I carry multiple cables. What do you do if your cable shorts or worse?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
EU Passes Law to Switch iPhone to USB-C by End of 2024
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
USB 4 isn't faster than USB 3? Apple could have increased the speed of Lightning (and did for one device) but hasn't done it. So Lightning means slow USB 2 speeds. USB C (and the protocols supported) varies wildly but has a much broader use from phones to laptops.
Again for the 10th time, I realize Apple could have run whatever protocol they wanted across their own physical plug. For all practical purposes, they stuck with USB 2. Again, I know changing the plug type doesn't make it faster.
I didn't switch anything. I bought a 100W Anker charger, I can charge a laptop, an iPad, and in the future, a USB C iPhone all with one cable. This charger has 3 ports so I can just use the Lightning cable but still.
The cable situation of USB needs to be fixed. They tried to make compliance cheap. A cable should just work or at least be labeled in such a way that it's clear what the max rate is.
For travel, I have a multi port charger. But sometimes, you might have a one port charger in your coat. Only having one plug type has advantages.
I like Lightning and had no major problems with it. But Apple never bothered to really improve it. If it were on par with the just announced USB PD Revision 3.1 then maybe there would be a case to continue to let the market fight it out. I think Apple decided to let it go years ago to maximize profits before they moved onto something else (likely wireless for phones and it appears USB C for power and data on larger devices).
USB Charger (USB Power Delivery) | USB-IF
Of course it is!
Correct!
Great! So let's stop making the argument that USB-C is better because it is faster, as well as the related "Apple never bothered to improve lightning, so it needs to be replaced."
Agreed, but I think the problems are fundamental. They are trying to jam too many protocols into a connector that can't support them all at the same time, so they have to fragment the standard to the point that its not a single standard. The typical result of "design by committee".
USB C is better because it suppots faster protocols. Lightning doesn't by Apple's choice it seems.
The general public is not tech savvy. They know this plugs into this and doesn't plug into that.
It appears they are learning. Trying to simplify the message.
USB 4: Everything We Know So Far
USB 4 promises a host of benefits that include faster transfer speeds, better management of video and optional compatibility with Thunderbolt 3.
www.tomshardware.com
Apple could stick with Lightning for another 20 years if they wanted to. Or improve it but they haven't. So to the general public, yes USB C is 'better'. One plug is capable of doing a lot more.
You understand the difference between USB 3, USB 3.1 gen 1 and gen 2, USB 3.2 gen 1 and gen 2, USB 4 with or without Thunderbolt support.....etc. 99% of the public just wants to plug it in.
Or what do you do when you want to charge multiple devices at one time?
Just how many of these members of the general public do you think ever use a wire to transfer data from their phones?
When's the last time you did, and why did you do so rather than wifi / cloud?
Last edited by a moderator:
Today, because I was transferring GB of AAC/ALAC files and it's still the quickest way.
Not often but it's not about data transfer for the phones. It's more about having the same plug as many other devices have or will have. Even Apple requires you to have two different cables if you have an iPhone and iPad now.
Yet so many, including yourself, if I remember correctly, have mentioned data transfer speeds as the issue you seek to have addressed. The goal posts seem to be dancing around the field.
As for cables, I already linked you a solution. Or if USBC was that important you’d buy a USBC equipped phone. Oh, and iPad remains Lightning.
Again, as I said it’s more about regulators dictating technology choices rather than allowing market forces to operate freely. The most probable long term outcome is the stifling of innovation since the regulation quashes any incentive for a company to do the R&D to create something new an unforeseen.
I imagine Apple would’ve moved to USBC in time by themselves. Now the EU will be stuck there, for all practical purposes, and likely the rest of the world. Sure some new version may eventually come out, after all the companies in USB-IF agree and then after another few years of legislation. All many years later than without a regulated charge connector type.
Edit - imagine if the EU had decided on this a few years ago when mini-B was a thin…. 🤮
Last edited:
Are you sure? What’s your WiFi like?
I just used the Files app to copy a 1GB file from my NAS to my iPhone, it took about 30 seconds. This transfer rate (~30MB/s) is far below the effective bandwidth of my home WiFi network (>100MB/s), so the NAS is likely the limiting factor. I can’t see how a cable could have improved this.
My iPad is USB C.Yet so many, including yourself, if I remember correctly, have mentioned data transfer speeds as the issue you seek to have addressed. The goal posts seem to be dancing around the field.
As for cables, I already linked you a solution. Or if USBC was that important you’d buy a USBC equipped phone. Oh, and iPad remains Lightning.
Again, as I said it’s more about regulators dictating technology choices rather than allowing market forces to operate freely. The most probable long term outcome is the stifling of innovation since the regulation quashes any incentive for a company to do the R&D to create something new an unforeseen.
I imagine Apple would’ve moved to USBC in time by themselves. Now the EU will be stuck there, for all practical purposes, and likely the rest of the world. Sure some new version may eventually come out, after all the companies in USB-IF agree and then after another few years of legislation. All many years later than without a regulated charge connector type.
Edit - imagine if the EU had decided on this a few years ago when mini-B was a thin…. 🤮
View attachment 2096825
Data transfer speed is still important. Apple can’t even manage USB 3 speeds for some reason. But most care about charging speeds.
You assume the new USB standard will use a different connector. That's not a given. The -C connector has enough connectors to last a while.Yet so many, including yourself, if I remember correctly, have mentioned data transfer speeds as the issue you seek to have addressed. The goal posts seem to be dancing around the field.
As for cables, I already linked you a solution. Or if USBC was that important you’d buy a USBC equipped phone. Oh, and iPad remains Lightning.
Again, as I said it’s more about regulators dictating technology choices rather than allowing market forces to operate freely. The most probable long term outcome is the stifling of innovation since the regulation quashes any incentive for a company to do the R&D to create something new an unforeseen.
I imagine Apple would’ve moved to USBC in time by themselves. Now the EU will be stuck there, for all practical purposes, and likely the rest of the world. Sure some new version may eventually come out, after all the companies in USB-IF agree and then after another few years of legislation. All many years later than without a regulated charge connector type.
Edit - imagine if the EU had decided on this a few years ago when mini-B was a thin…. 🤮
View attachment 2096825
I said while data transfer speeds aren't critical, being stuck at 480mbps speeds in 2022 and beyond is kind of ludicrous at this point especially when up to 40Gbps is possible now and 80 in the future. If you can charge at 12x the rate on devices and transfer data at multiple times faster over a connector roughly the same size, why stick with Lightning?Yet so many, including yourself, if I remember correctly, have mentioned data transfer speeds as the issue you seek to have addressed. The goal posts seem to be dancing around the field.
As for cables, I already linked you a solution. Or if USBC was that important you’d buy a USBC equipped phone. Oh, and iPad remains Lightning.
Again, as I said it’s more about regulators dictating technology choices rather than allowing market forces to operate freely. The most probable long term outcome is the stifling of innovation since the regulation quashes any incentive for a company to do the R&D to create something new an unforeseen.
I imagine Apple would’ve moved to USBC in time by themselves. Now the EU will be stuck there, for all practical purposes, and likely the rest of the world. Sure some new version may eventually come out, after all the companies in USB-IF agree and then after another few years of legislation. All many years later than without a regulated charge connector type.
Edit - imagine if the EU had decided on this a few years ago when mini-B was a thin…. 🤮
And list of iPads that use USB C connector
Charge and connect with the USB-C port on your iPad - Apple Support
Use the versatile USB-C port on your iPad to charge, connect to accessories like external storage devices, cameras, and displays, and power other devices.
I understand you're against regulations. I assume you know everything from the octane in gasoline to how much ethanol is blended to the size of the nozzle is all regulated.
867Mbps on 5GHz, 400Mbps on 2.4GHz.
If I move a file over Wi-Fi from computer to NAS, I get 50 MB/s. If I do it over Ethernet, I get 100MB/s.
I’ve tried syncing my phone before over Wi-Fi, wired is quicker.
Ethernet? We’re talking about transferring to/from an iPhone using Lightning vs using wireless.
No, it doesn't. What lightning supports and what Apple has implemented in lightning ports are two different things. USB4 over lightning would be just as fast as USB4 over USB-C.
Say you had a jet engine and a car engine. You attach the jet to a square and the car to a rectangle. Obviously, the square is faster. Not because it's a square, but because it has a jet engine attached. If you switch engines than, the rectangle is faster. If you attach a jet to both, the speeds are the same. Like the connectors we are discussing, the shape does not determine the speed.
Last edited:
I seriously don't know how to explain this to you. I know the shape of the plug does not determine the speed. I've said this multiple times. It's the protocol supported and the hardware on either end with the cable.
Yes it does. What Apple supports kind of matters because we're talking about Apple products, right? And only Apply implements Lightning connections. Today, how fast can I transfer a file over Lightning....today? Not in theory. And you can get Thunderbolt 4 over Lightning today on an iPhone, iPad, MBP or Mac? How about speeds faster than USB 2?
How fast can I transfer a file using Thunderbolt 4 over USB C? And yes, I know the iPhone doesn't support Thunderbolt 4 but the new MBP and Mac Studio does.
Last edited:
That red jet is super fast. Let's paint my bicycle red, and it will be super fast too!
Red jets are faster than blue cars. Let's paint the cars red, so they will be as fast as the jets!
I know the color of the car does not determine the speed, but today, not in theory, the red jets are faster than the blue cars! The color cars are painted kind of matters because we're talking about cars, right?
Last edited:
Don't confuse "can't" with "chooses not to".
USB3 speed on Lighting has been done. Can't say why they didn't continue it to later devices, but they've shown it to be possible.
iPad Pro's Lightning Port Supports USB 3.0 Transfer Speeds, New Adapters in the Works
Apple's larger-screened iPad Pro includes a Lightning port that's capable of supporting USB 3.0 speeds, according to both an iFixit teardown...
www.macrumors.com
I wasn't talking about USB data transfer standards.
Point was related to connector type standards and barriers to innovate; such as to a smaller connector or perhaps one which doesn't tend to loosen up with use as I've found to be the case with the ones I use.
Please detail exactly why you think Apple would implement anything faster than USB2 over USBC given that they've proven they can do USB3 over Lightning when they wish, but have chosen not to do so.
Plus your assumption of any substantial increase in charging speeds is both unfounded and also ignores the relationship between charging rates over 1C and LiIon battery longevity.
You understand incorrectly.
Last edited:
Cool - good to know they've boosted the spec, though it doesn't appear to be widely adopted.
Also functionally meaningless since you're talking a 14C charge rate, several times the rate that most LiIon batteries can tolerate without damage.
Last edited:
Yes, I’m giving you a bench line of what my kit can do and where the bottleneck is.
The max I get out of Wi-Fi transfers is less than half what my NAS can do - 400Mbps. Which in turn is slower than using a lightning connection to transfer.
So I’ll continue transferring music onto my phone and photos off my phone with a cable. If Apple can give me a 5Gbps usb-c connection, I’ll gratefully take it.
Siri Remote updated with USB C today. Apple knew the writing was on the wall and we’re on the way to a better world for everyone.