No phone comes with the latest everything. Even top end Android phones still don’t come with proper 3D secure Face ID, and some of them are even more expensive than the iPhone. Apple manage to do Face ID for £649, the competition don’t do it at any price.
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.
Images of Alleged iPhone 15 USB-C Connector Parts Leak Online
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Controller limitations could be overcome with the right I/O chipset (see: Samsung Galaxy S23 models). And iOS code should be able to handle faster I/O speeds given the use of iPadOS on the iPad Pro models.
I suspect it’s very easy for Apple to put a USB 3 controller in the iPhone. The question isn't whether they can do it or not, the question is whether they should or not. So far Apple has seen no need for the iPhone to have/need anything more than USB 2, primarily, I suspect, because the port on the iPhone is not designed to be used for anything that needs more than USB 2 bandwidth.
For instance if the iPhone was designed to output to a 4K display at 60hz it would probably need a USB 3 controller, but if it’s not designed to do that, it probably just needs a USB 2 controller.
Last edited:
The price is set based on what people are willing to pay, it seems Apple knows what it is doing
This. If Google could sell the pixel for £1000 instead of £300 then they would. But if they tried, they’d probably find no one would buy them, so they can’t.
People don’t care about the environment, as it’s so often displayed on the forums here... 🙁
Last edited:
Well... What you mean is that Lightning is just so old it can't run high power or high speed devices. A proper USB-C cable will support everything because it is backwards compatible.
Definitely not. Maybe in the macrumors forum, but I was talking most people in general.
I wonder if the Pros will have Thunderbolt speed ports?
Probably only if the iPhone starts being designed to output to a second screen via the port (I know it can already do it, but it's not a primary function the way it is for the iPad). I can't think of any other functionality the iPhone would be designed for that would otherwise need that much bandwidth.
maybe he/she means that existing users upgrading to USB-C will have to buy cables all over again, junking the existing lighting ones. Perhaps that environment unfriendly aspect?
Yes apple manufacturers the cables such that all devices are compatible. Usb c is a hot mess, which is why I prefer the tried and true lightning connector.
You can’t even defend your anecdotal statement.
Last edited:
Yes they can but that increases the cost of the device for no practical improvement. I take photos and videos all the time on my phone and very very rarely use a cable to offload them. And even then, at "just" usb 2.0 speeds, it's only a few seconds to a minute to offload. In order to switch to usb 3.0, I think they need the RAM to be faster, which it might be now and that's why we're switching to type C and USB 3 speeds on the 15 Pros, and the physical controller would necessitate a new processor (which we're getting) and possibly increased power limits (which we're also getting). It's not as easy as just swapping out a Lightning board module for a type C board module. The iPad Pros use more powerful processors than the phones and have larger batteries.
"net" waste is reduced only if Apple permanently sticks with USB-C port. plenty of rumors showing Apple has its eyes on portless which would make this USB-C switch temporary and unnecessary.
Many years of producing USB-C cables when they could have stuck with Lightning for many years would be bad for the environment since there are billions of functioning lightning cables in the world. It is more environmentally friendly to reuse what we currently have so a better option would be to force Apple to stop including lightning cables in the box.
As you pointed out, anecdotal.
My anecdotal experience is that I've had only one lightning cable break out of the many lightning cables I currently own. So this data point and your data point isn't really conclusive to how it will affect the environment.
Sure.
Disagreed. Switching to USB-C more than likely means a cable should be included. Otherwise many lightning owners will be frustrated.
Too bad many components of MagSafe has already been approved and being incorporated into the Qi spec.
Switching to USB-C would cause it to be included for many years. Literally EUs fault.
Agree to disagree.
You completely misunderstood. I meant Apple inevitably will be forcing wireless on their iPhone customers.
Yes, thank you EU for creating an environmental disaster. Apple will likely ship a 2.0 cable which you'll probably throw away later because it doesn't accommodate a lot of modern USB functions.
Disaster? Come on man, enough with the hyperbole.
I know the USB spec quite well and won't have such issues. I guess the, probably dozen or so lightning cables (all genuine) I've tossed over the years
is a disaster too?
You know what I'm doing? KEEPING MY CURRENT IPHONE. That's how you save the environment; stop upgrading constantly and buying crap you don't need.
I wish they did this years ago so I can have one cord that charges all my devices.
I'm willing to bet you can't figure out which USB-C in my drawer is 3A or max 60W without using a tool to measure the wattage or which can only run at USB2.0 speeds.
Speaking of anecdotal experience, I'm throwing out all of my USB-C cables and sticking to 3.0 speeds/100W minimum because I can't stand picking up a cable and failing to charge my MacBook at full speed.
Not really what I'm discussing here.
THANK YOU. This genuinely improved my day by making me less angry at Apple.