this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2023
1373 points (96.8% liked)
Memes
44124 readers
1844 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Not fair. It was a great cable. It came out when everyone else was using mini and mico usb which both sucked hard ass. They weren’t reversible, and they broke easily.
It was a good cable when it came out, but as soon as USB-C became common it was obsolete. It was limited to USB2 speeds and did not support fast charging.
Which, seeing how Apple is still hellbent on continuing to only have USB2 speeds even with USB-C, plus lockout chips, their new connector is obsolete as well.
I still don't understand the reason for the speed limit tbh. It just makes their product look like shit.
Faster USB chipset is more expensive and potentially also physically larger with more traces on the circuit board to deal with I imagine. And faster data speeds require more attention to how the traces are routed to prevent interference. I very much doubt this is anything other than to save a relatively small amount on materials and engineering costs, on an already overpriced phone, and/or to try and "encourage" you to use iCloud by making offline sync and backup painfully slow.
As someone involved in engineering boards with both USB 2.0 and 3.0 the costs are negligible. You're not wrong about more traces or about it requiring more attention but per phone this cost less then a few cents.
I think it's more about the upsell to the Pro line or as you suggested encouraging use of iCloud.
As I remember it the USB 3.0 chips can cause interference in 2.4GHz range unless shielding is used and the USB chipset is kept far away from the 2.4Ghz antennas. Probably just “juice not worth the squeeze” on the smaller non-pro model, if there’s a significant chance it could interfere with Bluetooth and wifi.
USB-C is still not “common”. There are now all kinds of different cables with nothing in common except a form factor. Also, USB-C came out 2.5 years after lightning and didn’t match feature parity until the Thunderbolt spec and that was 5 years later. At that point, accessories and cables that used the Lightning port numbered in the millions, if not billions.
Also, what do you mean? The new phones support USB3…
How is USB-C not common? It's the default for every remotely modern android phone I've seen, all the modern game consoles I've seen (eg, the Switch and PS5 controllers), and many other random electronics use it (I even had a covid tester that was plugged into USB-C). All my laptops these days use it (including two Chromebooks, a high end MacBook, and a Windows laptop) and of those, only the Windows laptop even had USB-A ports (ie, the other laptops only had USB-C).
I won't pretend it's perfectly ubiquitous. There's lots of older electronics still using micro or mini USB (there's been no reason for manufacturers to update older devices). But it's definitely common in my book.
It’s not “common” in the sense that a USB-C connector can be all kinds of different implementations of the USB2/3 standards. To use your example, using a USB-C charger other than the default Nintendo one can short out a Switch completely and kill it. Compared to products that use Lightning, the number out there dwarves the current USB-C landscape. There are tons of devices that still use USB-A and USB-B and USB-C hubs don’t really exist.
In that case either the charger or the Switch was faulty, no matter the protocol in use, the devices should negotiate which charging profile to use. You can't blame a non-spec implementation on the protocol, that's on the manufacturer.
From what I've been able to see, that specific issue stems from a combination of cheap chargers/docking stations and Nintendo changing the USB-C port tolerances to allow smooth sliding in and out of the dock. Again, don't blame the standard if the manufacturer decided to implement their own crappy version of it.
Only the Pro models, I believe. Funnily enough, typical Apple too, since they are bundling only a usb2.0 cable in the box for the Pro as well.
Doesn't matter how great the cable is, when it is proprietary it stinks.
Yeah, I still think it's a great mechanical interface, if not the best. Would've been great if rather than killing it, regulatory bodies had forced USB to adopt the lightning design for the C type.
Lightning doesn't have near the capabilities of USB C. Lightning had its time but it's pretty clear that USB C is superior.
Are you talking about the capabilities of the USB protocol 3.x, or the mechanical design like I was? I don't know a single property where the mechanical design of USB is superior to Lightning, but I'm ready to be enlightened.
For example having 3x the pins is a big plus. I don't know why you are so focused on not including the protocols a port can use. Apple will most likely use USB to make connections between PCs and their Phones possible. And you have to have connectors capable of carrying the signals for those protocols.
The huge speeds of USB 3.0 (USB 3.2 Gen 1x1) and up are because of added twisted pairs carrying the signals in duplex (Plus a new USB A connector). Anything above USB 3.2 (USB 3.2 Gen 1x2 and USB 3.2 Gen 3 2x2) needs to use USB-C because the older USB-A Connector doesn't have enough pins to allow a connection to a cable with 4 twisted pairs (plus one for backwards compatibility).
I think the lighting connector is enough to allow for a USB 3.0 connection, but you would have to switch the signals after it comes out of the port somehow, as the 3rd pair is not used during FullSpeed (I think there's an adapter that does this)
Even if they don't use USB and develope their own protocol, it's gonna benefit from more parralel connections
The mechanical design was patented by apple, THEY decided that others were not allowed to use it (unless they pay).
One area where that is the case is the clamping mechanism. With USB-C, the moving parts/springs, which are the part of a connector that is most prone to failute are in the cable, which is both easier and significantly cheaper to replace than the charging port/device.
I don't think this design could have work for USB 3.1 and more, even apple put USB -c as PD on there MacBook because it can deliver more watt (I think)
but yeah it was much better design than micro usb
It was a piece of shit, always. Doesn't matter if it was technically better, it was not standardized so fuck lightning cables forever. Good riddance to seriously awful bullshit rubbish
As someone who has had 2 small fires started in their cup holder with that so called "technically better" cable I will never understand how apple was ever able to market an exposed contact charging cable in the first place.
Wow, hadn't heard about that but it makes sense. Yeah this thread is way weird. So many people simping for a cable.
Do you approach your life with such black and white emotional reactions? Fuck nuance, details, and critical evaluations, amirite? Bad guy good guy hurrdurr.
I'm not going to argue why standards are good, that's self evident. Sorry you're blind to this.
How's this for nuance? Apple made billions of dollars by just choosing to be dicks. That's the honest truth here. Simp all you want.
Standards can be good, it's not black and white, and dismissing the technical merit outright is batshit insane. You lack critical thinking. It has nothing to do with any other meaningless term you want to throw around.
Right the person looking to advance society with standards can't think critically but the person who sucks off apple against logic is a brain master.
Your lack of assessment is even more evident. I never one mentioned the company. You did.
Lol yeah that's how it works