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.
Student Mods an iPhone X to Add a Functional USB-C Port
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I used to be in the "stop whining, Lightning is awesome" camp with regard to calls for USB in everything. Then I traveled and was annoyed every single time I had to dig around for the USB to USB cable (iPad) vs. USB to Lightning (iPhone). Let it go, Apple, FFS. If you wanted Lightning to be ubiquitous, you should have given it away.
Somehow I manage to transfer 50GB of lossless music in about 15 minutes over Lightning. Maybe I'm just magic.
Correct, eBay removed the ability for sellers to leave negative feedback for buyers years ago. Bad buyers abuse this and all the other 'protections' frequently.
Internal, no, but external some of the thinner devices didn't have space for a Type-C connector on the edge.
He's auditioning for a job at Apple, so he has to have these elaborate terms and conditions.
I love me some Apple, but I do hate nonsense like this. I would love to have USBC on my phone.
Meh... USB-C as a physical port is much less robust and more prone to contamination 'in the wild' than the lightning port.
I *much* prefer Lightning on a mobile phone that gets a ton of use.
(emphasis added above)
I'm in basic agreement, except for the paperclip thing (or any other metal object). Short circuit, static discharge, physical damage to the contacts... A soft, plastic item like the toothpick end of a disposable dental flosser is just as effective, but far less likely to do damage.
Does Apple stick with Lightning for the ease of amateur cleaning? Doesn't seem likely. If it's on their pro/cons list at all, I think it's at the bottom. Apple does not have a support document that suggests searching for pocket lint in the port.
Outside of, "How many cables/adapters/chargers should I have to carry/own," data speed is the only other significant benefit of USB-C over Lightning (a maximum of 1 - 2.4 GB/s vs. Lightning's maximum of 625 MB/s). Yeah, that becomes meaningful when you have a 512 GB/1 TB iPhone that you've packed with video from a pro shoot, but since the vast majority of users are not going to shoot ProRes in a fast-turnaround professional environment, "professional demands" aren't likely to push Apple to convert to USB-C, and since the vast majority of users today are uploading photos to iCloud rather than connecting their phones to computers, it's far more likely that government regulations will force the change.
They do on some devices, such as the generation of iPad Pro before the switch to USB-C there.
The problem is that 100% of the lightning to USB-C cables do not support that data performance. The only thing it worked with was the USB 3 camera adapter.
Don't want to? My only concern is if they go wireless. It kills the dongles.
I find lightning annoying. I am using wireless only for my 13PM atm. Using my OnePlus 50W charging stand as it is faster than MagSafe.
Actually it’s probably not what you think. I’m betting you’re thinking Apple simply wants to promote its MFI program. That’s utter nonsense since the proceeds from that program are a rounding error for Apple. They wouldn’t notice if the program went to zero revenue. They’re not changing it because there are 1.5 billion Lightning iPhones out there, many of them with Lightning accessories. There are a fraction of those iPhone users who have other Apple products, and most of those are consumers with Lightning products like AirPods or older iPads. They’re resisting changing the iPhone port because there are so many people with Lightning now. They’d get pushback except from YouTubers and tech geeks if they went USB-C. Not everybody’s in the techie crowd. Normies want Lightning because it works with what they have. If Apple sees that changing, then they’ll switch ports. They don’t change things without a compelling reason. For example, the last two Beats products came out with USB-C because they want to expand to the Android market. Hardly anyone there has anything Lightning. Note Apple branded AirPods remain Lightning.
Personally, I saw zero reason for Apple to change to USB-C on iPhones until they created the ProRes video capability of the Pro phones. With transfer speeds being affected, there now is a compelling reason to go to Thunderbolt, not USB-C. For that one reason only, they should change the port, but only for the Pros unless they expand the ability to shoot in ProRes on their non-Pro phones, which I doubt they will do since ProRes is a professional format. The non-Pros should remain Lightning for the reasons I mentioned above.
As a techie myself, I have all sorts of Lightning and USB-C items so it doesn’t bother me what ports Apple uses because I always bring one cable for all items, so I can charge everything simultaneously. At home, everything that can charges wirelessly. Whether it’s USB-C or Lightning, I have the cables and will bring one specifically for my iPhone. But the iPhone 13 Pro was the first time I ever thought Apple actually has a reason to switch.
Absolutely. The fact a lightening jack is practically indestructible is often ignored. There is nothing preventing lightening to USB 3.2 or higher throughput. I still feel that 4k video transfers over wire from an iPhone is a niche case. But it is one of the few that would benefit to the higher performance transfers. I’m assuming that we’ll see that soon via improved SoC developments. That way it doesn’t require any additional chips.
Don’t forget that lightening is also more durable (port side). This is a major benefit for most non-tech savvy users. I do agree with your general point. Most iPhone users would look at USB-C as an inconvenience not an upgrade.
More than likely, it's still going through the Lightning BUS, which means it's going to be limited to Lightning speeds/power draw/etc. So, you *could* use a USB-C cable, but it wouldn't give you any of the benefits of USB-C over Lightning ... just a different cable to plug in.
And *of course* Apple can do it. But they have to weigh the potential benefits with the risk of pissing off the huge user base that has tons of lightning chargers/adapters/etc if they change cable format. Again. Yes, they could provide free lightning to USB-C adapters, but that didn't do much to quell the ire they received from the public last time, especially since the adapters won't work in all cases.
If they are moving to a port-less design for the iPhone, it would be a really bad look for them to change port configurations, making everyone spend money on new accessory interfaces, only to remove the port altogether a year or three later.
It can be done of course. Maybe USB-C is better. I have seen a lot of iPhone "lightning" connectors with blackened terminals over time.
I wonder if this modification project retains water proofing?
I totally agree with you on the durability of Lightning versus USB-C. Who had the bright idea of putting a male connector inside a female connector in the port while the cable is female? You always want the fragile part on the easily replaceable, cheaper cable, not in the port. I’ve spent way too much money on USB-C port repairs because cables fall out.
Go after him for what? Modifying his own phone, which he has every right to do? Once you buy that phone, Apple has absolutely no say anymore in what you do with it.
If I want to put a Chevy engine in my Ford truck, Ford's lawyers can't do squat about it.
Last edited: