm Jack from the iPhone.
Last edited:
I really think Apple needs to standardize to either Lightning or USB-C across both platforms. USB-C can do more (such as running a display over it), but Lightning has a huge ecosystem of connecting products and they've already pushed through an iPhone port change once.
If they do get rid of 3.5mm headphone jacks, I want to be able to use the same wired headphones with both my phone and my laptop.
And you will. Apple will put Lightning ports on all of their Macs.
Here's the thing, if Apple sticks to their guns, Lightning has at least 10 years in its useful life, which is about how long the 30-pin dock connector has been around. But there's not going to be another connector ... Apple will likely keep Lightning until they can go truly wireless without any compromises. And that's likely not too far in the future.
In the meantime, keep this in mind ... USB-C is brand new. After a year, only rMB users have Apple products with one. And there's not a lot of products available for it. There's more adapters than anything. It's literally going to take years before USB-C reaches the same saturation as USB-A, B, micro, and mini devices. I don't think I bought my first Firewire device until 5 years after I bought my PowerBook G3/Firewire, instead opting for a SCSI adapter to use with my existing equipment.
By the time that happens, Apple will be able to drop Lightning completely from its devices for data and charging, possibly keeping it solely for vintage Lightning headphones. At which point, they can add as many USB-C ports as will fit on a product that actually needs that kind of connectivity -- assuming that is, that USB-C hasn't been replaced by something else.
I'd like that, but I think they should have already added lighting to some of their product, at least to the rMB.
Lighting was introduced in 2012 and after almost 4 years no lighting on Mac. What are they waiting for? As you said lighting could have a life cycle of about 10 years, maybe a little more but USB-C should be the future, not lighting.
Agreed. I think the time to push Lightning as a dominant connector beyond iOS devices has passed. USB-C is very new, but it already has support from Apple and other manufacturers, and continued support from Apple will help drive a more varied ecosystem of accessories. Of course, it will be one Apple has less control over, unless they put a proprietary authentication system into their use of USB-C -- something that I don't know if the USB standards allow for.
I want my next iPhone to have a USB-C port more than I want my next Macbook to have Lightning.
Apple is not looking to position Lightning as a primary replacement for USB-C, or Thunderbolt, or Firewire. It's not likely up to the job for starters. The only reason it will go onto the Mac is because it becomes a dedicated headphone and charging port, but with the added ability to port data. If anything, Lightning is a stop gap for their mobile devices on the way from wired to wireless. It's not a replacement for 3.5mm audio jack, it's a way to let those who prefer wired devices to continue using them until wireless audio catches up with their expectations.
Lightning is a mobile standard. Putting it on the rMB a year ago would have signaled plans about what they may have intended with the iPhone. Apple has already been dropping clues with the introduction of its Lightning audio program a year ago. Smart manufacturers took note and have been prepping some designs so they are ready.
And while I respect that people want as many USB-C ports on their Macs as possible, really for this product the one will suffice, as long as there's another way to charge it, and occasionally hook up more than two things at once. And Lightning at least makes that compromise for the Mac user.
And the plot thickens ...
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...as-apple-set-to-ditch-headphone-jack.1988498/
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...as-apple-set-to-ditch-headphone-jack.1988498/
There is no ecosystem of Lightning peripherals. It's a charging port for iOS the way USB-C is a charging port for Mac, the difference being USB-C can connect to legacy peripherals.
BJ
At this point, I do not see the point of retaining lightning, and not replacing it with USB-C. If it is easy to remove the 3.5mm connector from mobile phones, changing the lightning connector into something that has some kind of chance of supporting many things (being USB-something), should be even easier.
Lightning is a proprietary Apple protocol and a third-party license costs $4 per unit. Apple likes Lightning because they get paid every time a peripheral gets sold.
USB-C is a proprietary non-Apple protocol with an undisclosed license cost. Apple doesn't like USB-C because they have to pay the USB consortium a licensing fee every time a notebook gets sold.
It's not about what's "easier". It's about what makes Apple the most money.
BJ
The point is there are over half-a-billion customers using Lightning worldwide. It would mean replacing all of their Lightning cables and accessories with USB-C, which offers no added benefit over Lightning for an iPhone. And USB-C is virtually non-exestant in the real world at the moment. It will take several years before USB-C becomes wide-spread enough that it will be as ubiquitous as USB-A cables are now. And during that transition time, Apple customers will need adapters for all of their USB-C cables -- so it's not like it's adding any greater compatibility over Lightning. And even after USB-C becomes as wide spread as USB-A, as an audio standard, people will still need adapters to use any USB-C products with older analogue output equipment.
By the time all of that happens, Apple won't be using any ports on their mobile devices, as even charging will be wireless. So by sticking with Lightning, Apple is saving existing customers the headache of replacing all of their current hardware, likely with the full knowledge that in perhaps 5 years they won't even need a cable of any kind with their iPhones.
Do people really think we're going to get to a totally sealed box? I have trouble imagining such a device without some sort of port to be used for charging and re-imaging in the case of a device that needs to have its software recovered. Perhaps it would be a hidden "maintenance" port, though. Or perhaps I'm just not thinking outside the box.
Internet recovery works without any kind of cables and even after a hard drive replacement, so yeah: it's possible. (But I don't say practical!)
Actually yes. The Watch already has this. Granted it has a diagnostic port in the event of a catastrophic duster I suppose, but that's not really user accessible. All Apple needs to do is introduce magnet inductive data transfer, something like the Smart Connector is all it would take.
it's perfect to me (and sure, i have a usb3>usbC hub for when i'm at my desk). being able to plug in a flashdrive if i need it, to charge it (mostly overnight), AND have my earbuds connected... am very pleased (fyi am using crashplan for backup). so, mobile as i could ask for.
Right, but the rumor is that they may remove the headphone jack, and replace it with USB-C or Lightning.
sure, and i'll cross that bridge when i come to it (in fact, i own some serious headphones and an apogee groove, which, with a tiny nonda adapter (amazon, $10), works perfectly with the macbook's usb c port). tech changes, we adapt.
If your complaining about 1 USB port, the new MacBook isn't designed for you. The people its aimed at don't use ports other than to charge and occasionally transfer files.
I wouldn't mind losing the headphone jack for a 2nd USB-C in the next upgrade. For example when presenting, it's convenient to have one port for accessories (like a projector), and another for uninterruped power. The current dongle solution requires 4 steps when plugging in an HDMI/VGA and power. With another port it's only 2 steps.
I'm expecting they will update the rMB in October with a Lightning port in place of the headphone jack. Which should provide power natively, and give you the option of using it as an extra USB 3 port with an adapter.