Apple Is Letting Companies Make 3.5mm To Lightning Cables Now (9to5mac.com) 110
Apple has updated the specs for its Made-For-iPhone accessories program, letting accessory makers put USB-C ports on licensed devices, as well as create 3.5mm to Lightning cables for the first time. 9to5Mac reports: With the new specs, companies in the MFi program can now include USB-C receptacles on their officially certified iOS and Mac accessories for charging. That allows users to charge MFi accessories with a USB-C cable and or power adapter they might already have, for example, and also draw power from the USB port on a Mac using the same cable. It also has other advantages for manufacturers. Apple's documentation for the new specs lists battery packs and speakers as products that could benefit from using a USB-C receptacle. Products are also allowed to bundle USB-C cables with the MFi accessories, but manufacturers can opt to not include a cable or adapter and reduce their costs and or price in the process. Unlike with Lightning receptacles, Apple does not allow the port to be used for passthrough charging or sync of an iOS device. Also, new for accessory makers is the ability to create a Lightning to 3.5mm stereo analog audio output plug, which would allow users to go direct from the Lightning port to a 3.5mm input on another device.
Clarification? (Score:2)
Re:Clarification? (Score:5, Interesting)
It sounds as if Apple is worried that malicious devices will attempt to MITM the connections from iTunes to the device. Even if none of the certified devices do this, making iOS users expect other bits of hardware to be on the line in the nominally secure path makes it easier for uncertified devices to find their way into common use. In theory, everything is encrypted, but there may well be timing attacks that work if you can interpose some hardware.
It also sounds as if they're also worried that things won't correctly forward the power control signals or manipulate them to account for the drain of the device on the line and so the iOS device will get more or (more likely) less power than it expects. This is important with regards to the throttling that they do: peak power consumption for an unthrottled iPhone is more than the peak power output of an old battery. This isn't normally a problem on mains power, but it is if the mains power is lower than advertised.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You claim he's wrong, and back it up with exactly zero evidence, giving only hater conjecture.
His pass-through reasoning is probably right on - they are looking to prevent someone from creating an "iTunes cache device" that makes perfect digital copies of the all-you-can-eat iTunes subscription, so that you can turn off the subscription and still have all the music you aren't supposed to have. That explains the data pass-through restriction quite nicely.
The charging bit is more of a mystery - if it was rea
Re: (Score:2)
apples history is evidence enough.
So is the history of ACs...
Re: (Score:2)
You try to refute his arguments, yet you cannot find a technical reason that is satisfactory. Maybe you should agree that it is more likely just money.
So the AC OP's claims were based on absolutely nothing; so why should MachineShedFred have to offer any "proof" in rebuttal or "lose the argument"?
Re: (Score:2)
They are looking for their thoroughly designed DRM mechanism to remain intact. The way it is being enforced at present is not severe, but the mechanism needs to remain sharpened and active for when the 'analog hole' is sinched shut in the future.
It is already a hassle to get quality 'wired' headsets at places like Walmart. One would have to be a fool to not notice the progression toward music being 'locked down' for the ordinary consumer.
Yeah, the Company that single-handedly beat-down the music content providers into REMOVING DRM more than a decade ago, somehow has a secret (or non-secret) DRM agenda when it comes to... music?
Yeahrightsure.
Re: (Score:2)
they are looking to prevent someone from creating an "iTunes cache device" that makes perfect digital copies of the all-you-can-eat iTunes subscription, so that you can turn off the subscription and still have all the music you aren't supposed to have
So it's the classic DRM-to-satisfy-paranoid-delusions that harms the customer. Because all that stuff is available for free on the Pirate Bay anyway, and I really can't imagine many people bothering to buy such a device and then cache the stream somewhere just to save a few bucks that their parents pay anyway.
It's the same with HDMI and BluRay and video "purchased" on iTunes. The only people the DRM screws are legitimate users, and it does basically nothing to stop piracy. Even if you could just copy a BluR
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple users can't use Pirate bay - because reasons.
And what, exactly, would those "reasons" be, Hater?
Re: (Score:2)
I agree completely that DRM is a waste of time, treats legitimate users as criminals, and just adds layers of complexity that *will* break someday causing unneeded issues. It's one of the reasons I have purchased a grand total of zero movies or TV shows from iTunes.
That being said, Apple has contractual obligations with content owners that they are distributors for to keep the DRM secure. We already saw the RIAA sue hardware manufacturers for creating "instruments of piracy" multiple times - there's no re
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. You are trying to find technical reasons for the decision when with Apple it's always about money. Someone did a revenue analysis and decided that with lower demand for the newer hardware, there was more money to be made this way as opposed to feature lock-in (or lock-out ;). With Apple, it's always about the revenue.
Mods: There is NOTHING in the LEAST "Insightful" in the Parent's AC Post.
Stop piling-on, Apple Haters, or show PROOF that "With Apple, it's always about the revenue."
Re: (Score:2)
If you're referring to software that intercepts audio for recording it's a trivial effort to cut the wires at the earpieces and patch to another device recording. Just make sure the grounding braid is disconnected at the jack to prevent the 60hz hum and you're golden.
We used to do this back in the 8 track and cassette days. Looks like I need to grab that reel to reel I saw in Good will the other day...
Re: (Score:2)
If you're referring to software that intercepts audio for recording
No, I'm talking about hardware that intercepts the digital signals during sync. Not sure how you'd read what I wrote to talk about intercepting audio.
Re: (Score:2)
Ultimately the end result is to record music to *listen* to it at some point.
Humans have ears, not hardware paths. We don't process digital signals, we need analog. In the end, there will be speaker coils causing air to move to create sound we can hear.
The hardware path is irrelevant. The end use is analog. Which is what really boggles the mind as why they would use USB C for audio if they don't also allow charging or other activities to bring value to the change at the same time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I see what you're saying. You didn't mention anything about audio, but for me that's all those devices are really any good for. Actually using them is a completely separate matter.
There's absolutely zero Apple products or software allowed in my house or on my network so it's a moot point anyways.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
These exist, but the amount of text around it makes me think they're unauthorized (it talks about maybe having to reboot the phone, etc).
https://smile.amazon.com/gp/pr... [amazon.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, those have been a thing since about two weeks after Slashdot wanted to break out the bitch-forks about Apple doing away with the stereo plug. Then the gripe became "I don't want to have to carry around another 0.3 ounces of wire with my huge 3 pound stereo cans that already take up half of my bag!" Or, "it's something else to lose, because I can't figure out that I can just keep it in the case with my headphones, or just plugged into the end of the headphone cable!"
It was probably stupid for Apple t
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
With my Samsung I carry a usb cable and power adapter, and a pair of headphones.
To get the same functionality with the iPhone I need a half dozen dongles, which come at a premium price, and if they break when I'm on the road can't be easily replaced at any random corner store.
Not sure why you're trying to defend Apple in this. All they're doing is trying to take over the standards with their own proprietary format, and it's not giving you anything other than a headache and a lighter wallet.
Hyperbole, much, Anonymous Apple Hater?
"Half a dozen dongles".
Well, if you don't have BT or don't want to use the Lightning-based Earbuds that came FREE with your iPhone, you can use the Lightning to 3.5 mm adapter that came FREE with your iPhone. Done. If you need/want an additional Apple-branded Lightning to 3.5 mm adapter, those are available for the princely sum of $9. And while they may not be available "at the corner store", most people in the U.S. live within a short drive to a Walmart store, which
Re: (Score:2)
and with an iPhone you would carry a usb-to-lightning cable and power adapter, and a pair of headphones that on the end of the cable you have the 0.3 ounce 3.5mm-to-lighning adapter which came in the box with the phone for the exact same functionality.
Is that 0.3 ounce free adapter going to be the proverbial straw the broke the camel's back?
The argument against proprietary connectors is a legitimate one, but your "half a dozen dongles" is you either having zero clues about which you speak, or you making a m
Re: (Score:2)
break out the bitch-forks
LOL! Great phrase!!!
Re: (Score:3)
Buy Samsung
or others.
AppleKiller (Score:5, Funny)
Now that Apple updated the specs for the Lighting connector, we can reasonably expect the prompt delivery to the market of the Applekiller, for properly testing iPhones and similar equipments released by the well known firm in Cupertino. It is worth to note that probably the developers of the iPhone had exactly this in mind, when they nicknamed the new connector as "Lightning".
Uhm... (Score:5, Insightful)
Visionary? Magical? Great innovation?
Reinventing the wheel might be great, unless of course all you need is a wheel.
3.5mm jack just works. It's cheap it does what it needs to do. No real need to change it yet.
If they really want to do something new with sound they should make their stupid music app play FLAC. Isnt that the whole point of getting sound over W1 headphones? (AKA"special blutetooth")
Seriously, for such an innovator this is rubbish.
Re: Uhm... (Score:4, Insightful)
by only allowing AAC files in the app they ensure the best performance and battery life.
You mean, best performance for people that don't care for audio quality... which is the same public that uses regular bluetooth. But hey, a little bit more battery time! Super worth it!
I would give $1000 to anyone who could RELIABLY distinguish 256k bps AAC from ANY lossless audio encoding format.
Can't be done. Sorry.
Re: (Score:1)
However someone can quite likely hear the difference between a 256kbps AAC stream to the headphones, when the source material is AAC and the stream is being re-encoded. That's the problem here with wireless audio. It compresses audio that has already been compressed and then decompressed. That's why a lossless media format would be ideal, so you only get the encoding once.
Re: (Score:2)
Dont bother explaining using real tech information. This apple cheerleader will not understand or not accept any answer that is not pro-apple.
As a former sound engineer and a audio enthusiast (NOT an audiophile!), I very well understand the cumulative errors from chains of transcoding using lossy formats like AAC.
Perhaps that's why Apple added FLAC Support (as well as the ALAC already supported) in iOS 11.
And besides, since Apple controls the drivers for the entire audio chain and BT chain, I would be very surprised if they re-encode AAC source material, so long as it is at 256 kbps or below. Apple isn't stupid when it comes to audio.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Visionary? Magical? Great innovation?
Reinventing the wheel might be great, unless of course all you need is a wheel.
3.5mm jack just works. It's cheap it does what it needs to do. No real need to change it yet.
If they really want to do something new with sound they should make their stupid music app play FLAC. Isnt that the whole point of getting sound over W1 headphones? (AKA"special blutetooth")
Seriously, for such an innovator this is rubbish.
Spotted your problem. You seem to think that Apple is an innovator, not a marketer.
Re: (Score:2)
Or they could stop the pissing match with Qualcomm and support AptX (which they already do on macOS) so that the wireless music doesn't sound like garbage unless you have their special headphones, or one of a handful of other headphone sets that supports AAC over bluetooth...
SBC encoding is god damn garbage.
Re: (Score:2)
Problem. Qualcomm refuses to license AptX unless Apple uses Qualcomm's modems. And Qualcomm refuses to budge on their license fees.
And because of the various Qualcomm lawsuits, Qualcomm refuses to license, period.
I'd rather guess that A
Re: (Score:3)
3.5mm jack just works. It's cheap it does what it needs to do. No real need to change it yet.
There is a real need, which is some people (not you, of course) would like a phone that's thinner than the 3.5mm jack + casing will allow.
Please stop conflating my need with a real need or even anyone else's need. There are many phones on the market, you can pick one that suits you best without thinking ill of anyone else's choice.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Meanwhile, there exist 3.5mm headphone jacks which exploit the fact that the plug is cylindrical and only have material on two sides, making them exactly 3.5mm thick. The recommended installation for these is in a cut-out in the board, to keep them from spreadin
Re: (Score:2)
I don't buy that ditching the 3.5mm connector makes devices thinner when the ones without it are 18% (or more) thicker. Of course, you're welcome to buy whatever you want; I just want you to know that if you buy that excuse, you're getting a load of bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Visionary? Magical? Great innovation?
Reinventing the wheel might be great, unless of course all you need is a wheel.
3.5mm jack just works. It's cheap it does what it needs to do. No real need to change it yet.
If they really want to do something new with sound they should make their stupid music app play FLAC. Isnt that the whole point of getting sound over W1 headphones? (AKA"special blutetooth")
Seriously, for such an innovator this is rubbish.
Even though W1-equipped Apple earbuds stream over 256k AAC (which I defy any human to distinguish from lossless), it appears your ridiculous, storage-wasting wish has been granted:
https://www.theverge.com/2017/... [theverge.com]
But seriously? FLAC (or ALAC) on a fucking PHONE used in a Mobile environment is ASININE.
Re: (Score:2)
I read that with Eric Idle's voice.
Who Cares About Adapters? (Score:5, Insightful)
Alternate headline: Apple creeping towards a USB-C future. This move sounds suspiciously like the lead-up to a surprise announcement that they're courageously killing Lightning and replacing it with USB-C. Long overdue, IMO. Lightning is still limited to USB 2.0 speeds, and the latest revision of Thunderbolt uses the USB-C connector. Macbooks use USB-C as well, so iDevices are the only Apple things not yet using that connector... and would have much to gain by doing so. One of the last pieces of the puzzle was digital audio over USB... which had an official protocol finalized in the past year or so. Now that 3rd party manufacturers can produce licensed iDevice compatible gadgets with USB-C ports, everything is in place. Sure they'd have to include a USB-C to 3.5mm dongle instead of the Lightning one, but switching over sooner would be pulling the band-aid off quickly. People who bought those Lightning headphones would have to get a USB-C to Lightning adapter, as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The USB audio spec was first published in 1995, around 23 years ago: http://www.usb.org/developers/... [usb.org]
Android users have been enjoying USB digital audio since the very early days. Standard audiophile set-up is a USB DAC attached to the phone with a rubber band, and the "strapped to the back of a phone" form factor is fairly common these days.
Re: (Score:3)
I was referring to the publishing of Audio Device Class 3.0, which made it energy-efficient enough to be a feasible 3.5mm jack replacement. This was published in September 2016.
Re: (Score:2)
Two years too late (Score:5, Interesting)
As an embedded developer I think USB-C is a pretty good standard (cobbled together for sure, but not overly expensive and lots of good backwards compatibility). The connector is also a nice size/shape and should serve us well for many years to come. Apple was definitely on the right track when it pushed USB-C over other connectors on its 2016 Macbook pros. But why on earth has it taken them nearly two years to allow accessory makers to use this through MFi?
Having worked for some big companies, it feels like they pushed USB-C into the MBP on ideology (and to be fair, they have pulled these shifts off before), but then lost interest in following through with developing the eco-system. Some junior engineer probably got given the job of trawling the not-inconsiderable USB-3.1 spec to come up with a policy document for MFi, and they've only just managed to get it sorted out.
They seem to be dropping the ball on a lot of stuff like this recently. Homepod was delayed. The air charging mat is not here yet. The delays on the Airpods. I know that no big company lasts forever, but surely all that work they did to infuse the organisation with 'steve jobs think' could keep the magic going a bit longer. Personally I feel that Cook has and always will act as a caretaker, wanting to make the smallest changes possible in the belief that the spirit of Jobs lives on. But the technology market moves at an immense pace. They still make great products, but without strong ideas and assertive changes of direction, the company is increasingly getting left behind.
Re: (Score:1)
But why on earth has it taken them nearly two years to allow accessory makers to use this through MFi?
Oh, that's easy:
1. (Skip)
2. (Skip)
3. Profit!
Personally I feel that Cook has and always will act as a caretaker, wanting to make the smallest changes possible in the belief that the spirit of Jobs lives on.
Oh, the spirit of Jobs really does live on:
"We can do whatever we want and annoy our users, but they will still buy our products anyway . . . because we're Apple!"
Re: (Score:2)
> The connector is also a nice size/shape and should serve us well for many years
> to come. Apple was definitely on the right track when it pushed USB-C over other
> connectors on its 2016 Macbook pros. But why on earth has it taken them nearly
> two years to allow accessory makers to use this through MFi?
The bigger question is, why has it taken them over two years (because it hasn't happened yet) to ship USB-C cables with iPhones? You can walk into an Apple store today and buy the most expensive
Interesting! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Why would I need to buy an adapter? One comes included with the iPhone in addition to the includes headset which is enough for most people.
And if you need another one, it's only $9. Before you complain about this being expensive, look up what a USB-C to 3,5mm Adapter for the Pixel 2 phones costs. The ones I found on Amazon just now were around $17.
Re: (Score:2)
From TFA: Accessory makers in Apple’s Made-for-iPhone/iPad/iPod (MFi) licensing program now have the ability to create new types of products as the company adds specs for a Lightning to 3.5mm output cable and USB-C ports. [emphasis added]
This is not a dongle that lets you plug headphones into your phone's lightning port. This is a dongle that lets you plug your phone's lightning port into another device's input port; e.g., your car's accessory audio input.
Re: (Score:2)
what's the difference?
Car stereo or heatphones, both are outputs devices
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Interesting! (Score:2)
Are we allowed to criticise both? There was no need to remove the 3.5mm jack. It doesn't improve the product in any way. "But but the other side..." doesn't excuse Apple's poor choice.
Re: Interesting! (Score:2)
You get your expensive fragile mini computer wet and dirty!? What are you doing!?
Re: (Score:2)
Google also lets other manufacturers make Android phones, some of which have headphone jacks built right in (what a novel idea), so I have the option of foregoing the dongle, if I don't want to deal with it. If I want a current-model phone running iOS, I don't have that op
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're in a Best Buy you probably shouldn't be on slashdot.
Lightning to 3.5mm has been available for a while (Score:2)
I bought an MFi certified Scosche car power adapter with lightning to 3.5mm out back in April of last year. It charges the phone and provides 3.5mm audio out for connecting to the Aux jack on a car radio. Works great!
Re: (Score:2)
There have been MFi certified adapters for quite some time now... This isn't news, it's clickbait.
Re: (Score:2)
What if I don't want to be in the MFi program and want to build the cables anyway?
There's a chip in the lightning cable with an encrypted key. They iPhone will refuse to pair with that cable.
Apple Control (Score:3)
I think this story should serve for non-technical buyers to provide greater awareness of the amount of CONTROL that Apple wields upon their ecosystem. Many users are completely unaware that Apple effectively sets what you can, and often CANNOT, buy to interface with your iDevice. And consumers should know... because when they can't get that accessory they want, or they blame a vendor when a device uses a USB micro-B port/cable instead of Lightning, often their ire is misplaced at the vendors when 90% of the time it is Apple that has denied them the solution they desire. And considering how many vendors "take it on the chin" and never publicly inform the buyers of this, I can only assume there is a non-disparagement clause in the MFi license as well. From the amount of abuse that some vendors take and still remain silent, Apple might be the biggest "abuser" in the relationship. Certainly Apple took advantage with their passthrough Lightning port-to-Lightning plug used in the "bandaid" iPhone battery cases; they even used the fact that their case had it as a competitive finger in the eye to their partners... all without mentioning that they themselves prohibited the vendors from using such a port/plug combination. Mophie has remained silent, still can't use the part. Oddly, tech "journalists" reported the "marketing", knocking MFi partners in reviews for not having the port rather than reporting to buyers about Apple's shenanigans. I've not read a single review yet where this control over ports/options has been exposed.
Awww, that's so nice of them (Score:2)
Can they now reimburse me for the additional $100+ I spent on a DVI to USB Type-C adapter for my monitor, which only occasionally works right, and three USB Type-A to USB Type-C adapters for my peripherals? Yes, yes, I went ahead and bought a "magic mouse" to eliminate the need for one adapter, but I hate it and had to move back to my Logitech mouse for my sanity.
I don't know. You spend nearly $3K on a new MacBook Pro and you just assume the company might include a few adapters that probably cost Apple abou
Re: (Score:1)
http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/s... [sqspcdn.com]