Maybe they will create a wireless hub with a bunch of ports ? Or smart ports like the iPad ?
It sure will make the simplest solutions, way more complex and expensive.
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.
The iPhone 14 Is Unlikely to Be Portless, Here's Why
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It sure will make the simplest solutions, way more complex and expensive.
Because no one is thermal throttling from transferring files over WiFi rather than USB and has to drop down to BT transfer speed of 2-3Mb/s... I don't even know where you are getting that impression that that is a problem.
you could just use the wireless adapter for doing the same thing.
it's like people here are somehow thinking Apple will altogether remove the ability to charge and transfer data, lol.
there will undoubtedly be wirelesss-to-wire adapters so that people can continue using their CarPlay and pianos wired.
chill, people!
I can totally understand from their point of view the reluctance to give up the port and / or to move to another form of their own connectivity but It's insanity how much USB-C solves in terms of efficiency, power delivery and functionality and how they just pure refuse to make CONSUMERS lives better with something universal and easy to use. I hope the EU forces them into something actually beneficial for the end consumer and pushes for a transition to USB-C.
iPhones don't last days on a single charge and iPhone users relationship with charging is complicated and pretty unhealthy (I find myself way more attached to chargers and portable batteries than I'd like and being far from an extreme phone user I replace iPhone batteries way more often than I'd like) and I don't want that complicated with having an enormous and expensive puck in my bag that's literally 10 times larger than the cable it replaced (lightning) or could replace (USB-C) and the fact that at my local coffee shops / bars where I charge from time to time, they'll be forced towards having a 3rd and 4th technology for some phones - something totally unnecessary.
If Apple moved exclusively to wireless charging it would be a massive mistake. It's inefficient, hurts batteries with excessive heat and is actually slower than everything else out there. It's a nice trick, kind of cool that electricity passes through the air but with minimal positive benefits at this moment. The size of the charging infrastructure for wireless charging in a phone is enormous and wastefu (probably the worst in Apples case with their use of rare magnets for alignment purposes) compared to just a connectable port (which is less than a centimetre in width) and contains some tiny component based infrastructure for voltage regulation, overload protection etc.
It's idiocy to again introduce as mandatory another charging technology while the general technological world just agreed on something surprisingly good in USB-C that could last decades and provide everything we need to hundreds of producers of phones. We live in a world with severely dwindling resources and an obvious solution is standardising interoperability to create less pointless development of even more standards, and the pointless creation of even more processes for these ever increasing standards, more machinery doing different things, more factories producing something almost identical but a little bit different so it doesn't fit. Let's end this stupidity now.
iPhones don't last days on a single charge and iPhone users relationship with charging is complicated and pretty unhealthy (I find myself way more attached to chargers and portable batteries than I'd like and being far from an extreme phone user I replace iPhone batteries way more often than I'd like) and I don't want that complicated with having an enormous and expensive puck in my bag that's literally 10 times larger than the cable it replaced (lightning) or could replace (USB-C) and the fact that at my local coffee shops / bars where I charge from time to time, they'll be forced towards having a 3rd and 4th technology for some phones - something totally unnecessary.
If Apple moved exclusively to wireless charging it would be a massive mistake. It's inefficient, hurts batteries with excessive heat and is actually slower than everything else out there. It's a nice trick, kind of cool that electricity passes through the air but with minimal positive benefits at this moment. The size of the charging infrastructure for wireless charging in a phone is enormous and wastefu (probably the worst in Apples case with their use of rare magnets for alignment purposes) compared to just a connectable port (which is less than a centimetre in width) and contains some tiny component based infrastructure for voltage regulation, overload protection etc.
It's idiocy to again introduce as mandatory another charging technology while the general technological world just agreed on something surprisingly good in USB-C that could last decades and provide everything we need to hundreds of producers of phones. We live in a world with severely dwindling resources and an obvious solution is standardising interoperability to create less pointless development of even more standards, and the pointless creation of even more processes for these ever increasing standards, more machinery doing different things, more factories producing something almost identical but a little bit different so it doesn't fit. Let's end this stupidity now.
Last edited:
It's one thing fewer to break. Mechanical switches, ports, etc. all are more likely to fail than the solid-state internals of the phone. They also make waterproofing that much harder. On my last two phones (6 and X), the lightning port started to only charge intermittently or not at all. With the X, I can still wirelessly charge, while for the 6 that was a death sentence.
Apple has a long track record of eliminating features to reduce complexity. Sometimes they go back on those decisions (HDMI, MagSafe charging on the new MacBooks), but more often than not they stick with them (killing off Firewire, USB-A, headphone jack...).
Well, people who wear the watch on their right wrist will cover the screen with their left wrist as they twist/press the crown; as opposed to it being a bezel gesture equally accessible from either side of the watch. This could have been avoided with something that didn't need to be a physical button on only one side of the watch. As far as features changing, there haven't really been long-term issues with the home-button becoming a gesture.
Last edited:
Oh? That doesn't really make any sense since their computers all have USB-C ports on them now.
Anyhow, the truth is the industry has switched to this new standard, and eventually everything will use that kind of port, along with USB 3 and eventually USB 4, etc. Presently incompatible devices, such as scanners and wireless keyboards and mice will all be updated to work flawlessly with it, as they have in the past. And either Apple will comply with this or they will be sidelined as it becomes impossible to use ANY non-Apple device with their products.
But really, there's no need. There's nothing really wrong with ports - they do their job admirably, they're reliable, powerful, functional and nobody really wants a bunch of dongles to convert their existing wired infrastructure to wireless. Of course they'll make wired-to-wireless adapters for maintaining connectivity to your car, your home computer, your audio speaker but that's because Apple and a bunch of MFA companies will make ridiculous profits off it. It will have nothing to do with us or simplicity for our needs. For us it will be cumbersome, expensive, frustrating and mostly pointless.
Why MagSafe? All iPhones ≧ X happily charge on a Qi charging point, which are standardised and widespread.
...because they'll make MORE bank from the wireless pucks they'll sell that will act as the port for those who need to transfer data to and from the phone.
I wouldn't dispute your own first-hand experience. And I don't know where you bought your Lightning cables from. I've been using mine for years - but bought well-made ones.
As for the charging ports on Apple devices themselves, I believe most Apple Service providers or technicians can attest that the failure rate for USB-C ports (such as on Apple notebooks) is higher than the failure rate of Lightning ports on iPhones.
A broken cable is a 20$ replacement. A charging port on a phone however means (meant, before the advent of MagSafe/Qi charging) an unusable device worth hundreds of dollars - with your data on it.
Why shouldn't it make sense?
I mean, is there any other port for charging Apple devices that's more widespread than Lightning? No, the few USB-C equipped iPads are a drop in the ocean, compared to the gazillion of iPhones and iPhone chargers. Doesn't it kind of make sense to charge their Mac peripherals the same way as their most popular/ubiquitous device (the iPhone)?
Because my iPhone thermal throttle hard when transferring data in high speed while using cellular connection, or just downloading tons of stuff over extended period using wifi?
Not to mention that there aren't that many manufacturers supporting wireless CarPlay yet either. I have to be honest was I drive a Mercedes E300 there's no way I am going to go out and buy a new car just to support it. I'll run this phone into the ground and then convert to Android.
Problem for me and so many others is that swapping out the radio isn't really an option. Most car manufactures have the entertainment system so integrated into he dash that it's just not possible.
People will say I’m full of it but you know those nifty little nodules in the side of iPads and tucked away in apple watches…..
Ever since Apple removed the headphone jack on the iPhone 7 in 2016, rumors have swirled that Apple eventually aims to ditch the Lightning port next for a completely portless design. Indeed, analysts originally predicted that the highest-end iPhone 13 would offer a "completely wireless experience." Of course, that didn't happen, but a portless iPhone 14 in 2022 looks just as unlikely, for the following reasons.
Apple's longtime goal has been to design an iPhone with no external ports or buttons for a clean, streamlined device, but significant hurdles still remain if it intends to provide a completely wireless charging and data transfer solution. As far as data is concerned, Apple would need to look beyond Bluetooth because of its bandwidth limitations and rely on a faster wireless protocol that allows iPhone data transfer at a speed that either matches or exceeds Lightning, otherwise the loss of the port would be seen as a backward step.
In fact, Apple has already developed such a protocol. MacRumors recently discovered that Apple Watch Series 7 models are equipped with a module that enables 60.5GHz wireless data transfer when placed on a proprietary magnetic dock with a corresponding 60.5GHz module. Apple probably doesn't advertise this capability because it's for internal use only. For example, Apple Store staff may use the dock to wirelessly restore an Apple Watch. It's unclear how fast its wireless data transfer is, but our understanding is that USB 2.0 speeds up to 480 Mbps might be possible. In other words, Lightning speed.
However, it's not just data transfer that would need to be achieved wirelessly. With no Lightning port, you wouldn't be able to physically connect your iPhone directly to a computer to reset an unresponsive iPhone through recovery mode. Unless Apple came up with an alternative at-home solution – a second iteration of MagSafe with high-speed data transfer capabilities, perhaps – the iPhone would have to go back to the Apple Store every time an over-air update or full device restore failed and borked the device, meaning more irritation and inconvenience for end users.
For argument's sake, let's say Apple introduced "MagSafe 2.0" alongside a portless iPhone 14 and solved these data/recovery issues. The existing MagSafe Charger provides up to 15W of peak power delivery (or 12W on the iPhone 12 mini and iPhone 13 mini) and charges a compatible iPhone less than half as fast as a wired 20W USB-C charger, so any new version of MagSafe would have to ramp up the juice considerably in order to come close to existing cable speeds.
Admittedly, Apple could probably pull off this feat (assuming it has shaken off its AirPower woes). You only have to look at its rivals to see what's already possible. Both the Google Pixel 6 and 6 Pro support up to 21W and 23W wireless charging speeds, respectively, while the OnePlus 9 Pro boasts 50W wireless charging speeds thanks to its next-generation Warp charger, which is capable of charging a dead phone to full power in 43 minutes. That's faster than an iPhone plugged directly into a 20W charger. Xiaomi is another leader in the field – the 5000mAh battery in its Mi 11 Ultra phone can be charged from 0% to 100% inside 30 minutes, wirelessly.
Yet despite these speed gains in wireless charging, an oft-overlooked problem is its generally poor energy efficiency. In 2020, Eric Ravenscraft of Debugger found that wireless charging uses around 47% more power than wired charging for the same amount of power. Unless Apple surprised us with a new version of MagSafe boasting unprecedented energy efficiency, ditching the Lightning port would surely run counter to its much-touted environmental policy.
And that's not the only eco-problem Apple would be inviting upon itself by going portless. Speaking out in 2020 against EU deliberations on requiring a universal port across all mobile devices, Apple said that removing the Lightning port from the iPhone would "create an unprecedented amount of electronic waste." It's not hard to see how this line of argument could be turned against Apple if it launched a portless iPhone in 2022. It would make millions of existing Lightning cables, charging docks, and other adapters in the wild obsolete overnight and ready for the trash.
Of course, Apple could perhaps satisfy the European Commission by adopting USB-C, but that would just be swapping out one connector for another, committing the company to another cable standard for longer. Apple would effectively be kicking its vision of a portless iPhone further into the long grass. Indeed, analyst Ming-Chi Kuo predicts Apple will retain the Lightning connector on the iPhone for the "foreseeable future," and has no intention of switching to USB-C, which has a lower water specification than Lightning. As Kuo rightly notes, such a move would also be detrimental to Apple's profitable MFi business, which is why he believes Apple is more likely to switch directly to a portless model rather than first change to USB-C.
Given these interlacing obstacles, in spite of some iPhone 14 rumors, we expect Apple's next smartphone to continue to use Lightning ports with the option of MagSafe, until a more viable wireless charging solution comes along that allows for a portless iPhone design without the attendant disadvantages. So when could that be? Frankly, it's hard to say.
Back in 2016, Apple was rumored to be partnering with Energous to deliver a "true wireless charging" solution, but nothing has come from it so far. Apple is still believed to be researching new wireless charging technologies, and with the advent of MagSafe, the company is clearly still interested in innovating new ways to power devices without the mess of cables. How long we'll have to wait for one that powers a portless iPhone remains unknown.
Article Link: The iPhone 14 Is Unlikely to Be Portless, Here's Why
A port less iphone is another way for them to sell you dongles you. They create a problem only to fix it and everyone will call it revolutionary.
Imagine your iPhone having these little receded nubs. A MagSafe charger, a MagSafe USB adapter , MagSafe adapters for every application.
And not the crummy wireless charging.
Because that MagSafe charging hasn’t caught on the way you would expect....because they'll make MORE bank from the wireless pucks they'll sell that will act as the port for those who need to transfer data to and from the phone.
Nubs on a portless iPhone with many adapters for many functions. Nubs on the bottom that essentially pin out to a usb c port.
That's what I meant. I was just using an Apple term.
Qi is still not as ubiquitous as it could be. When I visit the offices and chat about this things 95% of people at work don't have one themselves.
Why shouldn't it make sense?
I mean, is there any other port for charging Apple devices that's more widespread than Lightning? No, the few USB-C equipped iPads are a drop in the ocean, compared to the gazillion of iPhones and iPhone chargers. Doesn't it kind of make sense to charge their Mac peripherals the same way as their most popular/ubiquitous device (the iPhone)?
If Apple does away with any port on the iPhone what about audiophiles who like to get the best of Apple Music hi-res files. Currently, an external dac connected via the lighting cable is the best way to reproduce 24bit/92khz or 24bit/192khz tracks.
Does that mean Apple would upgrade Airplay to carry such bandwidth for those file formats?
Does that mean Apple would upgrade Airplay to carry such bandwidth for those file formats?
That is a wonderful point, Quu! Even though I can get 100 megabytes/sec transfer rates with WiFi on my laptop (~800 megabits/sec), that's nothing compared to modern USB-c hard drives which transfer at gigabytes/second. And since Apple is pushing 2 TB iPhones soon, data movement is a real issue.
Apple: "Charging your iPhone is a niche activity that the majority of iPhone users never do, so why penalize them with a small, convenient charging port they'll never use?"
Let's hope they've moved away from the philosophy that subtle appearance queues are far more important that almost every mode of normal phone use.
Then again, the biggest issue is there's no "users" at Apple anymore. I still remember when Craig Federighi unveiled on stage that iPads with USB could finally use external storage devices. He added, "I'm an Airdrop guy myself, but...", as if to emphasize "I personally have no idea why anyone would need USB drives." Really, Craig? You'd like to try to stream a 2 terabyte BluRay movie by initiating an Airdrop transfer of the movie file to your phone at bluetooth speeds?
Then again, the biggest issue is there's no "users" at Apple anymore. I still remember when Craig Federighi unveiled on stage that iPads with USB could finally use external storage devices. He added, "I'm an Airdrop guy myself, but...", as if to emphasize "I personally have no idea why anyone would need USB drives." Really, Craig? You'd like to try to stream a 2 terabyte BluRay movie by initiating an Airdrop transfer of the movie file to your phone at bluetooth speeds?