Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Iphone Apple

Apple Set To Embrace an iPhone Charger Change It Didn't Want (bloomberg.com) 222

Posted by msmash from the up-next dept.
An anonymous reader shares a report: If Apple had its way, the iPhone would continue to use the current Lightning connector for the next few years -- until the point when the company is ready to begin phasing out ports on its smartphones altogether. But the European Union forced its hand, requiring mobile device makers to use the USB-C standard by the end of next year. So Apple is now in the awkward position of embracing the very technology it didn't want. When the company introduces the iPhone 15 on Sept. 12, USB-C connectors will appear on its four new phone models, as well as the AirPods Pro, and Apple will describe it as a major win for customers.

Customers will be able to use a single charging cable for iPhones, Macs and iPads. It will bring breakthrough data transfer speed increases for the new high-end iPhone models. Phones will charge faster in some instances. And, finally, the phones will be compatible with chargers used by billions of non-Apple devices.

Why will Apple be so upbeat about a change it didn't ask for? That's because the company has an iron-clad rule: When it's introducing a new product or dealing with the media, it always wants to operate from a position of strength. Apple's keynote presentation won't mention the European Union or make reference to the many times over the past few years that it criticized the government's decision to require USB-C. Back when it was still resisting the switch, Apple laid out a few arguments, including that the change would harm the environment -- given that billions of obsolete cables may wind up in a landfill. Another rationale, floated by Apple marketing chief Greg Joswiak last year, is the potentially harmful precedent of governments influencing product design.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Set To Embrace an iPhone Charger Change It Didn't Want More

Apple Set To Embrace an iPhone Charger Change It Didn't Want

Comments Filter:

  • Can we stop the stupidity (Score:4, Interesting)

    by gnasher719 ( 869701 ) on Monday September 04, 2023 @09:09AM (#63821906)
    Apple doesn't change the chargers. There is no need to change any chargers. All the latest iPhones work just fine with USB-C chargers.

    What you need is a USB-C cable. Cable, not charger. All my new iPhones have a USB-C to Lightning cable, that plugs into my USB-C charger or my Mac just fine and charges at USB-C speed. About 50% faster than USB-A.

    • Re:Can we stop the stupidity (Score:5, Insightful)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Monday September 04, 2023 @09:25AM (#63821944) Homepage Journal

      The problem for Apple is that they can't make proprietary chargers now either. Qi wireless charging is getting magnets too, which appear to be at least compatible with iPhones.

      That's a major source of revenue for them.

      I wonder how gimped it will be. I can't see Apple supporting the wide range of USB peripherals that Android does out of the gate. Things like HDMI over USB-C would cut off revenue from their overpriced dongles, for example.

      • Qi wireless charging ?

        Is that how Alan Davies and Sandi Toksvig charge their phones?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          It's the transliteration of a Chinese word that means "energy". I think it's more like spiritual energy though, not electrical.

      • The problem for Apple is that they can't make proprietary chargers now either.

        How is that a problem for Apple? They can make chargers. And from history we know that Apple can make _safe_ chargers, which only few other companies can. Like Anker, for example.

      • Re:Can we stop the stupidity (Score:4, Interesting)

        by edwdig ( 47888 ) on Monday September 04, 2023 @10:31AM (#63822144)

        The problem for Apple is that they can't make proprietary chargers now either. Qi wireless charging is getting magnets too, which appear to be at least compatible with iPhones.

        This isn't a problem - Apple donated the MagSafe standard to be used in the Qi standard.

        That's a major source of revenue for them.

        I wonder how gimped it will be. I can't see Apple supporting the wide range of USB peripherals that Android does out of the gate. Things like HDMI over USB-C would cut off revenue from their overpriced dongles, for example.

        They already support most of that stuff for Macs and iPad that have USB C, and Apple sells their own version of plenty of those accessories.

        While they certainly profit from Lightning, the main drive behind it was that there just wasn't anything else that could do what they needed when they created the port. USB C came out years later, and for the first few years most USB C stuff barely worked. By the time USB C was viable, Lightning was well established it it would've cost a lot to make everyone change ports again for little gain.

        • While they certainly profit from Lightning, the main drive behind it was that there just wasn't anything else that could do what they needed when they created the port. USB C came out years later, and for the first few years most USB C stuff barely worked.

          Apple is a member of the USB-IF but they decided to do Lightning with a proprietary chip in it instead of bringing it to the USB-IF. Then Type C was brought to the USB-IF and became the standard. The main drive behind Lightning was to be Apple-only and proprietary. Apple is a member of the USB-IF in bad faith. Most USB-C stuff worked right out of the gate, because it used existing USB signaling on the new connector and there is no problem with that.

          • Re: (Score:3)

            by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

            Apple is a member of the USB-IF but they decided to do Lightning with a proprietary chip in it instead of bringing it to the USB-IF. Then Type C was brought to the USB-IF and became the standard. The main drive behind Lightning was to be Apple-only and proprietary. Apple is a member of the USB-IF in bad faith. Most USB-C stuff worked right out of the gate, because it used existing USB signaling on the new connector and there is no problem with that.

            Apple needed to replace the 30 pin connector which was gett

            • Why has Apple used USB-C on the iPad Pro for years, but couldn't manage it on their phones using the same processors and core architecture? Was it just too technically hard for them until the EU said they had to in order to maintain access to the EU markets?

              The only reasonable answer that fits easily observed reality is: "Apple is a greedy shithead corporation that wanted to leverage proprietary bullshit in order to squeeze extra money out of their partners and customers."

              Your history is correct. However,

          • Re: (Score:3)

            by edwdig ( 47888 )

            Apple is a member of the USB-IF but they decided to do Lightning with a proprietary chip in it instead of bringing it to the USB-IF. Then Type C was brought to the USB-IF and became the standard. The main drive behind Lightning was to be Apple-only and proprietary. Apple is a member of the USB-IF in bad faith. Most USB-C stuff worked right out of the gate, because it used existing USB signaling on the new connector and there is no problem with that.

            You know that USB only went mainstream because Apple released the iMac with only USB ports, right? And one of the biggest drivers of USB C taking off was Apple releasing USB-C only MacBooks, right? Apple has done more to drive USB adoption than anyone.

            Things that were just sticking a USB-C plug on a USB 2.0 device worked fine. The first mainstream USB C device to really take off was the Nintendo Switch, and it turns out Nintendo made mistakes in their implementation of USB-PD, so you can fry devices if you

          • Apple is a member of the USB-IF but they decided to do Lightning with a proprietary chip in it instead of bringing it to the USB-IF. Then Type C was brought to the USB-IF and became the standard.

            That's some revisionist history. Apple released Lightning in products almost 2 years before USB published USB-C as a spec. Then it would take time for USB-C hardware to be available. From the standpoint of Apple, their 30-pin connector was getting old and they needed a replacement sooner. Also given the history of mini-USB and micro-USB connectors, USB-C was not guaranteed to be a success.

            The main drive behind Lightning was to be Apple-only and proprietary.

            So you have Apple's secret notes about why they released Lightning? No? Then this is pure speculation on your part.

            Apple is a member of the USB-IF in bad faith.

            Pleas

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by bjwest ( 14070 )

          USB C came out years later, and for the first few years most USB C stuff barely worked. By the time USB C was viable, Lightning was well established it it would've cost a lot to make everyone change ports again for little gain.

          The only ones who would have to "change ports" would be the factories making the devices, unless you expect Apple to recall every device to change them over to USB-C.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by edwdig ( 47888 )

            The only ones who would have to "change ports" would be the factories making the devices, unless you expect Apple to recall every device to change them over to USB-C.

            You know fully well that when we talk about "changing ports", we also mean changing everything that plugs into the ports. No one benefits from having to replace all their existing cables and accessories.

            • Re: (Score:3)

              by bjwest ( 14070 )

              The only ones who would have to "change ports" would be the factories making the devices, unless you expect Apple to recall every device to change them over to USB-C.

              You know fully well that when we talk about "changing ports", we also mean changing everything that plugs into the ports. No one benefits from having to replace all their existing cables and accessories.

              This only affects those choosing to purchase a new device, and Apple could, if they were concerned about their loyal users, include a new cable in the box and still make a killing in profit on the sale. The cable the user is using for their current device is still usable and can be given or sold to someone not upgrading. The fact Apple is using a standard port, but still requiring a proprietary cable to fully utilize that port, shows exactly where Apple stands on this issue -- They don't care about anythi

    • Re:Can we stop the stupidity (Score:4)

      by Thoth Ptolemy ( 110353 ) on Monday September 04, 2023 @09:29AM (#63821954)
      Didn't read the article and and pointless pedantry. That's on-the-spectrum stupid.

  • Apple should have offered Lightning to others (Score:5, Insightful)

    by caseih ( 160668 ) on Monday September 04, 2023 @09:09AM (#63821908)

    It's a bit too bad Apple is going away from Lightning. It's a far superior connector to USB-C mechanically. Less prone to breaking, simpler, and removes itself more easily when the cord is tripped over. Rather than adopt USB-C, Apple should have offered lightning to all other device makers years ago. They could have made a lot of money off that if they had offered terms similar to the USB consortium.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Askmum ( 1038780 )
      Oh, is that why every apple cable breaks?

      • Stop treating your cables like shit. The only Apple cable of mine that has fallen apart is the one that's been in my car for close to four years now. Electrically it's still fine as just the jacket is cracking and falling off.

        • I never had a non-Apple cable break or go bad*. There are still mini-USB cables sitting in my cable stash, they look pristine, but are all but obsolete nowadays. I also have a large stash of micro-USB cables, again, obsolete, but look perfect.

          *except those few that a particularly nasty puppy sunk its teeth in when I wasn't looking, back in the day.

        • Every single Apple cable I have ever owned has broke far before it should have. I have a feeling they were built to break on purpose. I have every other type of USB whatever cable going back 20+ years. I only recall a few ever breaking and most (if not all) due to my fault (mishandling, tripping, pinching, etc..)

    • Weird, I have a ton of broken lightning connectors that say otherwise.

      Cables in general are made to last a year and then good luck.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Can'tNot ( 5553824 )
      The fact that lightning is so much slower than USB-C might be addressable, but the difference in charging capacity almost certainly isn't. USB-C can handle five amps, while I believe lightning is limited to 2.4 amps. That's a physical limitation, you're never going to be able to charge as quickly over a lightning connector.

      You could say that lightning might still be good for low power devices, but then you're stuck with two standards and I don't think that the benefits you list are really very substantia

      • How is it a physical limitation? have you seen the pins on a USB-C? I wonder how they safely pump so much power over those things without heat problems.

        Like the crap USB-C does-- they can signal for higher power and switch modes thereby making for more complexity, cost, and problems -- adding it rather than beginning with it like USB-C did. Remember the cheap USB-C cables that broke devices?

        • I wonder how they safely pump so much power

          Because the voltage can switch, I charge my laptop at 65W over USB-C with no issues because it's sending that over 19V rather than 5V, so much less resistance and thus heat.

          • Amps, not Watts (Score:4, Interesting)

            by DrYak ( 748999 ) on Monday September 04, 2023 @11:27AM (#63822270) Homepage

            Top poster was mentionning that USB-C connectors can handle up to 5 amps (current) independent of the voltage.
            Reply was wondering how is it that USB-C could handle it (e.g.: the waste heat is proportionnal current squared) but lightning could not.

            You address how USB-C can reach higher power (watts) rather than current (amps): simply boost up the voltage while keeping within the maximum 3amps that any standard compliant cable should handle.
            You don't address how this connector could also use special cables rated for higher current (e.g.: 240 watts of power could be delivered by boosting tension to 48 volts and current to 5 amps. A much higher current than the maximum allowed for lightning).

            • The USB-C version 2.1 came out 2021, and like you noted, brings the max wattage up from 100W to o 240W.

            • Re:Amps, not Watts (Score:4, Insightful)

              by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Monday September 04, 2023 @05:23PM (#63823398)

              You don't address how this connector could also use special cables rated for higher current

              Lightning has a single pair for power and ground. USB-C has 2 pairs of power and ground, along with longer pins and mating surfaces. Apple's connector is a huge waste of space, which is immediately obvious when you look at the plug and see how small the mating surfaces are compared to the connector itself.

              The special cables required need to conform to the USB-C 2.1 specification for better insulation and slightly larger creepage distances in the rear of the connector to support 240W charging at 48V. The USB-C connector has always supported 5A.

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by dgatwood ( 11270 )

          How is it a physical limitation? have you seen the pins on a USB-C? I wonder how they safely pump so much power over those things without heat problems.

          Simple. USB-C has three times as many pins overall, and four times as many power pins.

          A Lightning cable has 16 pins, but only 8 of them are active at any given moment, because Lightning devices have electrical contacts on only one side. As a result, Lightning cables effectively provide only a single pin for power and a single pin for ground.

          A USB-C cable has 24 pins, all of which are simultaneously active. As a result, USB-C cables provide *four* pins for power and *four* pins for ground.

          That's why USB-C

        • How is it a physical limitation? have you seen the pins on a USB-C? I wonder how they safely pump so much power over those things without heat problems.

          Power is distributed in USB-C over 4 active pairs of power pins. Temperature rise in the connector is kept to 34degC max.

          Like the crap USB-C does-- they can signal for higher power and switch modes thereby making for more complexity, cost, and problems -- adding it rather than beginning with it like USB-C did. Remember the cheap USB-C cables that broke devices?

          There's almost no cost. Complexity is handled by a simple mass produced mass market chip. Proper PD3.1 compliant cables can be had for under $20. PD 2.1 complaint cables for half that. The "crap USB-C does" is not something USB-C did. It specifically involved *not* following the standard. You can break absolutely anything when you plug a non-compliant thing into it. Heck jam a screwdrive

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        The fact that lightning is so much slower than USB-C might be addressable

        Not without making the connector on the devices have separate contacts for both sides, which they currently do not, and which would make the connectors larger, and might even make the devices slightly thicker.

        You could say that lightning might still be good for low power devices, but then you're stuck with two standards and I don't think that the benefits you list are really very substantial. I'd rather just have one standard for everything.

        The other things on the list are questionable at best.

        Less prone to breaking

        Nope. Lightning cables, because of the shell dimensions that are, in practice, fixed by Apple selling the connectors, have tiny conductors that are much more prone to breakage than USB-C cables.

        removes itself more easily when the cord is tripped over.

        Which would be useful for a laptop, because you use it

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Khyber ( 864651 )

      "It's a far superior connector to USB-C mechanically."

      Yea, that's why every cable end has broken off inside my husband's iPhone, right?

      Apple really doesn't know how to properly design and manufacture things for usability, only looks.

      • All apple design decisions are made to steer the sheep into buy a new phone as soon as possible. Poorly design cables and port are port of that

      • >> Yea, that's why every cable end has broken off inside my husband's iPhone, right?
        Sorry, you're holding it wrong.

      • Personally I would rather the connector break that way because replacing the cable is cheaper than replacing the port. USB-C cables are female and the ports are male. There is more of a chance that the leads break in the phone which means a more expensive repair.

        • No, there isn't.
          The USB-C cable end is clad in a metal sheath. If you manage to snap it at that end, specifically, there's a higher chance the rest of the cable breaks off, or the device itself snaps in that area. Also, the male part inside the device is recessed.

          • The USB-C cable end is clad in a metal sheath. If you manage to snap it at that end, specifically, there's a higher chance the rest of the cable breaks off, or the device itself snaps in that area. Also, the male part inside the device is recessed.

            And you've missed the point. The main concern with USB-C failure will be the pins in the port being damaged [lenovo.com]. Considering that USB-C has more pins (12) than Lighting (8) in almost the same size connector, it means the pins are also smaller. Also the pins are generally put on plastic or PCB without anything else as the port is male. Lightning connectors are encased in aluminum alloy being male. Smaller pins on plastic/PCB vs larger pins surrounded by aluminum. Which do you think would be more resistant to dam

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by RedK ( 112790 )

      > Lightning. It's a far superior connector to USB-C mechanically. Less prone to breaking

      Man, this comment section is a gold mine. Imagine saying things like "Lightning doesn't break" with a straight face.

      Meanwhile, in the real world, I don't have a single official apple lightning cable that lasted more than 6 months.

      • Since the cable always dies because it's made to feel nice and not last we have a hard time experiencing the lifespan of the plug before the cable dies. This is about the plug not the cable.

      • Meanwhile, in the real world, I don't have a single official apple lightning cable that lasted more than 6 months.

        I'm still using the cable that came with my iPhone 6. Don't be an oaf and things will last.

    • Re:Apple should have offered Lightning to others (Score:5, Interesting)

      by jacks smirking reven ( 909048 ) on Monday September 04, 2023 @10:04AM (#63822064)

      Lightning has some bad flaws though, like the fact that the contacts are fully exposed which means they see finger oils and can get damaged much easier. Also at least anecdotally Lightning cables for me always wear out pretty quick, especially at the strain relief area, all brands but especially Apple cables since they like to use a nice supple rubber, which is nice to roll up and feels good but is not as durable.

      Frankly when MicroUSB was the standard Lightning was clearly superior. Against USB-C I would say it's wash or even a slight disadvantage and Lightning would never see the type of expansion possibilities USB C sees today (video cables, power delivery, hub systems, thunderbolt, etc)

      The connector Apple should have absolutely opened up for the good of mankind would be MagSafe because while USB C is excellent as a phone cable it's pretty middling as a laptop cable.

    • Less prone to breaking

      As someone who constantly travel with an endless array of gadgets not carefully crammed into bags with tangled mess of cables that get plugged and unplugged multiple times a day I have a suggestion for you:

      It's a mobile phone, not a lasso to be swung around by the cable at your rodeo.

    • Rather than adopt USB-C, Apple should have offered lightning to all other device makers years ago. They could have made a lot of money off that if they had offered terms similar to the USB consortium.

      Yep. When Type C was brought to the USB-IF, Apple knew about it, because they are a member. They could have offered up the Lightning connector at that point and done away with the stupid DRM chip that holds back the charge rate going forwards. However, Type C is a better connector in every way but durability, and it's frankly not that much less durable either, so this way is arguably better for the consumer.

      • When Type C was brought to the USB-IF, Apple knew about it, because they are a member.

        By your account, Apple knew that USB-C would not come out for at least 2 years then. And Apple could not afford to wait that long for a connector that might come out.

        They could have offered up the Lightning connector at that point and done away with the stupid DRM chip that holds back the charge rate going forwards.

        And what makes you sure USB would accept? Remember all USB since mini-A connectors are female when it comes to the cable and male when it comes to the port. Lightning is male on the cable side. I doubt USB would change their philosophy and this was is confirmed as USB-C is also female.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kriston ( 7886 )

      You can't be serious. My older Lightning cables have the black pin disease and I have to buy new cables for my family every six months.

      I have never had to buy replacement Type-C cables.

      Not to mention Lightning cannot support Fast or Super Fast Charging because it can only deliver 9 watts at 5 volts.

    • Or you can fix your complaints about USB-C with a magnetically-attaching cable for $7 and just leave the USB-C end in your phone, which also helps with dust intrusion. And since you clearly don't have a problem with proprietary connections, you now have something that can plug your phone into any standard charger or USB port literally in the world with better device-saving characteristics than your beloved Lightning connector.

      Do you think that's more or less prone to breaking than Lightning if you are cons

  • More accurately, (Score:2, Insightful)

    by blugalf ( 7063499 )

    So Apple is now in the awkward position of embracing the very technology it didn't want.

    rather: "So Apple is now in the awkward position of wanting to sell their products in the EU market while not wanting to follow that market's regulations".

    Nobody is forcing apple to sell their stuff in the EU or even to change their products for other markets. Perhaps a good opportunity to pull out of the EU to, er, teach them a lesson?

  • ...didn't want seat belts. But then it turned out that they're a good idea that benefits everyone. Much of the time, exclusive & unique doesn't serve anyone except the manufacturer.

  • What? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Monday September 04, 2023 @09:46AM (#63822002)

    the potentially harmful precedent of governments influencing product design.

    Government has always influenced product design by setting standards. One can look at cars with their mandatory, and stupid, backup camera and consequent screen. Manufacturers had to alter their dash design to accomodate this.

    Pick almost any piece of equipment and it's guaranteed there is some government regulation which influences the design of the product in some manner.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Ichijo ( 607641 )

      And if government required all cell phones to take standardized, user replaceable batteries so people no longer have to pay inflated prices for fake OEM replacements.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by guruevi ( 827432 )

        Then we'd all be using the Ericsson removable battery design they used for their phones, because they were at that point the only phone manufacturer in Europe.

        Never heard of Ericsson phones? Exactly my point. Simply sitting in your pocket and the battery would come apart from the back and if on the floor, they must have had it designed by Tony Hawk (hopefully youngsters remember that name from the video games) because it would always skate on its own like 10m down the street.

    • Government has always influenced product design by setting standards.

      No doubt. I'd far prefer it was a voluntary industry standard (e.g. TCP/IP) rather than a design-by-ivory-tower-academics-and-bureaucrats standard (e.g. OSI). And I'd prefer adoption was driven by customer demand rather than fiat.

      One can look at cars with their mandatory, and stupid, backup camera and consequent screen.

      <rant>

      My current hot button is the garage door opener bought yesterday. The fine legislators in Sacramento decided I absolutely could not live with a garage door opener unless it includes a backup battery so it'll work when the power is out.

      I don't know about you all but I've

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by hawk ( 1151 )

        well, gee, folks under three feet tall might not be able to reach the release cord during a power outage . . .

        eyeroll

        hawk, who used the manual release on his garage door during an outage last week.

  • OMG the horror ! Using tried, true and standard technology that does exactly the same thing their proprietary shit does. How will they ever make money only on their 50% marked up hardware ?

    • Apple predated "standard" USB-C tech by many years and probably is a big reason it was created. USB was much worse than their better connector at the time. USB-C is a mess of a standard which only became standard by leveraging the monopoly of USB. don't forget thunderbolt, DC power and all the other shit they crammed into the SAME connector. Thankfully almost nobody uses the other features of the port...

      The EU should have had IEEE or somebody work on a real standard to last decades that includes a DC powe

    • I'm sure they can add a popup that says "Warning: Using non-Apple chargers might void your warranty!" every time you plug in a USB-C cable.

    • Using tried, true and standard technology that does exactly the same thing their proprietary shit does.

      Apple released Lightning in products (September 2012) nearly 2 years before USB published USB-C as a specification (August 2014). While Apple has their reality distortion field, I do not think it includes time travel.

  • Precedent? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Immerman ( 2627577 ) on Monday September 04, 2023 @10:08AM (#63822078)

    the potentially harmful precedent of governments influencing product design.

    You mean like how every new ICE vehicle sold in the developed world for ages has had a catalytic converter to reduce dangerous pollution?

    That kind of precedent?

    Because I'm pretty sure not one single manufacturer made that product design decision without government influence.

    • Because I'm pretty sure not one single manufacturer made that product design decision without government influence.

      This is true, they are now the default everywhere. Still, some governments care if you remove them, and some don't.

    • That's not quite analogous. What you're describing is more like the E911 requirement; extra equipment for safety's or the environment's sake that has no appreciable downsides... aside from the platinum inside the things making them theft targets, anyway. The USB-C requirement is more like mandating that all cars everywhere use 87 octane regular unleaded with 15% ethanol added, no exceptions, and all else is verboten. One universal mandated standard, what could go wrong? No more accidentally filling a pe

      • lol consumers won’t be upset. Apple will see a large uptick in sales are people rush to pick up a usb C iPhone. All their other devices use usb C, even their iPad and MacBook.

      • Re:Precedent? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Chelloveck ( 14643 ) on Monday September 04, 2023 @03:21PM (#63823062)

        You do realize that the law doesn't specify the connector, right? It specifies that the industry agrees on and uses the same connector. And it has provisions for it to change in the future. The important part is that the cables/chargers/phones from different manufacturers are mutually compatible. Kind of like how all the electrical outlets in your house are the same size and shape and supply the same voltage. You don't need a GE plug for your GE appliances, and a Samsung plug for your Samsung appliances, and so on. And yet there are still special-purpose outlets available for devices for which the common standard is clearly inappropriate. No one's going to try mandating that your electric car has to be charged over USB-C.

        Your 5-digit userid implies that you've been around for a while. Think back to the 90s and early 2000s when every phone manufacturer had a different charger. Hell, sometimes different models from the same manufacturer had different chargers. And not because they were using some innovative battery chemistry that required a weird non-standard voltage. They were different just to be different so you'd have to buy a new charger from them and couldn't re-use the charger from your last phone. Standardized connectors and charging methods are a *good* thing for consumers.

  • I still lament that, when replacing my iPod year ago, I could no longer charge it over Firewire.

  • Funny observation by company founder (Score:4, Interesting)

    by smoot123 ( 1027084 ) on Monday September 04, 2023 @12:33PM (#63822432)

    The founder of a company I used to work at had a funny story. Our main product didn't have feature X. The founder would go into sales meetings and vigorously explain why the customer absolutely, positively did not really want feature X. Then we had a release with feature X and the founder immediately U-turned and started explaining why feature X was the best thing since sliced bread.

    This happens all the time. You flog the product you have, not the product you wish you had or you wish customers would want. I wouldn't expect Apple to say anything but how great USB-C is. I mean seriously, you expect them to say "we got our arms twisted to switch to USB-C port even though Lightning is better. Suck it up, cupcake."?

  • "Why will Apple be so upbeat about a change it didn't ask for? That's because the company has an iron-clad rule: When it's introducing a new product or dealing with the media, it always wants to operate from a position of strength."

    Yep, reality distortion fields in effect. And thank you for the reminder why it is NEVER a valid idea to believe the crap spewing from Apple's mouth.

  • Apple will describe it as a major win for customers.

    ... and they will be correct.

    And it's customers we should care about, not whatever Apple wants to do.

  • The regulators got what they want. Great. Why is it important how Apple spins this?

    • Because it's important to remind people who lap up propaganda that they are in fact consuming propaganda.

  • Firewire Days are Back, But Better. (Score:3)

    by Vandil X ( 636030 ) on Monday September 04, 2023 @04:28PM (#63823240)
    1. iPods started with Firewire end-to-end. You plugged it right into a Firewire port on the iPod, and a Firewire port on the Mac.
    2. Then Apple switched the connector to the 30-pin Dock Connector that connects to the Mac via Firewire.
    3. Then Apple switched PC connection to USB-A, so they can sell iPods, and later iPhones, to Windows users.
    4. Then Apple switched to the Lightning connector, still using USB-A to connect to computers and outlet adapters.
    5. Apple then phased in Lighting-to USB-C cables as their Macs started using USB-C ports.
    6. Now Apple will use a USB-C cable, end to end with a port right on the bottom of the device, just like the Firewire days.

Slashdot Top Deals

Know Thy User.

Close