Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPhone 6s and Macbook thought

U

Unrealmac1988

macrumors member
Original poster
Aug 2, 2015
50
6
After Apple releasing now the new iPhone 6s there is one thought that keeps bugging me and it simply had me thinking a lot about how serious Apple really is about USB type C and the new Macbook.

Apple praised the new wonderful port which is the future and puts everything you need in simply one port so much that it was dead clear for me that the next iPhone will come with usb type C or AT LEAST a second cable/adapter that allows it to use the new iPhone very easily.

Unfortunately they did not include any of this which got me thinking: is the whole usb type c just a lie to justify the non existence of a normal usb 2.0 port to make a product this thin and light? Apple is promoting the Macbook as the future. The future iPhone is here and it still isn't updated.

Just to make clear: I am an Android user so please do not tell me that there is no need for wires anymore with iOS 9 and stuff. I am not mad about the missing port on the iPhone but if I bought the new Macbook (as I initially wanted) I would be very pissed now.
 
There's a new EU directive coming where all OEM's must standardise ports in 2017

Apple may surprise us an include a Micro USB on their Iphones or USB C or just provide an adapter
 
I don't think it says anything. Usb-c will likely remain a port they keep on computers, and lightning will remain on the iOS devices. If they released a new MacBook Pro without sub-c, I'd be worried, but a new iPhone and iPad with lightning? Just as expected.
 
By keeping it lightning, they can charge accessory manufacturers licensing fees or require a certain amount of quality, packaging and design to get the MFI (Made for iPhone) approval sticker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MH01
Lightning port makes them more money. A standardised USB-C port means they do not get $$$$ from accessory manufactures.
 
Ive been thinking the same and you beat me to the forum debate.

I stare at my Macbook and think hmm they could have used Lightning, right? They make lightning to USB cables...

I'm not an engineer or know the specifics enough to debate this further, but maybe speed is an issue; who knows.

I almost plugged in my Lightning cable into it on accident today and thought damn that would be nice.
 
Without knowing a lot of technical detail about either USB-C or Lightening, I would imagine there are some good reasons why Apple created Lightening connectors specifically for its iOS devices but uses USB-C on the Macbook. iOS devices put a premium on battery life, even more than the Macbook, so I'm guessing the Lightning connector, while small on the outside, is also small on the inside to allow for a bigger battery. USB-C would probably take up more room on the inside of an iPhone, which is volume that Apple would rather use for other purposes.
 
USB-C is indeed bigger than Lightning, however it allows for better transfer speed.
Lightning is using USB 2.0, capped at around 30 MB/s, whereas USB 3.1 Type C can reach a theoritical maximum speed of 625 MB/s (Gen 1) or even 1,250 MB/s (Gen 2).

I would rather see Apple add USB-C to iOS devices than limiting the MacBook to Lightning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TechGod
toddzrx said:
Without knowing a lot of technical detail about either USB-C or Lightening, I would imagine there are some good reasons why Apple created Lightening connectors specifically for its iOS devices but uses USB-C on the Macbook. iOS devices put a premium on battery life, even more than the Macbook, so I'm guessing the Lightning connector, while small on the outside, is also small on the inside to allow for a bigger battery. USB-C would probably take up more room on the inside of an iPhone, which is volume that Apple would rather use for other purposes.
Click to expand...
They could have found a way to incorporate USB Type C.
 
I think you guys are kinda forgetting something here. This is an S model and I can only see them changing ports with a design refresh.

The S models never have changed much of their aesthetics and to put in a Type C port would go against that completely...
 
Niarlatop said:
USB-C is indeed bigger than Lightning, however it allows for better transfer speed.
Lightning is using USB 2.0, capped at around 30 MB/s, whereas USB 3.1 Type C can reach a theoritical maximum speed of 625 MB/s (Gen 1) or even 1,250 MB/s (Gen 2).

I would rather see Apple add USB-C to iOS devices than limiting the MacBook to Lightning.
Click to expand...

There is no technical reason why Apple can't update Lightning to faster speeds. I see the fact that they just released new peripheral devices (keyboard/mouse/trackpad) with Lightning connectors as a pretty clear sign that it isn't going anywhere. Lightning will remain for 'peripherals' (and that includes iOS devices) and usb-c will be on the computers. Why they didn't include at least one usb-c/thunderbolt port on the new iMacs is a bit puzzling, however.
 
I'm more worried about Apple not including USB-C with the new iMacs. At least this makes my decision easier whether I should buy a used riMac (late 2014) or for 1000 Euros more a brand new late 2015 model. For 1000 Euros more I wanted at least future proof I/O ports.
 
Lightning is smaller than USB-C. It makes sense to keep using it on the phones. Also, USB-C is not an apple thing. It is an industry wide standard that is going to be used.
 
Costino1 said:
Ive been thinking the same and you beat me to the forum debate.
I stare at my Macbook and think hmm they could have used Lightning, right? They make lightning to USB cables...
I'm not an engineer or know the specifics enough to debate this further, but maybe speed is an issue; who knows.
I almost plugged in my Lightning cable into it on accident today and thought damn that would be nice.
Click to expand...

The iPhone is 100% within the Apple ecosystem so a proprietary port makes sense. Nothing else plugs into it. Apple controls the environment, Apple gets paid a royalty by every third-party that wants to make a cable or an adapter. When you have huge mobile market share you can do that.

A MacBook is 90% within the Apple ecosystem but requires connectivity to others technology and the associated royalties that come with them. HDMI, VGA, SD, USB-A, pick a port, they're all designed to pay their owners and their consortiums money. Best way for Apple to manage this is to use the emerging USB-C standard only and throw all those other ports and fees out.

Point is, Apple can't just make any adapter it wants to appease these old port technologies and their owners. And, by the way, what do most MacBook owners do the moment Apple releases a new adapter? They get angry, wait it out, and buy one at half the price from the aftermarket. So it's high-time Apple gets out of the port business both on their notebooks and on their adapters. Put one powerful USB-C port on there, let Belkin and 100s of factories on eBay in China have at it instead.

BJ
 
TechGod said:
I think you guys are kinda forgetting something here. This is an S model and I can only see them changing ports with a design refresh.

The S models never have changed much of their aesthetics and to put in a Type C port would go against that completely...
Click to expand...

Apple will never give up the $1 royalty they make from every third-party Lightning cable and peripheral manufactured. There are over 500 Million iPhones out there and once sold, Apple makes money on accessories, not hardware. Somewhere out there is an old iPhone 4 whose 10-pin cable just broke; when that owner buys a new cable today, Apple makes $1 on something they sold 5 years ago.

USB-C is owned by someone else and they get their $3 royalty every time someone puts it on a device or a peripheral. Same for the HDMI people who get their $2 and the USB-A people who get their $1.50 and the VGA people who get their $1, and the SD Card people who get their $1, and on and on, all collecting their royalties. People say ignorant things like "it wouldn't have cost much to put a full set of ports on the new MacBook and that adapter shouldn't cost $75". Oh, really.

Lightning is Apple's retaliation to that practice, they get paid instead of the other way around. As for it's MacBooks, makes complete sense that all future notebooks will have a single USB-C port for just that reason, keep the costs down on their hardware. For the few that actually need physical ports they'll buy cheap adapters from China on eBay or through Belkin, Apple walks away and their customers are better for it.

BJ
 
It would have been nice for Apple to somehow combined USB-C with the lightning. Honestly the only reason I haven't gotten the macbook yet (instead of my 13" RMBP) is the amount of ports.
 
boltjames said:
Apple will never give up the $1 royalty they make from every third-party Lightning cable and peripheral manufactured. There are over 500 Million iPhones out there and once sold, Apple makes money on accessories, not hardware. Somewhere out there is an old iPhone 4 whose 10-pin cable just broke; when that owner buys a new cable today, Apple makes $1 on something they sold 5 years ago.

USB-C is owned by someone else and they get their $3 royalty every time someone puts it on a device or a peripheral. Same for the HDMI people who get their $2 and the USB-A people who get their $1.50 and the VGA people who get their $1, and the SD Card people who get their $1, and on and on, all collecting their royalties. People say ignorant things like "it wouldn't have cost much to put a full set of ports on the new MacBook and that adapter shouldn't cost $75". Oh, really.

Lightning is Apple's retaliation to that practice, they get paid instead of the other way around. As for it's MacBooks, makes complete sense that all future notebooks will have a single USB-C port for just that reason, keep the costs down on their hardware. For the few that actually need physical ports they'll buy cheap adapters from China on eBay or through Belkin, Apple walks away and their customers are better for it.

BJ
Click to expand...
I just hope they change it. I'll vote with my wallet and get a USB Type C Android phone.
 
j.quintana said:
I'm more worried about Apple not including USB-C with the new iMacs. At least this makes my decision easier whether I should buy a used riMac (late 2014) or for 1000 Euros more a brand new late 2015 model. For 1000 Euros more I wanted at least future proof I/O ports.
Click to expand...

The iMac 21 is still using Broadwell tips to get Iris Pro 6200 GPU's and no dGPU. USB-C/TB3 would need the newer chipsets for Skylake which is present on the 27" iMac's, which using a dGPU isn't a problem that no Iris Pro on Skylake.

Motherboards using Broadwell and USB-C are 3rd party add on chips and Apple isn't a fan of add on chips.

Couldn't see Apple wanting to make external appearance differences, would need them to change the back port outlets etc.

Would expect them to go USB-C when do the next iMac chassis, and go USB-C/TB3 instead of USB and TB2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back