You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
1 point

That’s like saying they made the lightning port as a protest to USB standards, nah they just want their proprietary shit.

They wanted a new, compact, durable, reversible plug for their mobile devices. There was no industry-standard option that met their requirements, so they made their own. If USB-C had existed at the time, they would have used it (though as a physical connector, Lightning is still just plain better).

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I don’t buy this argument at all, they could have contributed towards a combined connector with the usb-if, but instead they made their own proprietary connector.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

they could have contributed towards a combined connector with the usb-if

There was already one in the works but it was still years ago. They wanted to ditch the dock connector and didn’t want to wait forever.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Lightning came out in 2012, USB-C came out in 2014, not exactly “forever”

This is just cope man come on

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

They did contribute towards usb c. And lightning came out years before c did. They had promised to only switch connectors once a decade because people got so mad about the switch from the thirty pin to the lightning.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Source for them contributing towards USBC prior to implementing lightning port?

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Do you really think that?

Back when that would’ve been a good argument… but why then when USB-C did become a thing, and became robust and well-supported enough that even Apple used it on every other device they sold, didn’t they adopt it onto the IPhone despite lightning being an inferior standard in basically every way?

Why did they literally have to be forced by the EU to adopt the very standard they helped to create, a standard that was de-facto almost everywhere else?

Because they wanted that sweet, sweet proprietary monopoly. Plain and simple, the rest is just excuses.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Back when that would’ve been a good argument… but why then when USB-C did become a thing, and became robust and well-supported enough that even Apple used it on every other device they sold, didn’t they adopt it onto the IPhone despite lightning being an inferior standard in basically every way?

What’s the advantage of using USB-C? Because it’s a standard, right? A standard means wide support and it works with what you already have. Except Apple had effectively already established that with Lightning. It was in hundreds of millions of devices before USB-C became mainstream. Sure USB-C was nominally standard, but Lightning maintained the advantages for Apple’s customers as a de facto standard. The switch to USB-C meant buying new cables, while Lightning meant using the cables you already had.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Which is literally exactly what Apple did when they moved from the older connector to lightning in the first place lol.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

What’s the advantage of using USB-C? Because it’s a standard, right?

Other than support for superior data transfer speeds, energy carrying ability, and durability? Yeah, it would be that it is an almost universal standard outside of the Iphone.

A standard means wide support and it works with what you already have. Except Apple had effectively already established that with Lightning. It was in hundreds of millions of devices before USB-C became mainstream.

For well-established standards this is correct, but every standard has to start out somewhere, and you’ll find once upon a time lightning was faced this exact same argument.

Sure USB-C was nominally standard, but Lightning maintained the advantages for Apple’s customers as a de facto standard.

A defacto standard for more or less only Iphones, as Apple switched almost all of their other products to use USB-C once it reached mass adoption.

You’ll find that being locked into Apple’s proprietary charging standard maintained a much larger advantage for Apple than it did their customers in allowing Apple to demand royalties/licensing fees from any 3rd parties that wanted to make charging accessories.

The switch to USB-C meant buying new cables, while Lightning meant using the cables you already had.

You could make this argument against the adoption of any new standard, again baring in mind that once upon a time lightning stood was the new standard that faced this exact criticism.

Also, had Apple just allowed other manufacturers to make use of lightning as a standard, you wouldn’t even need to worry about this right now - thus this is a rod for Apple’s own back, which they won’t mind since they already got off with the money.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Lmao, how is Lightning better than a USB-C? They’re both practically the same thing, even in durability. Apple might’ve made Lightning first, yes, but then USB-C came out like 2 years later.

Be real here: Apple only stuck with Lightning because it’s stupid easy money for them. Cables are hella cheap to make, and if you make them in-house, you basically spend like $2 at most to manufacture 1 cable. Lightning has the upside of both that and forcing people into the Apple ecosystem because their old phone cables can charge the new phones.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

how is Lightning better than a USB-C?

It’s physically smaller, doesn’t require the thin little piece inside the port on the device, and the rounded corners make it easier to insert without lining up perfectly. To clarify, I’m not saying this makes USB-C bad, but the physical design just isn’t as good.

Be real here: Apple only stuck with Lightning because it’s stupid easy money for them. Cables are hella cheap to make, and if you make them in-house, you basically spend like $2 at most to manufacture 1 cable.

Third parties sell Lightning cables and Apple sells USB-C cables (really nice ones, actually). There’s no significant monetary impact to Apple regardless of which connector they have.

Lightning has the upside of both that and forcing people into the Apple ecosystem because their old phone cables can charge the new phones.

I thought the whole argument in favor of USB-C was that because it’s a standard, people already have cables for it or can buy them for dirt cheap. If that’s the case, the fact that people also have Lightning cables wouldn’t be a major reason to stick with an iPhone when upgrading.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Man you’re just proving you have no idea what you’re talking about with every response.

With lightning, Apple essentially added DRM to the connector, requiring cable manufacturers to pay Apple for each sold cable.

“Lightning also introduced additional protocols that could only be officially supported through the MFi program.”

"The Apple MFi Program has no fee to join, but there are two costs associated with membership; a company wanting to join has to pay for a third-party identity verification and pay royalties to Apple once approved, and neither cost is mentioned in Apple’s MFi FAQ documentation. Royalty fees in particular are covered by an NDA, making finding actual pricing difficult.

According to an Apple Insider article from 2014 (which is the newest pricing source available), MFi royalties run $4 USD per connector (e.g., a lightning port) on a device. It is unknown if this information is still correct. I contacted Apple and received this response:

All publicly-available information about the MFi Program is available on our FAQ page: http://mfi.apple.com/faqs. Unfortunately, we are not able to provide further details about the MFi Program beyond those provided in the FAQ."

Additionally, the point of standards in general is to reduce waste and make interoperable devices much easier across manufacturers, something Apple consistently has proven they have to be forced to do. For example… iMessage and the lightning connector. They can provide excuses all they want but the truth is plain to see, they frequently hoard technology for themselves and intentionally make products that don’t function with existing products in the name of profit.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s smart of them to do from a monetary standpoint, but that doesn’t make it right and consumers should be smarter.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 16K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 557K

    Comments