Isn't the issue that Apple charges 3rd party manufacturers a licensing fee to use their proprietary designs? This raises antitrust issues (using dominance in one market to control another market).
Apple may have to abandon Lightning connector cable
51–60 of 156 posts
Re: Apple may have to abandon Lightning connector cable
#52Re: Apple may have to abandon Lightning connector cable
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are telling the industry to choose one common connector, and to standardize around it.... They are not dictating which one.... and that the one they choose has to be set in stone (i.e. never change) De facto it is going to probably be USB-C, and I think it is a good move.... If years down the road, there is a new connector called USB-D (or whatever it is called), they can switch to it.... Also, this is for charg…
But if it's law to use the standard connector than how do you use a different (lets say newer) connection if the law says to use the standard connector. There's a bit of a chicken and egg problem. Somebody is going to have to build a device with a connector that isn't standard at some point to make progress.
something tells me Europe doesn't care much about the limits and fallibility of regulation
Re: Apple may have to abandon Lightning connector cable
#54To everyone that thinks no ports, Qi only iPhones are the future. What if you want to use your phone while it chargers? Charge your phone in the car? I think we are another 10 years at least from having a device that could last long enough off a single charge to warrant occasionally leaving it on a pad over night as the main charging method.
My car has an option for a built in Qi charger. It’s in the spot you normally put your phone anyway. That being said, how would you service a portless phone? There would be no more DFU mode.
It seems like it’s essential right now at least. The Apple Watch has a hidden lightning port that I have never even seen.
Re: Apple may have to abandon Lightning connector cable
#55Does anyone know if there's any merit to Apple's claim that USB-C isn't compatible with the iPhone's slim dimensions? (From the article: "Apple insisted that its slimmer devices would be unable to fit the then-new USB-C technology ...") Just looking at the tech specs for the iPhone 11 (lightning) [1] versus iPad Pro (USB-C) [2], the former is actually thicker at 8.3 mm compared to 5.9 mm, and yet the iPad Pro can hav…
You can't make a determination of connector dimensions based on device specs, because they're not strongly correlated.
The simplest explanation is that Lightning came out before USB-C did, and Apple did not want to risk another PR backlash from getting everyone to move to it after they'd just switched from the 30-pin connector cable.
Re: Apple may have to abandon Lightning connector cable
#56Please no. Design. by committee, specially political ones, is the worst thing that could happen to innovation.
But isn't that how USB and lots of standards are designed? Not political but still committees. It might not be perfectly elegant but at least it's a universal standard, which is the main point of it.
I don't want the return of Sony Memorysticks and all that nonsense as every company tries to be the winner. 18V powertool batteries currently suffer from pointless brand fragmentation even though they're all basically the same capability.
Re: Apple may have to abandon Lightning connector cable
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
But if it's law to use the standard connector than how do you use a different (lets say newer) connection if the law says to use the standard connector. There's a bit of a chicken and egg problem. Somebody is going to have to build a device with a connector that isn't standard at some point to make progress.
It only means that device makers will have to agree on a new standard before they can drop the previous one. I agree that it will slow down things, but there is no chicken and egg problem.
And what if they can't agree? Maybe apple make a device so thin that even USB-C won't fit and other manufacturers explicitly decide to hobble them by not supporting a thinner connector.
This law would be great for anti-competitive practices. Lowest common denominator wins by default.
Re: Apple may have to abandon Lightning connector cable
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lightning is smaller, case closed.
Is it meaningfully smaller? Side by side, they look the same size to me.
Yes? That depends on the device, of course.
I think another good argument for phones is that it's surely much easier to clean lint out of a lightning port than a USB C port.
Edit: But probably, I'd guess, right now the main reason Apple has stuck to lightning to whatever extent it is is because it's more convenient for its customers. USB C is already the standard, and Apple would benefit from switching to USB C across its product line if its customers would like that more.
Re: Apple may have to abandon Lightning connector cable
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lightning is smaller, case closed.
Is it meaningfully smaller? Side by side, they look the same size to me.
if you lay them down on the table and look from up top, they would be roughly similar. In terms of height (if you orient both of them directly towards your face, like you are about to plug them into your eyeballs, and measure the y-axis), I believe that lightning cable is about half the size of usb-c. Lightning also feels much lighter (no pun intended).
Re: Apple may have to abandon Lightning connector cable
#60Government mandated technology. What could go wrong?
This is exactly the sort of thing governments are good at. Previous successes are things like railway gauges, power connectors, power voltages, measurement units, etc.
This is the sort of thing that allows the free market to work efficiently.