Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Macs can now inform Apple if any liquids have been detected in the USB-C ports

9to5mac.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 351 posts

Re: Macs can now inform Apple if any liquids have been detected in the USB-C ports

#331

Post by Dalewyn »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #329
bluescrn wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody really cares about audio quality any more. I used to, but I realised that my mid-40s ears are now the limiting factor, so I might as well have the convenience of wireless. The real problem isn't 'another device to charge' though, it's battery degradation and the wasteful, disposable nature of Airpods.

Can people really hear the difference between wired and unwired headphones? I find it hard to believe. The bandwidth that Bluetooth can provide should be sufficient for very high quality audio. I'm confused by this reply.

>Can people really hear the difference between wired and unwired headphones?

Personally: Yes. Absolutely.

Even if I'm listening to just MP3s instead of FLACs, I can immediately notice that the wired headphone connection is better than wireless in both quality and latency. It's easy to compare since the headphones I use when travelling can do both, and I've used both as practicality demands.

The best wireless has to offer still can't hold a candle to good old wired.

Re: Macs can now inform Apple if any liquids have been detected in the USB-C ports

#332

Post by atoav »

redcobra762 wrote: post #292
atoav wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really dislike a feature that plays a loud sound instead of shorting pins in you USB-C connector together? Guess what is more annoying than a loud sound.

What?? Those aren’t the only options, the other option is that the device operate correctly…

I didn't claim there were two options.

This function measures the voltage drop between two pins and plays a sound when it is too high. So it is possible:

- to just not play a sound, and have it silently switch off the connector (this would feel like a broken cable to you, but at least wouldn't annoy)

- that the threshold is not well adjusted. But this is not rocket science, but simple Ohms law stuff, so I doubt this is the problem

- you could just not have that protection and live with what happens to the IC inside when those pins are shorted. That could be any number of things, most of them more annoying than a sound

Unless you want to change basic laws of physics or the USB-C spec these are the options.

Re: Macs can now inform Apple if any liquids have been detected in the USB-C ports

#333

Post by redcobra762 »

atoav wrote: post #332
redcobra762 wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What?? Those aren’t the only options, the other option is that the device operate correctly…

I didn't claim there were two options. This function measures the voltage drop between two pins and plays a sound when it is too high. So it is possible: - to just not play a sound, and have it silently switch off the connector (this would feel like a broken cable to you, but at least wouldn't annoy) - that the threshold is not well adjusted. But this is not rocket science, but simple Ohms law stuff, so I doubt this…

You actually did claim there were two options in the comment I replied to by saying:

> You really dislike a feature that plays a loud sound instead of shorting pins in you USB-C connector together?

The instead here splits the sentence into those two options. Either a sound is played loudly or pins are shorted. That's how the sentence you wrote is structured, anyway.

Clearly that's not how you considered the situation, but yes, you did claim there were two options.

Re: Macs can now inform Apple if any liquids have been detected in the USB-C ports

#334

Post by dpkonofa »

zaphirplane wrote: post #325
dpkonofa wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true. I fully submerged my phone in a pool and took video underwater and they replaced it under warranty.

Replaced it for what damage/failure ?

That’s not really relevant. OP said they would deny any warranty work if there was even a drop of water on the outside. I’m proving that hyperbole isn’t true.

Re: Macs can now inform Apple if any liquids have been detected in the USB-C ports

#335

Post by geon »

adolph wrote: post #261
flir wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somewhere, a YouTube content creator scribbles Macbook Pro in concentrated sulphuric acid . (And I'd probably watch it).

NileRed for HN, paging NileRed for a video about non conductive liquids in USBC PD

Is Codys Lab ok?

Re: Macs can now inform Apple if any liquids have been detected in the USB-C ports

#336

Post by guappa »

microtonal wrote: post #270
grishka wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me personally, the cost isn't a factor. I'd gladly buy a small Android phone for up to $2000 if it would satisfy all my needs. Yes, I'm this desperate. And by the way, high-quality Android phones cost comparable to iPhones. Keep in mind that Apple is simply not interested in the budget segment.

A Galaxy S23 can be had currently for just over 600 Euro, which is substantially less than an iPhone Pro (almost half), despite also sporting a 120Hz OLED display, tele lens, etc. You can get a lot of great/premium Android phones in the 500-800 bracket (Nothing Phone 2, S23, Pixel 8).

Anything over 200€ is expensive.

Could I pay 1000€ for a phone? Yes. But I don't want to deal with the feeling of dread every time it slips out of my pocket.

Re: Macs can now inform Apple if any liquids have been detected in the USB-C ports

#337

Post by bluescrn »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #329
bluescrn wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody really cares about audio quality any more. I used to, but I realised that my mid-40s ears are now the limiting factor, so I might as well have the convenience of wireless. The real problem isn't 'another device to charge' though, it's battery degradation and the wasteful, disposable nature of Airpods.

Can people really hear the difference between wired and unwired headphones? I find it hard to believe. The bandwidth that Bluetooth can provide should be sufficient for very high quality audio. I'm confused by this reply.

Wired enables a wider choice of higher-end headphones/IEMs, as well as avoiding bluetooth lossiness.

Re: Macs can now inform Apple if any liquids have been detected in the USB-C ports

#338

Post by pierat »

izacus wrote: post #53
bruceallmighty wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would greatly depend upon the country. Many countries (sans USA probably) have rights of warranty for consumers, that companies policies cannot override.

Water damage is one of the cases I've seen companies abuse to get out of warranty in Europe. I don't know of a way to dispute it.

A touch of bleach on the water dots will revert them to "no water detected".

Re: Macs can now inform Apple if any liquids have been detected in the USB-C ports

#339

Post by tgv »

crote wrote: post #241
tgv wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me with an analog headphone?

The problem is that it's a rather confusing Alt Mode. Basically, it's only supposed to be used for USB-C-to-3.5mm adapters, and it was only implemented by some smartphones. It's not a reliable way to get audio out of a USB-C port, and because it's using the internal DAC the audio quality isn't going to be good anyways. The proper solution is to use a USB DAC. This provides the same user experience but it actually wor…

Thanks. I didn’t know that that connector actually contained a DAC.

Re: Macs can now inform Apple if any liquids have been detected in the USB-C ports

#340

Post by acdha »

cameldrv wrote: post #319
dpkonofa wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>even if a drop of water gets on the external case, they will refuse to honor the warranty This is both not true and so hyperbolic it's ridiculous. IP68 is only colloquially "waterproof" as none of the IP ratings have an indefinite exposure time.

There are liquid sensors in the ports, and if a drop of water gets on them, they will turn red and Apple will refuse to honor your warranty. Apple claims the iPhone is waterproof to 6 meters for 30 minutes, but if you put your phone in one inch of water for one second, your warranty is void.

This is categorically untrue. What you’re mistaking is the difference between the exterior port powering down to prevent corrosion and the tags they use to tell when the device is no longer waterproof (e.g. because the seals have failed or there’s a crack).

I know this because we’ve used our iPhone 11s for years in the pool, bath, etc. and never had an issue on a warranty status or battery replacement. They do check that for battery repairs because of the safety issues but you won’t get it for any use which doesn’t result in water inside the case.

Post reply on HN