Because if it’s done right, a single USB-C charger and cable is all you’ll need, instead of 2 or three different chargers. You buy less things, less trash out there polluting the environment. And it’s not like Apple hasn’t made you throw charging cables before… remember the 30-pin connector?
I do remember the 30-pin connector and how up in arms people were about the change. As it’s not just the cables, it was also all the accessories. When they went from 30-pin to lightning they said they designed it to last a long time and it wasn’t going to be something they changed frequently, because they understood the impact. The EU is now trying to force their hand on that. 30-pin was made for the iPod. The iPhone does a lot more and has different needs. I’m not saying we never need change, just that it shouldn’t be up to the government of 1 little part of the world to dictate what that change is.
Also, not needing to buy any new stuff means less trash than forcing people to buy new stuff. I assume that’s why the iPhone seems to be going last in Apple’s move to USB-C. If they move their lower volume stuff over and give it some time, a good number of people will already have other USB-C stuff they can use the new iPhone with, rather than leading with their highest volume product and forcing everyone to buy new instead of reusing other stuff they may have gotten along the way from other stuff they were already buying. I still know people who don’t have any USB-C stuff.
The fact that you need to buy a special cable to connect an iPhone to a MacBook (for example) should be a motivation enough for the change.
Apple has moved most of their products to USB-C, except the iPhone, and the only explanation possible is that using Lighting is profitable for them, even if it’s not convenient for users. Not all iPhone users are Mac users, and as you said, there are more iPhone users than mac users. All those iPhone users (and Mac users that use iPhones) are forced to buy cables from Apple or an authorized MFi manufacturer) that money will be gone with USB-C, as you’ll be able to use any cable brand you want.
On my part, I’m glad they’re being forced to do it. They seem more worried on incrementing their pile on money than doing something that may benefit their customers, in this case. So, good riddance lightning cables! You won’t be missed. And thanks EU, for doing it.
the only explanation possible is that using Lighting is profitable for them
I gave you another possible explanation in the comment you replied to. They have a whole product line to move and the left iPhone for last, because it has the most impact, and if they leave it for last, it will have less consumer impact. Why not assume good intentions when there is a reasonable explanation?
If it was all about the money, why would they have used the Qi standard for their wireless charging? Why would they have gone all in on USB-C on MacBooks, facing a ton of backlash, to push that port when everyone else was hedging by just including 1 USB-C port at best? Sure they make money from Lightning, but it’s likely a rounding error on their bottom line.
It’s also not a bad thing to have some cable certifications. I’ve seen tear downs of cheap 3rd party charging bricks, or tests of cheap cables, and they’re all really bad and out of spec. They’re cheap for a reason. Maybe that will lead to device damage, maybe it won’t, but I’d rather not risk a $700 phone over saving $10 on a non-certified cable/charger that cuts corners. It happened to my sister, I went against my judgement and bought her a 3rd party cable she asked for instead of the Apple one I thought she should get. A few months later she called me crying because he phone wouldn’t charge anymore. I felt like shit, even though I technically just got her what she wanted.
Apple makes as much good and reasonable decisions as they make questionable ones.
But why could that be? Simple, they make what interest and benefits THEM first. And if it incidentally benefits the customers, fine. If not, people will go up in arms, but they don’t care because they know that in the end, they’re powerless and will keep buying their products.
They don’t care if customers have to change accessories (the move to Lightning is the proof), they change things, or use new standards as long as it benefits THEM in any way, or is in their interest. All those changes you mentioned benefited THEM, and in some cases, the customers too, but in others, they didn’t and then customers got upset.
And they simply don’t want to change to USB-C on the iPhone because it’s not beneficial for them, it just benefits the customers. And that’s, in my opinion, all that there’s to it. And again, I’m glad that, for a change, they’ll be forced to do something that benefits the customers and not them.
I don’t see why it’s them or us. If Apple (or any company) can make the customers happy, people will by more products and create more positive word of mouth, which is good for Apple. Generally the most successful companies aren’t the ones sacrificing their customers for a couple extra cents. That may work in the short term, but not over decades.
I agree with that. I have not been a fan of everything Cook has done, and he is clearly not a product person. That being said, there have been several long overdue features in macOS that came after Jobs was gone that customers begged for for a long time. The MacBook Pro is another example of where Apple clearly listened to the customer and not their initial vision. They brought back some ports, made it thicker, and brought back the old keyboard.
Like I said, I think the removal of lightning for the iPhone was on the roadmap, they just aren’t being given the time to see it through. I’m sure they’re planning 5 years ahead internally.
Lightning was better that the 30-pin one. Or maybe the first iterations of USB-C. These days, USB-C is way more capable, technically, than Lightning, and that’s why the industry use it so massively (even Apple for other products).
They don’t charge it because it will only benefit consumers, but not the company. And they only care for things that benefit them, irregardless of it benefiting the customers.
I don’t know what makes any company make the decisions they do, but it’s easy to see that lightning is a better connector for a phone.
You’re right that usbc supports more lanes and by extension a higher transfer speed and that usbc has a higher voltage power delivery standard.
The better physical port to have on a phone is lightning. It’s more durable, easier to clean, and the cable breaks instead of the port.
The environment phones live in makes those much more important than faster transfers and charging speed (every phone I’ve dealt with from any manufacturer actually throttles back the charging speed to save the battery!).
So while usbc has significant advantages over lightning, it’s physically a bad port to have on a device that’s hanging around in your pocket and that makes it worse.
I’m not aware of anything to cite. It’s kinda common knowledge if you have phones with usbc ports or do microsoldering work. If you have one at hand to look at, just take a gander. The usbc receptacle has more conductors than lightning and they’re thinner and all on a flexible (and breakable) plastic tongue.
In a way it looks like an engineer was playing a cruel joke.
If you just gotta have some kind of data, look up usbc repair videos. There’s a bunch and they showcase all the ways it can get mangled.
I’m not saying it’s a bad port for a desktop or laptop. It’s kinda perfect for those circumstances. Low cycle, relatively clean, etc. A phone needs the exact opposite: high cycle, extreme durability, extreme dirt tolerance, amenable to field expedient cleaning.
How is making me throw away all my old charging cables and buy a bunch of new ones better for the environment?
Because if it’s done right, a single USB-C charger and cable is all you’ll need, instead of 2 or three different chargers. You buy less things, less trash out there polluting the environment. And it’s not like Apple hasn’t made you throw charging cables before… remember the 30-pin connector?
I do remember the 30-pin connector and how up in arms people were about the change. As it’s not just the cables, it was also all the accessories. When they went from 30-pin to lightning they said they designed it to last a long time and it wasn’t going to be something they changed frequently, because they understood the impact. The EU is now trying to force their hand on that. 30-pin was made for the iPod. The iPhone does a lot more and has different needs. I’m not saying we never need change, just that it shouldn’t be up to the government of 1 little part of the world to dictate what that change is.
Also, not needing to buy any new stuff means less trash than forcing people to buy new stuff. I assume that’s why the iPhone seems to be going last in Apple’s move to USB-C. If they move their lower volume stuff over and give it some time, a good number of people will already have other USB-C stuff they can use the new iPhone with, rather than leading with their highest volume product and forcing everyone to buy new instead of reusing other stuff they may have gotten along the way from other stuff they were already buying. I still know people who don’t have any USB-C stuff.
The fact that you need to buy a special cable to connect an iPhone to a MacBook (for example) should be a motivation enough for the change.
Apple has moved most of their products to USB-C, except the iPhone, and the only explanation possible is that using Lighting is profitable for them, even if it’s not convenient for users. Not all iPhone users are Mac users, and as you said, there are more iPhone users than mac users. All those iPhone users (and Mac users that use iPhones) are forced to buy cables from Apple or an authorized MFi manufacturer) that money will be gone with USB-C, as you’ll be able to use any cable brand you want.
On my part, I’m glad they’re being forced to do it. They seem more worried on incrementing their pile on money than doing something that may benefit their customers, in this case. So, good riddance lightning cables! You won’t be missed. And thanks EU, for doing it.
I gave you another possible explanation in the comment you replied to. They have a whole product line to move and the left iPhone for last, because it has the most impact, and if they leave it for last, it will have less consumer impact. Why not assume good intentions when there is a reasonable explanation?
If it was all about the money, why would they have used the Qi standard for their wireless charging? Why would they have gone all in on USB-C on MacBooks, facing a ton of backlash, to push that port when everyone else was hedging by just including 1 USB-C port at best? Sure they make money from Lightning, but it’s likely a rounding error on their bottom line.
It’s also not a bad thing to have some cable certifications. I’ve seen tear downs of cheap 3rd party charging bricks, or tests of cheap cables, and they’re all really bad and out of spec. They’re cheap for a reason. Maybe that will lead to device damage, maybe it won’t, but I’d rather not risk a $700 phone over saving $10 on a non-certified cable/charger that cuts corners. It happened to my sister, I went against my judgement and bought her a 3rd party cable she asked for instead of the Apple one I thought she should get. A few months later she called me crying because he phone wouldn’t charge anymore. I felt like shit, even though I technically just got her what she wanted.
Apple makes as much good and reasonable decisions as they make questionable ones.
But why could that be? Simple, they make what interest and benefits THEM first. And if it incidentally benefits the customers, fine. If not, people will go up in arms, but they don’t care because they know that in the end, they’re powerless and will keep buying their products.
They don’t care if customers have to change accessories (the move to Lightning is the proof), they change things, or use new standards as long as it benefits THEM in any way, or is in their interest. All those changes you mentioned benefited THEM, and in some cases, the customers too, but in others, they didn’t and then customers got upset.
And they simply don’t want to change to USB-C on the iPhone because it’s not beneficial for them, it just benefits the customers. And that’s, in my opinion, all that there’s to it. And again, I’m glad that, for a change, they’ll be forced to do something that benefits the customers and not them.
Hope that clears the point.
I don’t see why it’s them or us. If Apple (or any company) can make the customers happy, people will by more products and create more positive word of mouth, which is good for Apple. Generally the most successful companies aren’t the ones sacrificing their customers for a couple extra cents. That may work in the short term, but not over decades.
I think Jobs said it pretty well…
Young Jobs - https://youtu.be/48j493tfO-o
Old Jobs - https://youtu.be/XmRNIGqzuRI
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/48j493tfO-o
https://piped.video/XmRNIGqzuRI
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
This is not Job’s company anymore, and it hasn’t been for a while…
While Cook is not a bad CEO at all, he comes from manufacturing, and it shows.
I agree with that. I have not been a fan of everything Cook has done, and he is clearly not a product person. That being said, there have been several long overdue features in macOS that came after Jobs was gone that customers begged for for a long time. The MacBook Pro is another example of where Apple clearly listened to the customer and not their initial vision. They brought back some ports, made it thicker, and brought back the old keyboard.
Like I said, I think the removal of lightning for the iPhone was on the roadmap, they just aren’t being given the time to see it through. I’m sure they’re planning 5 years ahead internally.
The other explanation for lightning on the phone is that it’s a better connector for a phone.
It’s simpler, easier to clean, more durable and is designed to break the cable instead of the phone when twisted or bent.
Lightning was better that the 30-pin one. Or maybe the first iterations of USB-C. These days, USB-C is way more capable, technically, than Lightning, and that’s why the industry use it so massively (even Apple for other products).
They don’t charge it because it will only benefit consumers, but not the company. And they only care for things that benefit them, irregardless of it benefiting the customers.
I don’t know what makes any company make the decisions they do, but it’s easy to see that lightning is a better connector for a phone.
You’re right that usbc supports more lanes and by extension a higher transfer speed and that usbc has a higher voltage power delivery standard.
The better physical port to have on a phone is lightning. It’s more durable, easier to clean, and the cable breaks instead of the port.
The environment phones live in makes those much more important than faster transfers and charging speed (every phone I’ve dealt with from any manufacturer actually throttles back the charging speed to save the battery!).
So while usbc has significant advantages over lightning, it’s physically a bad port to have on a device that’s hanging around in your pocket and that makes it worse.
Citation on the durability claim?
I’ve been using USB-C since it was released, and none of them ever broke on me.
I’m not aware of anything to cite. It’s kinda common knowledge if you have phones with usbc ports or do microsoldering work. If you have one at hand to look at, just take a gander. The usbc receptacle has more conductors than lightning and they’re thinner and all on a flexible (and breakable) plastic tongue.
In a way it looks like an engineer was playing a cruel joke.
If you just gotta have some kind of data, look up usbc repair videos. There’s a bunch and they showcase all the ways it can get mangled.
I’m not saying it’s a bad port for a desktop or laptop. It’s kinda perfect for those circumstances. Low cycle, relatively clean, etc. A phone needs the exact opposite: high cycle, extreme durability, extreme dirt tolerance, amenable to field expedient cleaning.