(Presumably) Apple engineer comment on Lightning AV adapter design • Hacker News Board

Re: (Presumably) Apple engineer comment on Lightning AV adapter design

#111

Post by justincormack » Sun, Mar 03, 2013, 4:42 PM UTC

dmishe wrote: post #32

revelation wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, this is a connector from your mobile device to a display. Nobody has ever done any lossy compression on that pathway; both because you can drive simple circuits at frequencies high enough to have plenty of bandwidth and because it would actively destroy information (hence lossy). This is such a big problem because the video you are playing has already been lossy compressed (H.265) and it will most certainly no…

I think that if you have a 1080p source on your phone, it goes to tv as 1080 and without another compression step, it's only mirroring that reduces the resolution (which, for ipad mini, is less than 1080p btw) and introduces compression pass

rescaling does not mean you need to do compression.

Re: (Presumably) Apple engineer comment on Lightning AV adapter design

#112

Post by nathanstitt » Sun, Mar 03, 2013, 4:47 PM UTC

nirvana wrote: post #67

Ideology has trumped engineering, and as hackers, you shouldn't tolerate it. Frankly, all of this has been obvious all along to any competent engineer, since the moment Apple introduced lightening. They described it as a serial bus and talked about how it gave more flexibility. If you think about it for 2 seconds its obviously better to run protocols over a serial bus than to run 30 lines of individual signals, with…

I agree 100%. Software is eating the world, so I'm not sure why everyone is so against this.

Maybe it's a case of I didn't complain when they came for my DEC Alpha server with green screen, nor when they took away my Token Ring network, but I will not stand for only using one flimsy cable for all my devices. Come on, this is the tech industry, what did you think was going to happen?

What I see Apple's done here is future proofed the connector. Ok, so it doesn't output 1080p today, but I see no reason why it couldn't tomorrow. Devise a new protocol, download an update to all the iDevice's which in turn upgrades all the adapters out there and everything's golden. Once this (admittedly painful) transition is complete, I see no reason for Apple to have to endure another one. By the time it's outdated, I'm sure everything will be wireless.

Perhaps everyone complaining about a $30 adapter shouldn't have purchased a $600 phone and instead stuck with a $20 Moto Razr.

Re: (Presumably) Apple engineer comment on Lightning AV adapter design

#113

Post by TorbjornLunde » Sun, Mar 03, 2013, 5:00 PM UTC

rossjudson wrote: post #108

nirvana wrote: post #67

Ideology has trumped engineering, and as hackers, you shouldn't tolerate it. Frankly, all of this has been obvious all along to any competent engineer, since the moment Apple introduced lightening. They described it as a serial bus and talked about how it gave more flexibility. If you think about it for 2 seconds its obviously better to run protocols over a serial bus than to run 30 lines of individual signals, with…

What you're saying is true from an engineering standpoint (serial vs parallel), but has to be placed in the customer's context. In this specific case the quality is bad, operation is unreliable, and the price is high. Consumer devices accept HDMI as input. Serial to parallel video (Lightning to HDMI) is tough without some heavy-duty hardware -- hence the exorbitant cost of these adapters. The SoC design introduces a…

I strongly disagree that reversibility is a small feature. Whenever Plugging the chargers to new iOS devices is effortless the same way as headphones jacks.

Non-symmetrical connectors are an affront to usability.

Re: (Presumably) Apple engineer comment on Lightning AV adapter design

#114

Post by teamonkey » Sun, Mar 03, 2013, 5:04 PM UTC

ecopoesis wrote: post #101

XorNot wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real issue here though is it's a solution to a non-existent problem. This was potentially a problem before HDMI was a standard. That's no longer true though. Modern HDMI does video, audio and has an ethernet bus standard right on the cable. All Apple is doing is proprietary lock-in here - it's not more flexible in anyway, where as HDMI is signal compatible with DVI and DisplayPort.

_Modern_ HDMI supports ARC, 3D and Ethernet. The early versions didn't, and you have to upgrade components to get the functionality. Apple is solving a real problem here: next time the HDMI consortium adds another random feature to their bus, Apple can just ship a new adapter that will work with all Lightning devices since none of the HDMI hardware is in the phone.

Since when did Apple care about not having to replace your iPhone?

Re: (Presumably) Apple engineer comment on Lightning AV adapter design

#115

Post by blinkingled » Sun, Mar 03, 2013, 5:11 PM UTC

nirvana wrote: post #67

Ideology has trumped engineering, and as hackers, you shouldn't tolerate it. Frankly, all of this has been obvious all along to any competent engineer, since the moment Apple introduced lightening. They described it as a serial bus and talked about how it gave more flexibility. If you think about it for 2 seconds its obviously better to run protocols over a serial bus than to run 30 lines of individual signals, with…

So what does Lightning Digital AV Adapter do today that could not have been done using Micro USB->MHL? Looking at the reviews the Apple solution is a) pricey b) over engineered and c) performs worse than MHL. And you are talking about Apple haters creating a reality distortion field?

One way you could defend it is to promise features that can be programmed into the adapter firmware but if today it does 720p poorly I see no reason to believe something much more useful/better will come later. I am paying the $50 today, not in the future.

Re: (Presumably) Apple engineer comment on Lightning AV adapter design

#116

Post by blinkingled » Sun, Mar 03, 2013, 5:20 PM UTC

bilbo0s wrote: post #97

esolyt wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Ideology has trumped engineering, and as hackers, you shouldn't tolerate it. Exactly. It turned out Apple's Lightning is actually inferior to a standard MicroUSB + MHL.

In what way do you believe (Lightning) is inferior? and in what way do you believe (MicroUSB + MHL) is 'standard'? Serious questions.

Both Micro USB and MHL seem to be industry standards - ref Wikipedia. Lot of vendors seem to putting out cheaper Micro USB to MHL adapters - so even if (Micro USB->MHL) may not be a standard it is at least built on two standards and proprietary licensing / approval seems to be unnecessary for vendors.

Also most MHL adapters seem to do 1080p - the Lightning one seems to do 720p badly if we are to believe Apple store reviewers.

Re: (Presumably) Apple engineer comment on Lightning AV adapter design

#117

Post by lttlrck » Sun, Mar 03, 2013, 5:23 PM UTC

It all seems liks a fairly logical progression from the company that brought us Firewire. If you don't like it instead of whining, vote with your wallet. Personally I believe this is a smart move and we'll see far more exciting things running on this interface in future. Plus myriad related patents.

Re: (Presumably) Apple engineer comment on Lightning AV adapter design

#118

Post by smackfu » Sun, Mar 03, 2013, 5:23 PM UTC

nirvana wrote: post #67

Ideology has trumped engineering, and as hackers, you shouldn't tolerate it. Frankly, all of this has been obvious all along to any competent engineer, since the moment Apple introduced lightening. They described it as a serial bus and talked about how it gave more flexibility. If you think about it for 2 seconds its obviously better to run protocols over a serial bus than to run 30 lines of individual signals, with…

This seems like the kind of solution you would bodge together if someone gave you the already designed Lightning connector and said "now make it support VGA and HDMI". A completely crazy hack. Bashing Apple over it seems completely reasonable.

Re: (Presumably) Apple engineer comment on Lightning AV adapter design

#119

Post by runjake » Sun, Mar 03, 2013, 5:25 PM UTC

While the explanation seems plausible, I still have my doubts this is legitimate.

From the wealth of information this anonymous person provided, they could be tracked down to a handful of employees at Apple.

And if the current day Apple is anything like the year old Apple, this person is knowingly exposing themselves to termination.

Edit: If you re-read the comment, the author claims they work at Apple on the technology in question.

Re: (Presumably) Apple engineer comment on Lightning AV adapter design

#120

Post by glasshead969 » Sun, Mar 03, 2013, 5:26 PM UTC

XorNot wrote: post #106

glasshead969 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't just about video, the design helps to keep pin smaller and removes the need to having dedicated combination of pins to support a certain standard which may not be used anymore. For example, old 30 pin connected had support for FireWire which is no longer user anymore but connecter still needed to have those pins. I think they know the issue of video quality and are working to fix that. The beauty of this d…

Except all it does is create a new problem for them, without solving an old one. If you're putting a SOC in the cable then it has to be powerful enough to talk to the new standard. So you need a custom cable and connector no matter what. If you need a custom cable no matter what, then why not support a common standard - which is a standard and thus common to many devices - and then adapt it as necessary? Instead you…

>>They're not going to be reprogramming iOS devices for faster bitrates - that means an IC change in the device. It also means an IC change in the cable. And at the end of the day still means...less capability then using standards would have.

I am not sure the assumption that it would need a new chip is true. It may be a firmware issue that can be fixed in a software update.

>> It'd make sense if there was a lack of pins or something, but it doesn't - between USB and HDMI/DP there's every type of signalling you would need to support newer standards within the realms of the existing hardware.

Within in realm of existing hardware is the key point. 30 pin connector was used for 10 years. In those 10 years there has been huge change in Standards used and adopted. I would assume Apple has similar plans for Lightning.

Also USB and HDMI is not a perfect standard as you seem to imply. The docking port on iDevices is used for many other things including things which haven't been invented yet.

Standards like Micro USB 2 are non starters for Apple. With only 5 pins: +5V, Ground, 2 digital data pins, and a sense pin,most of the dock connector functions wouldn’t work – only charging and syncing would. Micro USB 3 is capable but Larger than Lightening. Also implementing Micro USB 3 would require a Chip on the host and also handle USB protocol on processor using precious PCB space. Also implementing HDMI on Micro USB needs a special convertor chip.

Also many devices break USB spec for allowed power to charge their devices. iPad with retina display, despite going over limits takes forever to charge. On lightening, device can multiplex all 8 pins to charge the device.

I agree with your point of controlling the peripheral market. This isn't as much of a compromise as what would needed to be done in case of Micro USB. MHL does same thing for Micro USB where a separate controller chip on the cable repurpose signals to HDMI while USB is off.