Wouldn't be controversial for me. I'd love it.Apple changing the charging port on iPhones for the second time in five years, after switching from the 30-pin Dock Connector to Lightning connector in 2012, would certainly be a controversial decision.
Wouldn't be controversial for me. I'd love it.Apple changing the charging port on iPhones for the second time in five years, after switching from the 30-pin Dock Connector to Lightning connector in 2012, would certainly be a controversial decision.
They already have to do that; the onboard microchips only handle bit transfer and ECC - not the underlying protocol. If the cables had to handle the protocol, you'd need new cables to support any new protocols. Try to think a little.they'd have to move controller hardware for supported modes back into the iDevice; at the moment the iDevices only need to control USB traffic and everything else is handled on the cord
USB-C <-> USB-A cable, instead of a Lightning <-> USB-A cable.How would a USB-C iPhone work with existing devices that are USB-A?
If Apple were listening, they would have introduced USB-C instead of the Lightning port in the first place!
I dunno, most poets live a lot longer than 5 years.It'd make sense to swap to USB c or include a USB c to lightning cable in the box (or at least an adapter). 5 years isn't unreasonable time for a poets lifespan
They already have to do that; the onboard microchips only handle bit transfer and ECC - not the underlying protocol. If the cables had to handle the protocol, you'd need new cables to support any new protocols. Try to think a little.
You're confusing protocol with bandwidth. Older lightning cables did not have the ability to transfer at the rates necessary to support decent 1080p.You are wrong, do a little research instead of assuming. You do need new cables to support new protocols.
That's how Apple produced a new version of the HDMI adaptor for 1080p that was backwards compatible with every lightning device in existence, even those that existed only when the 720p cable was available.
Goodness. More dongles. So many uh...interesting... rumors today in response to the EU mandate.
You're confusing protocol with bandwidth. Older lightning cables did not have the ability to transfer at the rates necessary to support decent 1080p.
USB-C <-> USB-A cable, instead of a Lightning <-> USB-A cable.
Thats literally all you need to change.
How would a USB-C iPhone work with existing devices that are USB-A? Such as a CarPlay infotainment system?
Will it be backward compatible?
I dunno, most poets live a lot longer than 5 years.![]()
I hear there exists an inverse, exponential relationship between dongle size and the act of losing them.![]()
With a lossy input, you get a lossy output. What the HDMI adapter can output is irrelevant when its input is not up to par.It's because Apple compresses 1080p video into Airplay codec, transfers it through Lightning to the Adaptor (which can be done over USB2 when compressed), then the adaptor decompresses the video and sends the uncompressed video via HDMI, which supports the higher bandwidth.
The WSJ article could be interpreted as "comes with Lighting to USB-C cord instead of Lighting to USB-A". The wording is vague.
Barclays managing director Blayne Curtis told MacRumors that he expects the iPhone 8 to keep its Lightning connector, while he believes that Apple will sell a Lightning to USB-C adapter in European countries to adhere to the European Commission's "one mobile phone charger for all" campaign.
I obviously can't speak for everyone's use case, but the only dongles I ever use with my Apple products are display adapters for mini displayport-to-whatever, and I've had that issue with almost every Windows laptop I've used as well.Woo hoo, more dongles!
Glad I switched to Android. None of this proprietary nonsense.