iPhone 14 Pro's Lightning Connector Still Limited to USB 2.0 Speeds Despite Large 48MP ProRAW Photos

[ajfahey]

Wireless charging is anything but ecological. It uses 75% more energy to do the same job.

Assuming that the charging MagSafe tech doesn't keep evolving, and that is a big assumption, the additional losses from inductive charging are quite trivial as a percentage of total world energy production that currently runs at 170 peta-Watt hours per year.

 

[Stiksi]

Assuming that the charging MagSafe tech doesn't keep evolving, and that is a big assumption, the additional losses from inductive charging are quite trivial as a percentage of total world energy production that currently runs at 170 peta-Watt hours per year.

And if we convert all chargers to wireless, suddenly it’s nowhere near trivial. Your argument is ”it’s fine for me to do it, the problem is everyone else”. It’s never going to be as effective as a direct connection, that’s physically impossible. We don’t need more technologies that are less energy efficient than their predecessors.

 

[The Game 161]

Seems obvious they are just waiting for USB C next year

 

[Piplodocus]

How slow is "slow"? If USB2 is 480 Mbit/s, that's 60 MBytes/s and supposedly a 48-megapixel ProRAW is about 75 MB, does that mean roughly about 2 sec/pic accounting for less than full theoretical speed? So if you were doing a photoshoot with hundreds could get quite long, but if you've got 60 of them ProRAW at full 48 Mpx it's still only a couple of minutes?

Or have I completely miscalculated somewhere?

(Not like I wouldn't want USB-C anyway though...)

 

[avtella]

How slow is "slow"? If USB2 is 480 Mbit/s, that's 60 MBytes/s and supposedly a 48-megapixel ProRAW is about 75 MB, does that mean roughly about 2 sec/pic accounting for less than full theoretical speed? So if you were doing a photoshoot with hundreds could get quite long, but if you've got 60 of them ProRAW at full 48 Mpx it's still only a couple of minutes?

Or have I completely miscalculated somewhere?

(Not like I wouldn't want USB-C anyway though...)

Yes USB-2.0 won’t give anywhere near 60 MB/s (480 Mbps) that’s only theoretical. After overheads it’s probably like in the mid 30s to low 40s at best in real world so you’re not too far off.

Wi-Fi 6 would probably be 80-100 MB/s ish (640-800 Mbps) on the phone in good conditions. If Apple had used HT160 capable chipsets probably would have been able to hit the 120-150 MB/s range (960-1200 Mbps @ 2.4 Gbps link rate). USB3 base would have been in the 400-500 MB/s range.

 

[ArkSingularity]

Yes USB-2.0 won’t give anywhere near 60 MB/s (480 Mbps) that’s only theoretical. After overheads it’s probably like in the mid 30s to low 40s at best in real world so you’re not too far off.

Wi-Fi 6 would probably be 80-100 MB/s ish (640-800 Mbps) on the phone in good conditions. If Apple had used HT160 capable chipsets probably would have been able to hit the 120-150 MB/s range (960-1200 Mbps @ 2.4 GBPs link rate). USB3 base would have been in the 400-500 MB/s range.

Yep. USB 2.0's theoretical maximum is 48MB/sec after 8b/10b encoding. In practice, it's closer to 40MB/sec in real-world conditions.

 

[bmustaf]

Do you even know what wireless chargers are? They are coils – the materials used for a single wireless charger could produce dozens of wires and on top of that they have wires themselves. So you have succesfully substituted a wire with a wire, a coil and a circuitboard. All of which will be obsolete fairly quickly because wireless charging is an infant technology. I hope they snuff it out before it gets too bad.

Yes, I'm an electrical engineer by training, so I know exactly what they are.

But it doesn't take an EE to figure out and compare the story between the coils inside a phone that will likely get recycled when the phone is EOL'ed (copper is a highly recoverable substance and the economics of recovery are quite compelling, and these coils are very easily recycled) and the body of cables over the course of a device's life that people basically buy and treat as disposable and have at-best a few month lifespan in high use situations (like in your car where the connectors fail quickly, especially the Apple lightning cables which are not known for durability, although the braided ones aren't great). Then you add on the idea that rather than throwing cables into each box, each accessory, etc, you just have the coils in it and the coils in the charger unit, they never get replaced until the device/charger gets replaced.

Two coils that never wear out over the life of the device vs countless cables (which isn't just copper but is plastic insulators, connectors, packaging, the whole bit that are NOT very well recycled or recyclable the economics of these do NOT even come close to copper coils).

So, yes, happy to replace multiple plastic-coated cables sold in plastic with their own enormous supply chain and distribution infrastructure with an internal, recyclable coil: no question.

Got any more uninformed, not-well-thought-through condescension to dish out?

 

[Stiksi]

Got any more uninformed, not-well-thought-through condescension to dish out?

Oh hey pot, meet kettle! You are wildly overestimating the durability and longevity of wireless chargers and wildly underestimating the durability of simple cables. If you want to feel better about your choice of charging tech when it’s proven to be worse for the environment, go ahead but don’t expect me to just take your word for it over actual researchers.

 

[ArkSingularity]

Oh hey pot, meet kettle! You are wildly overestimating the durability and longevity of wireless chargers and wildly underestimating the durability of simple cables. If you want to feel better about your choice of charging tech when it’s proven to be worse for the environment, go ahead but don’t expect me to just take your word for it over actual researchers.

I mean, I've never had a wireless charger break. I've had plenty of charging cables break.

 

[iBreatheApple]

I think I read somewhere that the money Apple receives from third parties is basically offset by the components sent to them for the construction of these lightning cables. In short, it’s not just free money for Apple. There’s actually work and deliverables expected on Apple’s end as well.

I have no facts, but I would be so surprised if Apple was willing to “break even” or even close to it to support third party. Unless they feel the like of certified accessories would impact sales of their own devices. Maybe I’m wrong/cynical…

 

[Abazigal]

I have no facts, but I would be so surprised if Apple was willing to “break even” or even close to it to support third party. Unless they feel the like of certified accessories would impact sales of their own devices. Maybe I’m wrong/cynical…

I like to think that the lightning programme was always more about ensuring some degree of quality and consistency in lightning cables and accessories, and less as some form of added revenue (which is likely a rounding error for Apple at any rate).

 

[iBreatheApple]

I like to think that the lightning programme was always more about ensuring some degree of quality and consistency in lightning cables and accessories, and less as some form of added revenue (which is likely a rounding error for Apple at any rate).

Very reasonable; makes sense.

 

[geartau]

They don't have to update the cable, just make the port capable of it which has been for over 5 years with the 1/2nd gen iPad Pros that had USB3 lightning ports.

that's false. current lightning charging cables cannot transfer at USB3.0 speeds.

iPad Pros with USB3 lightning ports only worked with the camera adapter (which was updated to support 3.0 speeds).

 

[magbarn]

that's false. current lightning charging cables cannot transfer at USB3.0 speeds.

iPad Pros with USB3 lightning ports only worked with the camera adapter (which was updated to support 3.0 speeds).

Even enabling that would a huge upgrade as my iPad Pro 10.5 transfers much faster to USB 3.0 flash drive vs. my iPhone.

 

[geartau]

Even enabling that would a huge upgrade as my iPad Pro 10.5 transfers much faster to USB 3.0 flash drive vs. my iPhone.

and, going back to my original point, littering the world with brand new USB 3.0 lightning cables is an absolute disaster waiting to happen, especially when EU just forced Apple to make iPhones USB-C by 2024.

 

[JedTheFish]

I don’t know why I didn’t check. Impulsively bought 14Pro bc my iPhone 12 was stolen from a McDonald’s, right in front of my dog. I am glad it’s such a groovy phone, but PLEASE! No Thunderbolt? How long has the iPad had them? I ass - umed it would fit my dozens of TB/USBC connectors. Talk about electronic waste! At least Apple admits it will be massive, but unless they are talking about Lightning connectors THEY have already manufactured (likely), that so-called waste will always occur. The nerve of bringing that up, when Apple e-waste has been rampant for decades.

 

[SantiagoDraco]

Wow, I'm late to the party but so glad I checked into this. I had thought for sure that they had finally moved to USB-C. I have (had) and Iphone 14 Pro Max 1tb on order but no more. No way am I investing in the lightning cable. Sticking with Samsung for now. Apple, what are you doing over there?

 

[SantiagoDraco]

I don’t see the issue. By the time you have taken your photo and gotten back to your computer. The photo would have synced via iCloud and already be on your computer. Everyone is complaining about instant transfer. But apple is great at designing things that just work and work in the background. So when you go to use that photo you took this morning it’s already on your computer.

Really? What about videos? What about when you aren't on WiFi and need to get those videos (which can be HUGE) to your device? How do you do that over iCloud to your pc magically? Yep, broadband. Broadband data. Slow broadband speeds. What if you don't have broadband at all?

Apple should have switched to USB-C long ago.

 

[compwiz1202]

Assuming that the charging MagSafe tech doesn't keep evolving, and that is a big assumption, the additional losses from inductive charging are quite trivial as a percentage of total world energy production that currently runs at 170 peta-Watt hours per year.

Is MagSafe any more efficient? I know the Wireless charging cases are horrible. Used one for my 13PM, and got like 30% from a full case charge

 

[I7guy]

Wow, I'm late to the party but so glad I checked into this. I had thought for sure that they had finally moved to USB-C. I have (had) and Iphone 14 Pro Max 1tb on order but no more. No way am I investing in the lightning cable. Sticking with Samsung for now. Apple, what are you doing over there?

Stopped the order on a $1500 phone for a $6 cable. I got a quite the chuckle out of that.

 

[Bento.Box]

Assuming that the charging MagSafe tech doesn't keep evolving, and that is a big assumption, the additional losses from inductive charging are quite trivial as a percentage of total world energy production that currently runs at 170 peta-Watt hours per year.

It isn't trivial if you charge the phone of mobile solar panels or even just a power pack (which itself is inefficient, it would be more efficient to just swap out the battery once it's empty).

It's also a big issue for heat management. My iphone 12 tends to overheat when charging wirelessly, even though it's just doing a hotspot and playing music at the same time. Not even the screen is on.

If I look at my diving computers, there are better ways to charge a device without having too much impact on water restistance etc.

 

[greentheglobe12]

iPhone 14 Pro and iPhone 14 Pro Max models feature an upgraded rear camera system that can shoot 48-megapixel ProRAW photos, which retain more detail in the image file for more editing flexibility. 48-megapixel ProRAW photos are very large files that clock in at around 75MB each, according to Apple, and sometimes even larger.

Despite these very large image sizes, we have confirmed that the Lightning connector on the iPhone 14 Pro models remains limited to USB 2.0 speeds of up to 480 Mbps like previous models, meaning that transferring full-resolution 48-megapixel ProRAW photos to a Mac or other device with a Lightning cable will take a long time.

Apple recommends using iCloud Photos to access ProRAW files in full resolution on a Mac or other Apple devices, or to transfer the photos off an iPhone wirelessly by using AirDrop, but the Lightning connector certainly remains a bottleneck.

Back in 2015, the original iPad Pro's Lightning connector supported USB 3.0, which was capable of up to 5 Gbps speeds based on the spec at the time, but Apple has evidently chosen not to move in this direction for the iPhone. Fortunately, rumors suggest that all iPhone 15 models will be equipped with a USB-C port instead of Lightning, which should result in speeds up to 10 Gbps or even up to 40 Gbps with Thunderbolt 3 support.

Article Link: iPhone 14 Pro's Lightning Connector Still Limited to USB 2.0 Speeds Despite Large 48MP ProRAW Photos

There would be other perks that come from thunderbolt 4 integration into iPhone. Faster charging (up to 65 watts, like Oneplus phones), improved continuity camera performance, more stable calls via gigabit Ethernet, access to expandable storage via 4.8 GB/s thunderbolt SSDs, improved testing capabilities for developers with SSD boot drives, displayport alt and thunderbolt 4 display compatibility, universal control compatibility...

I think Apple's decision to maximize control over peripherals is a foolish compromise when you consider the Pro-level perks that come from a Thunderbolt 4 iPhone.

 

[greentheglobe12]

iPhone 14 Pro and iPhone 14 Pro Max models feature an upgraded rear camera system that can shoot 48-megapixel ProRAW photos, which retain more detail in the image file for more editing flexibility. 48-megapixel ProRAW photos are very large files that clock in at around 75MB each, according to Apple, and sometimes even larger.

Despite these very large image sizes, we have confirmed that the Lightning connector on the iPhone 14 Pro models remains limited to USB 2.0 speeds of up to 480 Mbps like previous models, meaning that transferring full-resolution 48-megapixel ProRAW photos to a Mac or other device with a Lightning cable will take a long time.

Apple recommends using iCloud Photos to access ProRAW files in full resolution on a Mac or other Apple devices, or to transfer the photos off an iPhone wirelessly by using AirDrop, but the Lightning connector certainly remains a bottleneck.

Back in 2015, the original iPad Pro's Lightning connector supported USB 3.0, which was capable of up to 5 Gbps speeds based on the spec at the time, but Apple has evidently chosen not to move in this direction for the iPhone. Fortunately, rumors suggest that all iPhone 15 models will be equipped with a USB-C port instead of Lightning, which should result in speeds up to 10 Gbps or even up to 40 Gbps with Thunderbolt 3 support.

Article Link: iPhone 14 Pro's Lightning Connector Still Limited to USB 2.0 Speeds Despite Large 48MP ProRAW Photos

PS
Steve Jobs never would have approved of this compromise. He always prioritized the quality of the product above all else. Remember when he engineered a coup to get rid of the guy who tried to make the first Macintosh an underpowered piece of junk so it would be more affordable? Cutting costs by delaying USB 4 would have infuriated him, prompting the classic Jobs response to a bad idea: "Holding on to lightning is s***!"