Apple to Limit iPhone 15 USB-C Cables to USB 2.0 Speeds: Report::undefined

  • DrRatso@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    149
    ·
    1 year ago

    ITT people pretending this is a spite based move, when realistically it is probably cutting costs by reusing the same hardware they used for lightning ports just soldering on a USB-C port instead of a lightning one.

      • DrRatso@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean, it’s not like it matters much. Most of apple devices actually expected to transfer data over wire are on thunderbolt already aren’t they? Frankly I’m a little surprised they switched to C on 15 already, iirc they could have still released this cycle on lightning according to EU regulation (I think it only comes in effect end of 2024, right?) It comes to me as no surprise that they use up the controllers they had for lightning before they roll out thunderbolt. It will probably be 2.0 for base and thunderbolt for pro this cycle and likely thunderbolt for all next cycle. That would be the apple m/o.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        Are you trying to suggest the company that invented rounded corners isn’t innovative enough?!

    • Sethayy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      77
      ·
      1 year ago

      dude usb 3.0 is 15 years old by now, and they’re a trillion dollar company. They’ll manage, this is 100% by choice

    • nathris@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      1 year ago

      The SoC lacks the hardware. Even the USB C iPads with A series chips operate at 2.0 speeds. They can only do 5Gbit in host mode, like with an external SSD. Plugged in to a computer they are 2.0.

      I would imagine future chips will have the capability, once the Pro chips trickle down to the base models.

      • DrRatso@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yea, well, there you go. Pretty much straight up supports my original claim. If they need to full on change the SoC why in the hell would they fork up to support thunderbolt on iphones.

        • lud@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Thunderbolt seems excessive for most, but 3.0 would be welcome.

    • wieli99@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      You think this more likely than just creating a bigger artificial difference between the standard and normal model?

      • DrRatso@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think that is most likely a lot of what drives that divide, but this almost certainly the case for the port. Some shit undoubtedly is software locked, and that is in fact scummy, but new hardware will always be more expensive than hardware you have already designed and maybe even have lying around.

        To get thunderbolt in there they probably need a new board specifically for the iphone, while they can just cram in the lightning version with a new solder job and call it a day.

        At the end of the day 95+% of the people who will use their phones will only use the port for charging anyway.

        • wieli99@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Well we don’t know yet what port the pro model we have, so once we do, we’ll know whether it’s just scummy behavior once again, or if Apple decided to use low to midrange hardware on all their models

    • PeachMan@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      That, and also, how many iPhone users do you think will actually notice slower USB speeds? One percent? They literally do not need 3.0 to keep their customers happy. And they’re not going to poach many Android fanboys with this change, so who cares?

      • netburnr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m with you, people use the cable for power, it’s pretty rare to use them for data transfers. He’ll moving to a new phone is all wireless, just set them next to each other.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m going over… that’s literally all I needed from them. Consumer choice is all lesser evils atm.

        RIP Firefox phone and Samsung Pure.

    • 3laws@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      by reusing the same hardware

      I’m sure their engineers are competent enough to repurpose she iPad Pro’s TB4 hardware.

      • DrRatso@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Two factors. Do they still have lightning hardware sitting on shelves? Do they need to design to fit the iphone form factor? If the answer is yes to either of these, designing for TB this release cycle seems non-sensical when most people only use the cable to charge their phones.

    • dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I believe it’s both. Apple said that they’d be compliant with the EU regulations of having usb-c as a port for any cell phone with a charging port. I don’t remember the exact wording, but a valid interpretation was that usb-c is not required if the device has no charging port. I believe apple is moving towards exclusively QI-charging and wireless connection. Reducing the capability of wired connections would in that case just be a way to move the users towards the planned infrastructure.

      So it’s both a spiteful move regarding the regulations, but also a move which reduces costs and pushes users their desired way.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I believe apple is moving towards exclusively QI-charging and wireless connection.

        I sure hope not. I’d have to take off my case every time I wanted to charge my phone.

        • dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I charge my samsung just fine with a decently fat case. Does apple have a weaker QI receptor?

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I have a wallet case. It’s really really thick. It holds all my credit cards and drivers license and stuff.

            • dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I see. I believe that Apple’s vision is that payment cards and drivers licence will soon be fully integrated in the phone, eliminating the need for a wallet case. Not that I’m an Apple user, but I am pretty much at the point of never using physical payment cards, and my drivers licence has a digital version in my country.

                • dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  My health insurance is fully digital and my country has an official app for driver’s licences. This varies from country to country, but I think we’re all heading in that direction.