Change is inevitable but there is a large ecosystem built around the current connector. This isn't going to be an easy transition.
Get a 30pin to this thin connector adaptor, problem solved. If the adaptor has a lower contour that's exactly the same as an iPhone or iPod, then it will work pretty much the same way as it's working right now. Plus it has the benefit of allowing you to use a peripheral designed for older iDevice with a new one, if you get the right shaped adaptor.
If it's a unique connector you most certainly can. And if someone wants to use it they will have to license it from you.
I guess I should ask why you think a unique connector design shouldn't be patentable?
I don't see anything paraticulary unique or non obvious about it. I guess I just have a low tolerance for trivial patents. In constrast their MagSafe connector is unique and non-trivial.
I don't see anything paraticulary unique or non obvious about it. I guess I just have a low tolerance for trivial patents. In constrast their MagSafe connector is unique and non-trivial.
How else can say it except to say that unique means unique, not cool looking. MagSafe is just a power cable and some magnets, which had been used on shipping device for at least a couple decades. If you want to know what unique means try plugging a USB cable into an Ethernet or FW port, and vice versa.
You still have to plug in to charge. Likely for the next decade. You might as well sync while you're doing that.
You're looking at how you use your iOS device and not considering other usage. I rarely plug my iOS devices into my Mac for charging. I have an alarm clock that I put my iPhone into at night, I plug it into my car when driving, I plug it into my boat when sailing, and I carry portable batteries with me.
So for me (and I know many others), I'd love to be able to sync without finding and plugging in cables each time since I'm not normally charging when I do.
How else can say it except to say that unique means unique, not cool looking. MagSafe is just a power cable and some magnets, which had been used on shipping device for at least a couple decades. If you want to know what unique means try plugging a USB cable into an Ethernet or FW port, and vice versa.
I do know what unique means and I also know that adding a few lines and changing the size can hardly be considered unique.
You're looking at how you use your iOS device and not considering other usage. I rarely plug my iOS devices into my Mac for charging. I have an alarm clock that I put my iPhone into at night, I plug it into my car when driving, I plug it into my boat when sailing, and I carry portable batteries with me.
So for me (and I know many others), I'd love to be able to sync without finding and plugging in cables each time since I'm not normally charging when I do.
Sure, that would be great but that doesn't mean it's the best option. There are a lot of pitfalls associated with OTA syncing of large amounts of data, but considering Apple hasn't been able to get it right with MobileMe for relatively inconsequential amounts of data for contacts, calendar, bookmarks and notes I wouldn't be holding my breath for the ability to sync an entire iDevice worth of data which is now up to 64GB for the largest WiFi-capable devices.
Assuming Apple will get a handle on syncing and Lion's Local Snaphots are a sign of things to come they would also need to have a system in place that would gauge how mug data will be processed against the transfer speed and remaining battery life. Will this work on battery power? If so, what is the minimum needed so that your phone is made completely unusable by this syncing? Will they cap the amount of data to be synced over WiFi to prevent this? How will this affect the local network speed? How will this affect the host computer you're syncing to? Will it disallow a sync if the network is wing congested or the battery is low or will be saturate the local network and sync until it goes into sleep mode? How would the average consumer feel about this? Would they understand the processes inaction enough to intelligently disable/enable this feature?
Should Apple bother with that to satisfy a few geeks or go with a more sound solution?
In a similar vein, what about OTA updates? Would a 600MB iPhone update over a limited plan from a carrier be something consumers as a whole woul be okay with? What about the network usage slowdown and battery drain when this happens in the background? Will the system check for 600MB of free space before initiation the OTA update in the background or will Apple reserve the free space beforehand on a hidden partition like it does with Lion? Does this mean that root access can be had from a wireless connection potentially inadvertently corrupting millions of units away from a viable iTunes-based backup and restore system? Could this service be hacked and being down millions of iPhones from someone(s) not even within the country(ies) of the attcack?
And if Apple apologists had their way, none of these would have come about because everything would have been perfect just the way it is. And before you deny ever calling anything perfect, did you ever admit that things needed improvement? If not, then you may as well be calling everything perfect.
I just reread my post...I don't see the word "perfect" in it at all.
That's something I didn't consider. So why is the USB 2.0 data only 1/4the speed? Is this a processing limitation of the current ARM architecture, the RAM, or some other factor. Is there reason to believe offering USB3.0 or Thunderbolt will resolve any of this?
USB's bandwidth potential is a maximum only and is usually only achieved in bursts. This is one of the reasons it has always been so much slower than Firewire. Thunderbolt is much more like Firewire in terms of overall throughput compared w/USB. Less spiky, more steady and much faster.
Take a look at the size of the connector, then take a look at the important bit that has all the contacts. This thing could be 1/3 to 1/2 the size it is now. Every chance this could be on iphones soon. Mind you, I would still rather have wireless sync to iTunes than blistering fast cabled...
There is too much electromagnetic pollution in our homes already. Some scientists are finding that electromagnetic frequencies have a harmful effect on our brains and body functions.
I hope that all computer products will maintain the option to turn off their broadcasted signals. I don't own a cell phone or use wireless connections in my home.
What will all the companies do when real long term data comes out proving that cell phone users are being harmed by the extremely high frequency microwaves being blasted into their skulls? Cell phone towers are even worse for the residents around them.
A patent recently granted to Apple reveals that the company is looking into a modified dock connector compatible with newer high-speed communication standards, such as USB 3.0 and a "dual-lane DisplayPort," or Thunderbolt, connector.
I don't think that "dual-lane DisplayPort" has anything to do with Thunderbolt. Displayport uses 1 to 4 lanes; effective data rate 1.296, 2.16, or 4.32 Gbit/s per lane (total 5.184, 8.64, or 17.28 Gbit/s for a 4-lane link). This implementation probably limits displayport to 8.64Gb/s (or up to a single 2560 × 1600 × 30 bpp @ 60 Hz display) over two lanes. That's probably why the displayport section of the new connector only use 7 pins from the 20 pins on a regular displayport connector.
This looks like the new Dock Connector I've been predicting and it can't get here soon enough with a 64GB iPhone and Touch potentially coming this year, though no competitor is matching Apple on this front, and a 128 iPad potentially coming next year.
60 pins. I wonder what the final size will be. I assume it's thinner than the current Dock Connector, but how wide will it be? (rhetorical)
Oh, and what christopher126 said, too.
How many people said "no way" when a few of us were discussing the possibility?
The bandwidth would be much appreciated, especially when synching HD video files. It might extend the capabilities as well. Hmmm. Time to be wrong again.
How many people said "no way" when a few of us were discussing the possibility?
The bandwidth would be much appreciated, especially when synching HD video files. It might extend the capabilities as well. Hmmm. Time to be wrong again.
Yeah, even if we don't expect the tech to be rest for awhile it seems impossible to imagine Apple implementing an entirely new data protocol in conjunction with Intel and ignore the 100+ million iOS-based iDevices it will be selling each year. I just hope thy able to get this chip into the iPhone starting this year.
Comments
Change is inevitable but there is a large ecosystem built around the current connector. This isn't going to be an easy transition.
Get a 30pin to this thin connector adaptor, problem solved. If the adaptor has a lower contour that's exactly the same as an iPhone or iPod, then it will work pretty much the same way as it's working right now. Plus it has the benefit of allowing you to use a peripheral designed for older iDevice with a new one, if you get the right shaped adaptor.
I'm amazed that something like this is even patentable. I think should draw one up with two more pins and get my own patent.
If it's a unique connector you most certainly can. And if someone wants to use it they will have to license it from you.
I guess I should ask why you think a unique connector design shouldn't be patentable?
If it's a unique connector you most certainly can. And if someone wants to use it they will have to license it from you.
I guess I should ask why you think a unique connector design shouldn't be patentable?
I don't see anything paraticulary unique or non obvious about it. I guess I just have a low tolerance for trivial patents. In constrast their MagSafe connector is unique and non-trivial.
I don't see anything paraticulary unique or non obvious about it. I guess I just have a low tolerance for trivial patents. In constrast their MagSafe connector is unique and non-trivial.
How else can say it except to say that unique means unique, not cool looking. MagSafe is just a power cable and some magnets, which had been used on shipping device for at least a couple decades. If you want to know what unique means try plugging a USB cable into an Ethernet or FW port, and vice versa.
You still have to plug in to charge. Likely for the next decade. You might as well sync while you're doing that.
You're looking at how you use your iOS device and not considering other usage. I rarely plug my iOS devices into my Mac for charging. I have an alarm clock that I put my iPhone into at night, I plug it into my car when driving, I plug it into my boat when sailing, and I carry portable batteries with me.
So for me (and I know many others), I'd love to be able to sync without finding and plugging in cables each time since I'm not normally charging when I do.
How else can say it except to say that unique means unique, not cool looking. MagSafe is just a power cable and some magnets, which had been used on shipping device for at least a couple decades. If you want to know what unique means try plugging a USB cable into an Ethernet or FW port, and vice versa.
I do know what unique means and I also know that adding a few lines and changing the size can hardly be considered unique.
You're looking at how you use your iOS device and not considering other usage. I rarely plug my iOS devices into my Mac for charging. I have an alarm clock that I put my iPhone into at night, I plug it into my car when driving, I plug it into my boat when sailing, and I carry portable batteries with me.
So for me (and I know many others), I'd love to be able to sync without finding and plugging in cables each time since I'm not normally charging when I do.
Sure, that would be great but that doesn't mean it's the best option. There are a lot of pitfalls associated with OTA syncing of large amounts of data, but considering Apple hasn't been able to get it right with MobileMe for relatively inconsequential amounts of data for contacts, calendar, bookmarks and notes I wouldn't be holding my breath for the ability to sync an entire iDevice worth of data which is now up to 64GB for the largest WiFi-capable devices.
Assuming Apple will get a handle on syncing and Lion's Local Snaphots are a sign of things to come they would also need to have a system in place that would gauge how mug data will be processed against the transfer speed and remaining battery life. Will this work on battery power? If so, what is the minimum needed so that your phone is made completely unusable by this syncing? Will they cap the amount of data to be synced over WiFi to prevent this? How will this affect the local network speed? How will this affect the host computer you're syncing to? Will it disallow a sync if the network is wing congested or the battery is low or will be saturate the local network and sync until it goes into sleep mode? How would the average consumer feel about this? Would they understand the processes inaction enough to intelligently disable/enable this feature?
Should Apple bother with that to satisfy a few geeks or go with a more sound solution?
In a similar vein, what about OTA updates? Would a 600MB iPhone update over a limited plan from a carrier be something consumers as a whole woul be okay with? What about the network usage slowdown and battery drain when this happens in the background? Will the system check for 600MB of free space before initiation the OTA update in the background or will Apple reserve the free space beforehand on a hidden partition like it does with Lion? Does this mean that root access can be had from a wireless connection potentially inadvertently corrupting millions of units away from a viable iTunes-based backup and restore system? Could this service be hacked and being down millions of iPhones from someone(s) not even within the country(ies) of the attcack?
These a few of the things that come to mind
And if Apple apologists had their way, none of these would have come about because everything would have been perfect just the way it is. And before you deny ever calling anything perfect, did you ever admit that things needed improvement? If not, then you may as well be calling everything perfect.
I just reread my post...I don't see the word "perfect" in it at all.
Best
Less USB3, more Light Peak please, unless of course Intel decide to fully support USB3.
I'm dissappointed with the inconsistant USB3 implementations at the moment.
Could you imagine if they weren't leading the way in iLife and iWork... that would be weird!
Also, I'm pretty sure Google are leading the way in etc etc.
Yep, Firefly...it was late and I did get a little off track with those last points!
Best
That's something I didn't consider. So why is the USB 2.0 data only 1/4the speed? Is this a processing limitation of the current ARM architecture, the RAM, or some other factor. Is there reason to believe offering USB3.0 or Thunderbolt will resolve any of this?
USB's bandwidth potential is a maximum only and is usually only achieved in bursts. This is one of the reasons it has always been so much slower than Firewire. Thunderbolt is much more like Firewire in terms of overall throughput compared w/USB. Less spiky, more steady and much faster.
Take a look at the size of the connector, then take a look at the important bit that has all the contacts. This thing could be 1/3 to 1/2 the size it is now. Every chance this could be on iphones soon. Mind you, I would still rather have wireless sync to iTunes than blistering fast cabled...
There is too much electromagnetic pollution in our homes already. Some scientists are finding that electromagnetic frequencies have a harmful effect on our brains and body functions.
I hope that all computer products will maintain the option to turn off their broadcasted signals. I don't own a cell phone or use wireless connections in my home.
What will all the companies do when real long term data comes out proving that cell phone users are being harmed by the extremely high frequency microwaves being blasted into their skulls? Cell phone towers are even worse for the residents around them.
A patent recently granted to Apple reveals that the company is looking into a modified dock connector compatible with newer high-speed communication standards, such as USB 3.0 and a "dual-lane DisplayPort," or Thunderbolt, connector.
I don't think that "dual-lane DisplayPort" has anything to do with Thunderbolt. Displayport uses 1 to 4 lanes; effective data rate 1.296, 2.16, or 4.32 Gbit/s per lane (total 5.184, 8.64, or 17.28 Gbit/s for a 4-lane link). This implementation probably limits displayport to 8.64Gb/s (or up to a single 2560 × 1600 × 30 bpp @ 60 Hz display) over two lanes. That's probably why the displayport section of the new connector only use 7 pins from the 20 pins on a regular displayport connector.
Main Link Lane 0+
Main Link Lane 0-
Main Link Lane 1+
Main Link Lane 1-
AUX CH+
AUX CH-
Hot Plug Detect or whatever utility pin
This looks like the new Dock Connector I've been predicting and it can't get here soon enough with a 64GB iPhone and Touch potentially coming this year, though no competitor is matching Apple on this front, and a 128 iPad potentially coming next year.
60 pins. I wonder what the final size will be. I assume it's thinner than the current Dock Connector, but how wide will it be? (rhetorical)
Oh, and what christopher126 said, too.
How many people said "no way" when a few of us were discussing the possibility?
The bandwidth would be much appreciated, especially when synching HD video files. It might extend the capabilities as well. Hmmm. Time to be wrong again.
How many people said "no way" when a few of us were discussing the possibility?
The bandwidth would be much appreciated, especially when synching HD video files. It might extend the capabilities as well. Hmmm. Time to be wrong again.
Yeah, even if we don't expect the tech to be rest for awhile it seems impossible to imagine Apple implementing an entirely new data protocol in conjunction with Intel and ignore the 100+ million iOS-based iDevices it will be selling each year. I just hope thy able to get this chip into the iPhone starting this year.