Ming-Chi Kuo Says All 2017 iPhones Will Have Lightning Connectors With USB-C Fast Charging

[d5aqoëp]

How have people managed to get USB 3 speeds on their iPad Pro 12.9" during sync is beyond me.

I got Apple's original lightning to USB-C cable and connected it to my PC's USB-C port. But transfer speed is always under 40 MBPS which is clearly USB 2 speed. My PC is Kabylake with AsMedia USB-C controller.

 

[pika2000]

Those cables exist today. If Apple includes it in the box they will likely leave out the USB-A to Lightning cable. So lots of people will have to buy the older cable separately.

Well, if the included AC adaptor is USB-C, it wouldn't be as big of a deal since majority of people simply use the included adaptor. Of course, there will be complaints from people having chargers/powerbanks with USB-A, but then again USB-A to lightning cables are plenty in the aftermarket.

 

[satinsilverem2]

Doesn't the iPhone 7 have USB 3?

 

[ILikeAllOS]

I hope this means data transfer via Lightning won't still be limited to USB 2.0 speeds.

Lightning has always been faster than usb 2, as long as you plug it into a usb 3 port or higher.

They have a 3-7 month lifetime anyway.

The cable from my 5s that's 3.5 years old still works fine.
Just don't let your cat play with it like a piece of yarn.

 

[Rob_2811]

Kuo expects Apple to retain the Lightning port given it has a slightly slimmer design compared to a USB-C port, to sustain MFi Program licensing income from Lightning accessories

Sounds about right

 

[PaulSproul]

has anyone on this thread used the lightning and the USB-C? USB-C doesn't stay connected like the Thunderbolt connection does. The thunderbolt connection is about 8x better at staying in place than the USB-C.......

 

[FelixDerKater]

Just go ahead and make the switch to USB-C completely. No halfway point...

 

[nviz22]

1. No it's not. If Apple can't produce enough at high quality, they're not going to do it. You do realize how many more iPhones there are compared to the PSVita right?

2. Ok. I prefer flat

3. The Note 7 was recalled twice and eventually taken off the market. That didn't happen to the iPhone 7

4. Maybe for some. For most I would say it's a nice to have.

5. So you're saying Apple's decision to use all glass is because it's more aesthetically pleasing and it appeals to Galaxy users? I'm confused.

1. It is a copout. Apple made a crappy Touchbar MacBook. The 2016 Macs saw so many bugs. Of course a cell phone will outsell a video game handheld. The point remains the same, you should go with newer tech to be innovative as possible. Jobs' Apple is much different than the Cook play it safe and maximize profits Apple. Let's not forget how Phil Schiller dismissed Touchscreens yet didn't dismiss a gimmicky Touchbar.

2. Then stick to an older phone and use it for awhile to maximize value or go with a phone that is flat. Don't have to buy the iPhone 8 clone of the GS7 Edge.

3. But that doesn't change the fact that Apple phones caught fire. The Note 7 is pure negligence. Apple has been negligent with their products in the past. Apple prefers to charge people for the company's product liability issues.

4. Still doesn't change the fact its a must have in phones. You don't want to use it? Toggle it off in the settings.

5. What I am saying is that the Galaxy is one of the biggest iPhone competitors. Competitors try to outdo each other. If a curved OLED device with a glass back becomes industry acclaimed and popular amongst consumers, Apple could flirt with some internal product designs and decide if they can outmatch the S7 Edge and the S8/S8 Plus. If they can't, they could always release a half-hearted iPhone attempt and get millions to buy their units because of brand loyalty, people's preferences, etc.
[doublepost=1488511082][/doublepost]

Apple is very particular about the displays it uses. We can see that with the screens used in the iPhone 7 and the excellent colour gamut.
IMHO, it is entirely possible that no one was able to make even a limited quantity (viz several million) OLED screens to Apple's spec until now? Apple is very much about getting a product that improves on the tech that is already in use but may well not have been implemented very well due to a variety of factors. So many people complain that Apple is not first to adopt a tech. As a mechanical engineer and a student of Industrial Archaeology I know of countless examples of the first adopters of a tech not being the best.
Apple will often adopt a tech when they can make it work better than anyone else. That is what we have come to expect.

Just my useless 2p worth on the subject.

But on the flip side, they also don't want to embrace crucial contemporary aspects in some of their products. A Touchscreen on a MacBook would be a welcomed edition. Especially since Microsoft's Surfaces are doing well. Instead, we saw a flawed Touchbar 2016 model. I understand they want to play it safe and maximize profits, but at the same time, there isn't much of a drive to reach new heights. You can only maximize certain tech for so long. I mean yes, their LCD was the best ever, but they didn't even attempt to put QHD even as unnecessary it may sound.

Getting back to phones, the industry is pretty stagnant. It makes very little sense for me to spend $1000 USD on a phone. I have owned the 7+, 6S+, 6+, iPhone 5s, iPhone 5c. I just don't see that must have anymore with them.

I often early adopt on iOS devices because of the hype, but the 7+ left a bad taste in my mouth because of call quality issues with the Intel modem. I was fine with the TSMC/Samsung split, but I cannot understand how Samsung has the newest LTE tech in their S7 that was quietly placed into the T-Mobile model. There is already talk about a new LTE-U setup with T-Mobile and the S8/S8 Plus. I am looking to get the S8 for $250 or less on a 2 year contract with T-Mobile through monthly bill credits, preferably free with a Note 5 trade in since they offered the same for the iPhone 7/7+.

 

[jerryk]

What good is Qi charging over traditional cable charge? More restrictive? I use my device when it's charging and I'm sure I'm not alone. Apple doesn't need to add more gimmicks to their products just to please a very select, very vocal, minority of users.

What's the difference in being tethered to a pad or being tethered to the wall? Wireless Qi is not wireless at all.

Would you say the Apple Watch supports wireless charging? Using your logic, it would be called wireless, even though it's a 3 meter cable.

It is not wireless OR wired. It is both. If you want to charge it with a cable do that. If you want to charge it with a Qi charging pad do that.

I have Qi charging pads at my office and home. When I sit at my desk I throw the phone on it. Charges right through a case. When I come home I throw the phone on the charging pad in the drawer where I put my wallet and keys every night. The phone is 100% charged when I pick it up.

 

[nutriousmitten]

Looking at these points it's no wonder the Note 7 exploded.

Well, the S6 series, Note 5 and S7 series all have glass bodies,wireless charging and fast charge. Tens of millions of handsets. Models further back than that have Amoled panels. No issues.

Wireless charge is a bit of a gimmick, Amoled screens are just fantastic, and people won't remember how bad it was for regular charging, when most phones have quick charge down the road. To come home from work, put the phone on a charger, make a snack or have a shower, and have your phone ready and replenished with enough battery to get you through the rest of the evening is unbelievably handy.

 

[RTemi]

Apple, just kill the whole lightning thing already.

 

[subjonas]

Does that mean 12.9 iPP already has usb-c connection in its lightning port? And this just means iPhones are adopting the same port as the 12.9?

What about usb-c video throughput? I assume that's being left out too? Doesn't make too much sense for an iPhone but I'd love for the 12.9 iPP to be able to natively function as an external display for a mbp.

 

[kimmen]

I don't get why anyone would rather have USB-C on a mobile phone. It wont be any difference speedwise, but it is way more fragile than Lightning with its tab or lip inside of the contact that can break!

 

[DCIFRTHS]

I don't get why anyone would rather have USB-C on a mobile phone. It wont be any difference speedwise, but it is way more fragile than Lightning with its tab or lip inside of the contact that can break!

How would it break? By inserting the connector?

I've always liked the USB connection - with the contacts inside the USB connector - it seems like it would protect the contacts better.

 

[kimmen]

How would it break? By inserting the connector?

By bending the plug. Lightning is designed to just slip out without destroying anything.
USB-C seems way more tight...

 

[thespacekid]

I expect Apple to include wall chargers with USB-C connectors and USB-C to Lightning cables.

 

[WRChris]

It is not wireless OR wired. It is both. If you want to charge it with a cable do that. If you want to charge it with a Qi charging pad do that.

I have Qi charging pads at my office and home. When I sit at my desk I throw the phone on it. Charges right through a case. When I come home I throw the phone on the charging pad in the drawer where I put my wallet and keys every night. The phone is 100% charged when I pick it up.

So, there's zero advantage? Keep using your android phone if you want Qi gimmicks. You can buy a case that does it for the iPhone as well.

 

[Moorepheus]

Compared to the HTC One M8 which combined a 2MP camera with a 4MP camera. Two things make an innovation, it has to be a new approach to solve a problem and it has to be a vast improvement over previous solutions to the problem.

Well, In my opinion, Apple did neither with the dual camera on the 7+
[doublepost=1488549515][/doublepost]

Doesn't the iPhone 7 have USB 3?

Absolutely NOT

 

[jerryk]

So, there's zero advantage? Keep using your android phone if you want Qi gimmicks. You can buy a case that does it for the iPhone as well.

You are not understanding. The wireless charging is not part of the case, it is part of the phone. It will charge wirelessly if you have a case on or if you do not have a case on.

And yes it is a big advantage. Once you start using wireless charging you wonder why how you got along without it. You put your phone down, do some work, and pick it back up and it is charged.

FYI, Apple just joined the Qi charging consortium.

 

[Moorepheus]

Lightning has always been faster than usb 2, as long as you plug it into a usb 3 port or higher.

In which universe? I can tell you, that at most I get 50MBps, that is roughly 400Mbps, or just under USB2 speeds (480Mbps) via a USB3 port. I even believe that the specs for even the 7 state it's USB2 speeds.
[doublepost=1488551375][/doublepost]

I don't get why anyone would rather have USB-C on a mobile phone. It wont be any difference speedwise, but it is way more fragile than Lightning with its tab or lip inside of the contact that can break!

What, you living under a rock? Lightning Cable is USB2 speeds 480Mbps max. USB-C would be at USB3.1 speeds 10Gbps (21 times faster than USB2). Currently, if you have a 7 w/ 256GB and lets say you have 80% used (204.8GB). Just to back up your phone or sync would take an hour or more with the Lightning Cable (if you get the max of 480Mbps). Now, put that up against a USB3.1 USB-C cable would take 3-4 MINUTES. Can you see the difference? I tell you, Just to wait for a backup alone on my 7+256 is painfully slow. Now, could APPLE get the Lightning cable to USB3.1 speeds, probably, and if they can, what are they waiting for, it's not like USB3.1 or USB3.0 speeds have just arrived.

One thing I forgot to mention, there may be other bottle necks, like the speed of the memory itself, so while we could get 10Gbps via USB3.1, the Memory chips may be slower, which if I think about it, I don't know personally, might be the reason why they have not moved to USB3 or USB3.1.

Ok, just did a little digging, and I saw a YOUTUBE video showing a 32GB vs 256GB iPhone 7 for Disk Read/Write speeds. For the write speeds, 256GB got 341MBps (2.66Gbps), where as the 32GB only got 42MBps (336 Mbps). So, at least for the 32GB iPhones, the disk is the bottleneck, it would be for the 256GB, but it's still 8 times faster....

 

[honglong1976]

Macbook Pro's have USB-C connectors.

I suspect the iPhone will be lightning still with the USB-C connector on the other end to plug into the laptop so it can charge without a dongle.

The mains charger will also have a USB-C connector (most likely the exact same charger as the macbook's) pumping out more wattage!

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

Lightning has always been faster than usb 2, as long as you plug it into a usb 3 port or higher.


The cable from my 5s that's 3.5 years old still works fine.
Just don't let your cat play with it like a piece of yarn.

There's always outliers...

 

[GeneralChang]

Well, the S6 series, Note 5 and S7 series all have glass bodies,wireless charging and fast charge. Tens of millions of handsets. Models further back than that have Amoled panels. No issues.

Wireless charge is a bit of a gimmick, Amoled screens are just fantastic, and people won't remember how bad it was for regular charging, when most phones have quick charge down the road. To come home from work, put the phone on a charger, make a snack or have a shower, and have your phone ready and replenished with enough battery to get you through the rest of the evening is unbelievably handy.

I keep reading this kind of thing, and I can't help but wonder how different my use is from yours. Because even without an OLED panel, and with a battery everyone keeps telling me is too small because Apple prioritized thinness over functionality, I finish the day off with something like 45% of my battery left, no charging of any kind needed. Sometimes I'll get 2 full days of battery without a charge and zero anxiety that my phone is going to die on me at any point. I just really gotta wonder what we're doing different.
[doublepost=1488555283][/doublepost]

There's always outliers...

I think I've got... 12 lightning cables in my house? One of which is from an iPhone 5, and has been in use constantly since lightning was introduced? Something like that. And they're all still fine, though the two from the latest iPhones are still in their boxes.

So maybe I'm an outlier in the way I treat my cables, but I'm pretty sure that it's not just "every once in a while a cable gets made right by accident."

 

[WRChris]

You are not understanding. The wireless charging is not part of the case, it is part of the phone. It will charge wirelessly if you have a case on or if you do not have a case on.

And yes it is a big advantage. Once you start using wireless charging you wonder why how you got along without it. You put your phone down, do some work, and pick it back up and it is charged.

FYI, Apple just joined the Qi charging consortium.

Yeah, I'm aware they joined that consortium. And I'm understanding that you want an additional way to charge your device with no advantage. And again it's not wireless if it's tethered to a pad.

You don't understand that a pad is no more of an advantage over a cable. The only difference is Qi doesn't charge as fast.

If Qi is make or break to you then buy the add on case. I, for one, am not interested in another slow way to charge my device and not having the ability to move it and keep it charging.

 

[Mac 128]

Well, if the included AC adaptor is USB-C, it wouldn't be as big of a deal since majority of people simply use the included adaptor. Of course, there will be complaints from people having chargers/powerbanks with USB-A, but then again USB-A to lightning cables are plenty in the aftermarket.

The way to solve this problem is a changing cube in the box with both a USB-A and USB-C port to accommodate whichever cable a customer happened to have. This allows them to include a USB-C cable for use with Macs and that charger only, but gives them the ability to use that charger with any cable they happen to have. So if That's the only USB-C device I have, and I lose or damage the one USB-C cable I have, then I'm not put in the position to go find a USB-C cable (currently an extremely difficult task) before I can charge my phone again.

That said, anybody who buys a new iPhone is almost certainly going to have both USB-A chargers, and spare USB-A Lightning cables, making the inclusion of a USB-C only charger and cable moot for most. The only customer this really impacts is a first time iphone buyer, who will have to go out and buy a USB-A to Lightning cable to use with every other current phone charging system in the world. The good news there is they can be picked up relatively cheaply at any convenience store. Then again, so can USB-A chargers.

So I'm sort of back to why should Apple bother to switch over to a USB-C charging solution at all? Just to support some late model MB & MBP users for data sync?