I accidentally knocked my iPod touch off a desk while it was attached to a Mac mini. The cable prevented it from hitting the floor, but ever since that day the Home button has been a bit flakey, sometimes requiring multiple presses to finally register.
So I'm left wondering whether a cord that detaches easily is better or worse.
How? The British power plug is the safest (electrically) design you can get. It's solid, it is fused, and the mechanism connects ground before live and neutral. The plug is solid enough that you can't tug it out of the socket, and the socket itself has barriers to prevent insertion of non-plugs (e.g., forks) into the socket.
Not so pleasant at night if you walk on the plug though.
The Schuko plug also connects ground before live and neutral, it is also quite solid but certainly cannot beat the UK plug when it comes to pure size.
I accidentally knocked my iPod touch off a desk while it was attached to a Mac mini. The cable prevented it from hitting the floor, but ever since that day the Home button has been a bit flakey, sometimes requiring multiple presses to finally register.
So I'm left wondering whether a cord that detaches easily is better or worse.
I have dropped my iPhone 4 quite a couple of times, almost always its fall was much slowed down by the headphone cable. So far it has not suffered much but I am on my third set of headphones (not only because of its double duty as fall shock absorber, I also often catch something with my headphones which usually yanks them out of my ears).
Except that every other manufacturer of cell phones has adopted the MicroUSB standard to comply with very sensible EU requirements. Every manufacturer - smart phone, tablet, eReader - everyone EXCEPT Apple. But somehow, Apple has magic data that can't be transmitted in standard cables.
The whole point was to avoid all the silliness and waste that proprietary cables caused in the early PC and cell phone markets. The logic and the law of the USB standard has nothing to do with market domination.
The now obsolete 30 pin Apple connector is a prime example of exactly the kind of waste and market confusion the EU standard was set up to avoid. New Apple compatible products will now need two dock connectors to cover the market. OR adapters. 3 if they want to be compatible with Android devices. And now I need additional cables and adapters if I want to travel with my Apple products. What about business users who may have a mix of old & new Apple devices plus a blackberry, Android, or other USB device?
Ahh, young grasshopper, you do not know yet why you want this connector. All will be revealed to you in only one more cycle of the moon. Be patient. Eat your rice. Go wash your bowl.
Except that every other manufacturer of cell phones has adopted the MicroUSB standard to comply with very sensible EU requirements. Every manufacturer - smart phone, tablet, eReader - everyone EXCEPT Apple. But somehow, Apple has magic data that can't be transmitted in standard cables.
The whole point was to avoid all the silliness and waste that proprietary cables caused in the early PC and cell phone markets. The logic and the law of the USB standard has nothing to do with market domination.
The now obsolete 30 pin Apple connector is a prime example of exactly the kind of waste and market confusion the EU standard was set up to avoid. New Apple compatible products will now need two dock connectors to cover the market. OR adapters. 3 if they want to be compatible with Android devices. And now I need additional cables and adapters if I want to travel with my Apple products. What about business users who may have a mix of old & new Apple devices plus a blackberry, Android, or other USB device?
Sometimes I marvel at how much wronginess one poster can make in a single post. I'd like to think you are were given bad information but some of the crap you've written just show an anti-Apple bias that seems very unlikely to have come from anywhere else but your own mind.
Sometimes I marvel at how much wronginess one poster can make in a single post. I'd like to think you are were given bad information but some of the crap you've written just show an anti-Apple bias that seems very unlikely to have come from anywhere else but your own mind.
Well I'm open to factual correction, by you or anyone else.Tell me what's not true. (if you feel like it - I understand if you don't think it is worth your time)
[BTW, If you take exception to the phrase "the logic and the law of the USB standard", I can see where that is poorly worded and incomplete. I was referring specifically to the EU trade laws that require all "hand held" phone, smartphone & comm devices sold in the EU use mircoUSB as the charging port on the device side. The logic of the that law has nothing to do with market share - they were trying to bring order to a market for the benefit of consumers, and they were successful. I was not talking about the USB standard itself being any kind of law - it obviously is not.]
But my question is: Why is it a bad thing to ask Apple to use a standard data/power connector. If it works for thousands of other devices of equal complexity, why not Apple?
Ahh, young grasshopper, you do not know yet why you want this connector. All will be revealed to you in only one more cycle of the moon. Be patient. Eat your rice. Go wash your bowl.
Fill it with water... then pretend to design your own phone...
If it works for thousands of other devices of equal complexity, why not Apple?
The whole basis of your post is wrong because you 1) don't think the current 30-pin connector uses USB, 2) think the EU was trying to cut down on cables not power supplies (which Apple's have had USB-A connectors in since not to long after iTunes works on Windows), 3) think the USB port interface is some magical standard despite the many variations of the interface, 4) claim that it offers nothing else that USB offers, 5) and think no other vendor has different port connectors on their handsets other than MicroUSB.
Bonus: 6) Apple's been using the same — THE SAME! — 30-pin connector interface for nearly a decade and using a universal wall charger that will charge any device that, at would connect to FW (for reasons of USB 2.0 not being available) and later to USB and yet you are here pooh-poohing it while completely ignoring how the world has fallen behind Apple's initiative to use interchangeable power adapters when before it would come attached to the cable with some vendor specific power plug. You can still walk into stores and see a stand full of phone power adapters all in molded plastic casings listing the various models and vendors they will work with.
If all digital media I/O is going to be handled by AirPlay, and Firewire has been dropped, then what's left? What do those 9 pins need to do?
Power, USB.x, analog audio out and control signals? Nothing to do with video?
Is that it, and would 9 pins be adequate?
If so, that's a pretty cool evolutionary step. I haven't used AirPlay yet. Is it that fast and reliable? I assume it supports streaming full 1080p video with surround audio, etc?
But my question is: Why is it a bad thing to ask Apple to use a standard data/power connector. If it works for thousands of other devices of equal complexity, why not Apple?
In all of your comments... you seem to forget that Apple's Dock Connector is for more than just charging... it's a platform.
When Apple introduced the Dock Connector in 2003... it ushered in a new generation of accessories for Apple devices. Alarm clocks, boomboxes, digital audio interfaces, video output, etc. Considering the abundance of accessories available and the demand for such accessories... I'd say it worked.
MicroUSB didn't even EXIST in 2003. Even if it did... it still couldn't do all the stuff that Apple's Dock Connector could do.
Would a micro or mini USB been so hard? Why do we need yet ANOTHER non standard data connector that does exactly what all the other STANDARD connectors do?
"Why might Apple want to avoid micro-USB? Because charge and sync is about all micro-USB can do, on the face of it; the accessory support, line-level audio out, and video out features the current-day Dock connector sports aren't possible down a four-wire connector."
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; } Why didn't they use MagSafe technology? That would have been awesome without having to push and pull. Just have it snap into place. If Steve were alive, that's what he would have asked the engineers to do.
This phone has probably been in development for 2 to 3 years. The 7th generation iphone is probably in mid development now and a team has probably being assembled to start on the 8th. Most people don't realize how long and tedious this process is when paving your own way.
Steve was surely alive when this connector was developed, along with a bunch of other competing design variations that he/they could then choose from, followed perhaps by some testing and fine tuning of the design. Of course, Samsung will then take about 2 weeks to copy it and stuff it in their next phone, claiming that Apple didn't invent the rectangular plug with rounded edges.
I would like to see a reversible plug that would make use of contacts on both sides for a total of 17 potential pathways. I would also like to see it snap into place magnetically, although I don't think that would qualify for a MagSafe label. It has all to do with a feeling of quality, ease of plugging in and keeping the plug snuggly in place while requiring minimal effort to pull it out. It will do little to keep the phone from getting yanked off a table.
The length of the connector, along with a seemingly strong metal casing both in the phone and on the connector, will work well for docks.
This phone has probably been in development for 2 to 3 years. The 7th generation iphone is probably in mid development now and a team has probably being assembled to start on the 8th. Most people don't realize how long and tedious this process is when paving your own way.
Steve was surely alive when this connector was developed, along with a bunch of other competing design variations that he/they could then choose from, followed perhaps by some testing and fine tuning of the design. Of course, Samsung will then take about 2 weeks to copy it and stuff it in their next phone, claiming that Apple didn't invent the rectangular plug with rounded edges.
I would like to see a reversible plug that would make use of contacts on both sides for a total of 17 potential pathways. I would also like to see it snap into place magnetically, although I don't think that would qualify for a MagSafe label. It has all to do with a feeling of quality, ease of plugging in and keeping the plug snuggly in place while requiring minimal effort to pull it out. It will do little to keep the phone from getting yanked off a table.
The length of the connector, along with a seemingly strong metal casing both in the phone and on the connector, will work well for docks.
To all of you who don't get it. Steve was alway about pushing his engineers to make what seems impossible at first glance. There are alway trade offs in engineering. The entire antenna gate saga should tell you that he's not above sacrificing some functionality for what's cool or design aesthetics.
As for the excuses that many of you seem to be under the mistaken impression of; that such a small socket wouldn't make a good MagSafe connector. Well, you're wrong. There are some very strong magnets in the marketplace. You can make the connection as strong or as weak as you want. If you want it strong you can put magnets on both the iPhone AND the cable side like they did with the iPad cover which would make the connection much stronger than just on the cable side. You can also vary the size of the magnet to increase or decrease the strength of the connection to the application in addition to the type of magnets used. So, yea, it's completely feasible to make the connector MagSafe.
What we do know is that the engineers at Apple are trying to make all of the components smaller so as to squeeze evey available space out the the devices. The recent adoption of the nano SIM speaks to this. That means that one of the goals of a new connector is to make it as shallow as possible so that it doesn't need to be inserted as deeply into the devices as previous connectos. The only way that can be done is with a MagSafe like connector because the strength of the connection is determined not by the depth or some mechanical arrangement but by the strength of the magnetic attraction.
This also fits in with two other criteria of Apple's MO. It would be consistent with using something they invented for other larger products and that it's "cool".
There can only be two reasons as to why this wasn't done while Steve was alive. One, cost. It may have been too expensive to create a MagSafe connector so small and would fit all of their i devices. Second, it maybe that the Engineers found that such a small MagSafe connector isn't very reliable. That it fails much sooner than a plain mechanical connector. Both are things that may be overcome with time. They may have overcome these two hurdles.
One of the telling signs that Apple is going for a new connector soon is that they're about to refresh all of their i devices next month, with the exception of the iPad. Usually they announce iPhones and iPod's during different times of the year. It's not a coincidence that this year they will do that all at the same time. It's mainly to coordinate the replacement of the connector so that all of their i devices are on the same system.
As for the excuses that many of you seem to be under the mistaken impression of; that such a small socket wouldn't make a good MagSafe connector. Well, you're wrong. There are some very strong magnets in the marketplace.
And that's exactly the opposite of what such a connector should have. These devices aren't multiple pounds. You don't want a magnet anywhere near as strong as on MagSafe or MagSafe 2. Single-spec hopefuls should really just drop their belief until launch so they're not disappointed. I mean, they'll still be disappointed, but at least they won't whine about something that was never going to happen in the first place after the product is released.
So, yea, it's completely feasible to make the connector MagSafe.
And also completely self-defeating. If the magnet is strong, there's no difference from a regular cable. If the magnet is weak, there's no point to having it. And when the connector is this small and this shallow, it's really not even needed.
That means that one of the goals of a new connector is to make it as shallow as possible so that it doesn't need to be inserted as deeply into the devices as previous connectos. The only way that can be done is with a MagSafe like connector because the strength of the connection is determined not by the depth or some mechanical arrangement but by the strength of the magnetic attraction.
We could be wrong, but I doubt it. I imagine that the first thing done to those leaked parts was running a magnet over them. And if they'd reacted in any way, we'd know about it right now.
And that's exactly the opposite of what such a connector should have. These devices aren't multiple pounds. You don't want a magnet anywhere near as strong as on MagSafe or MagSafe 2. Single-spec hopefuls should really just drop their belief until launch so they're not disappointed. I mean, they'll still be disappointed, but at least they won't whine about something that was never going to happen in the first place after the product is released.
And also completely self-defeating. If the magnet is strong, there's no difference from a regular cable. If the magnet is weak, there's no point to having it. And when the connector is this small and this shallow, it's really not even needed.
We could be wrong, but I doubt it. I imagine that the first thing done to those leaked parts was running a magnet over them. And if they'd reacted in any way, we'd know about it right now.
If those leaked photos ARE the final connectors I can guarantee that they're NOT MagSafe as they're too deep to be such a connection. A deep connector means that they're going with a mechanical solution and not MagSafe. It could be that they didn't need a shallow connector as that's one of the reasons they relocated the headphone jack to the bottom of the phone so there's space for the new deep mechanical connector as well.
What this also means is that going forward, all of their small i devices will have their headphone jacks on the same side as their power connector.
As reported in the update, it states the design utilizes 16 pins (+ ground presumably). What is yet to be identified is if it is reversible (orientation independent, etc). If it is, then that means that there is hardware/software that can reverse the pin outs by sensing the orientation of the connector which although not the first example of this technology, (ethernet crossover/straight through detection in routers) at least somewhat revolutionary in the sync/charge phone implementation in that the physical connector has no upside down, which is quite unique to my knowledge.
As reported in the update, it states the design utilizes 16 pins (+ ground presumably). What is yet to be identified is if it is reversible (orientation independent, etc). If it is, then that means that there is hardware/software that can reverse the pin outs by sensing the orientation of the connector which although not the first example of this technology, (ethernet crossover/straight through detection in routers) at least somewhat revolutionary in the sync/charge phone implementation in that the physical connector has no upside down, which is quite unique to my knowledge.
No necessarily. It could be that the 8 wires split to have twice the connectors each crossing over so that no matter who you place it it's still going to match up. That would mean the device (not the cable) would only need to have connector plates for the 8 pins+plus the ground.
Whether it's 8,9, 16 or 17 pins that seems very low. I wonder a couple things.
First of all, could they be using the local host TB controller on the device and have it send/receive USB over that connector so that it's transparent if you were to use a USB cable (which is what I'd think it will come with by default no matter what). If they are changing up the connector I'd xpect them to plan ahead, like they did with the decade old 30-pin connector. Even if a TB controller isn't possible today I would expect them to plan for it being a possibility.
Secondly, nine pins does make sense as USB 3.0 is typically 9 pins. However there are all the other functions of the iDevice port interface that would be lost if those were dedicated to USB. Even at 16 or 17 pins it would still be too few with no room for growth. That makes me think that Apple could be using intelligent in the HW that will switch to the right output as needed. The problem with this is that it can be expensive, more finicky, use more power, and take up more room inside the device. That said, if anyone can make this work and be viable its Apple who can easily invest the time and money without any real long term costs as it's spread across dozens of millions of iPhones, iPads, and iPods per year.
Can't wait for Sammy to copy that with the AppleUSB port.
Why don't they just use a standard friggen connector? Didn't they come to some agreement with the EU that said they'd use the same microusb port all the other phones do so they could cut down on waste? WTF?
So USB 2.0 and USB 3.0 can connect every other kind of device in the world EXCEPT Apple products? Why? Does Apple use some secret faster-than-light subspace transmission mode that requires their connectors to think differently? Need more pins than USB 2.0? Guess what - USB 3.0 has more pins.
Everything coming out or going into the iPortables is either digital data or analog audio . None of which requires an exotic non-standard connector.
Why does it matter? Because when Apple abandons it non-standard connectors (ex 30 pin) it orphans a boatload of devices and cables made for that standard. And it means that you cannot use the same charging and sync cable that your sue for all your other devices - leading to more consumer confusion, needless duplication, and e-waste. This is why the EU has made micro USB the required standard connector for all phones.
Why don't they just use a standard friggen connector? Didn't they come to some agreement with the EU that said they'd use the same microusb port all the other phones do so they could cut down on waste? WTF?
The waste was to reduce all those non-interchangable power adapters. Guess which company has use a USB-A port in the power adapters across PMPs, handsets and tablets for nearly a decade?
Comments
I accidentally knocked my iPod touch off a desk while it was attached to a Mac mini. The cable prevented it from hitting the floor, but ever since that day the Home button has been a bit flakey, sometimes requiring multiple presses to finally register.
So I'm left wondering whether a cord that detaches easily is better or worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hattig
How? The British power plug is the safest (electrically) design you can get. It's solid, it is fused, and the mechanism connects ground before live and neutral. The plug is solid enough that you can't tug it out of the socket, and the socket itself has barriers to prevent insertion of non-plugs (e.g., forks) into the socket.
Not so pleasant at night if you walk on the plug though.
The Schuko plug also connects ground before live and neutral, it is also quite solid but certainly cannot beat the UK plug when it comes to pure size.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad
I accidentally knocked my iPod touch off a desk while it was attached to a Mac mini. The cable prevented it from hitting the floor, but ever since that day the Home button has been a bit flakey, sometimes requiring multiple presses to finally register.
So I'm left wondering whether a cord that detaches easily is better or worse.
I have dropped my iPhone 4 quite a couple of times, almost always its fall was much slowed down by the headphone cable. So far it has not suffered much but I am on my third set of headphones (not only because of its double duty as fall shock absorber, I also often catch something with my headphones which usually yanks them out of my ears).
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanVoyeur
Except that every other manufacturer of cell phones has adopted the MicroUSB standard to comply with very sensible EU requirements. Every manufacturer - smart phone, tablet, eReader - everyone EXCEPT Apple. But somehow, Apple has magic data that can't be transmitted in standard cables.
The whole point was to avoid all the silliness and waste that proprietary cables caused in the early PC and cell phone markets. The logic and the law of the USB standard has nothing to do with market domination.
The now obsolete 30 pin Apple connector is a prime example of exactly the kind of waste and market confusion the EU standard was set up to avoid. New Apple compatible products will now need two dock connectors to cover the market. OR adapters. 3 if they want to be compatible with Android devices. And now I need additional cables and adapters if I want to travel with my Apple products. What about business users who may have a mix of old & new Apple devices plus a blackberry, Android, or other USB device?
Ahh, young grasshopper, you do not know yet why you want this connector. All will be revealed to you in only one more cycle of the moon. Be patient. Eat your rice. Go wash your bowl.
Sometimes I marvel at how much wronginess one poster can make in a single post. I'd like to think you are were given bad information but some of the crap you've written just show an anti-Apple bias that seems very unlikely to have come from anywhere else but your own mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Sometimes I marvel at how much wronginess one poster can make in a single post. I'd like to think you are were given bad information but some of the crap you've written just show an anti-Apple bias that seems very unlikely to have come from anywhere else but your own mind.
Well I'm open to factual correction, by you or anyone else.Tell me what's not true. (if you feel like it - I understand if you don't think it is worth your time)
[BTW, If you take exception to the phrase "the logic and the law of the USB standard", I can see where that is poorly worded and incomplete. I was referring specifically to the EU trade laws that require all "hand held" phone, smartphone & comm devices sold in the EU use mircoUSB as the charging port on the device side. The logic of the that law has nothing to do with market share - they were trying to bring order to a market for the benefit of consumers, and they were successful. I was not talking about the USB standard itself being any kind of law - it obviously is not.]
But my question is: Why is it a bad thing to ask Apple to use a standard data/power connector. If it works for thousands of other devices of equal complexity, why not Apple?
Fill it with water... then pretend to design your own phone...
The whole basis of your post is wrong because you 1) don't think the current 30-pin connector uses USB, 2) think the EU was trying to cut down on cables not power supplies (which Apple's have had USB-A connectors in since not to long after iTunes works on Windows), 3) think the USB port interface is some magical standard despite the many variations of the interface, 4) claim that it offers nothing else that USB offers, 5) and think no other vendor has different port connectors on their handsets other than MicroUSB.
Bonus: 6) Apple's been using the same — THE SAME! — 30-pin connector interface for nearly a decade and using a universal wall charger that will charge any device that, at would connect to FW (for reasons of USB 2.0 not being available) and later to USB and yet you are here pooh-poohing it while completely ignoring how the world has fallen behind Apple's initiative to use interchangeable power adapters when before it would come attached to the cable with some vendor specific power plug. You can still walk into stores and see a stand full of phone power adapters all in molded plastic casings listing the various models and vendors they will work with.
30 pins > 9 pins
If all digital media I/O is going to be handled by AirPlay, and Firewire has been dropped, then what's left? What do those 9 pins need to do?
Power, USB.x, analog audio out and control signals? Nothing to do with video?
Is that it, and would 9 pins be adequate?
If so, that's a pretty cool evolutionary step. I haven't used AirPlay yet. Is it that fast and reliable? I assume it supports streaming full 1080p video with surround audio, etc?
All that, from a phone. It still amazes me.
Beam me up, Scotty.
In all of your comments... you seem to forget that Apple's Dock Connector is for more than just charging... it's a platform.
When Apple introduced the Dock Connector in 2003... it ushered in a new generation of accessories for Apple devices. Alarm clocks, boomboxes, digital audio interfaces, video output, etc. Considering the abundance of accessories available and the demand for such accessories... I'd say it worked.
MicroUSB didn't even EXIST in 2003. Even if it did... it still couldn't do all the stuff that Apple's Dock Connector could do.
So I'm glad Apple went down that route.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanVoyeur
Would a micro or mini USB been so hard? Why do we need yet ANOTHER non standard data connector that does exactly what all the other STANDARD connectors do?
Yes. Yes it would.
Please read: http://www.tuaw.com/2012/06/26/the-whys-and-wherefores-of-a-shrunken-dock-connector/ for details, but basically USB alone is not enough to do all the things they'd want a Dock port to do.
"Why might Apple want to avoid micro-USB? Because charge and sync is about all micro-USB can do, on the face of it; the accessory support, line-level audio out, and video out features the current-day Dock connector sports aren't possible down a four-wire connector."
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCC
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Why didn't they use MagSafe technology? That would have been awesome without having to push and pull. Just have it snap into place. If Steve were alive, that's what he would have asked the engineers to do.
This phone has probably been in development for 2 to 3 years. The 7th generation iphone is probably in mid development now and a team has probably being assembled to start on the 8th. Most people don't realize how long and tedious this process is when paving your own way.
Steve was surely alive when this connector was developed, along with a bunch of other competing design variations that he/they could then choose from, followed perhaps by some testing and fine tuning of the design. Of course, Samsung will then take about 2 weeks to copy it and stuff it in their next phone, claiming that Apple didn't invent the rectangular plug with rounded edges.
I would like to see a reversible plug that would make use of contacts on both sides for a total of 17 potential pathways. I would also like to see it snap into place magnetically, although I don't think that would qualify for a MagSafe label. It has all to do with a feeling of quality, ease of plugging in and keeping the plug snuggly in place while requiring minimal effort to pull it out. It will do little to keep the phone from getting yanked off a table.
The length of the connector, along with a seemingly strong metal casing both in the phone and on the connector, will work well for docks.
To all of you who don't get it. Steve was alway about pushing his engineers to make what seems impossible at first glance. There are alway trade offs in engineering. The entire antenna gate saga should tell you that he's not above sacrificing some functionality for what's cool or design aesthetics.
As for the excuses that many of you seem to be under the mistaken impression of; that such a small socket wouldn't make a good MagSafe connector. Well, you're wrong. There are some very strong magnets in the marketplace. You can make the connection as strong or as weak as you want. If you want it strong you can put magnets on both the iPhone AND the cable side like they did with the iPad cover which would make the connection much stronger than just on the cable side. You can also vary the size of the magnet to increase or decrease the strength of the connection to the application in addition to the type of magnets used. So, yea, it's completely feasible to make the connector MagSafe.
What we do know is that the engineers at Apple are trying to make all of the components smaller so as to squeeze evey available space out the the devices. The recent adoption of the nano SIM speaks to this. That means that one of the goals of a new connector is to make it as shallow as possible so that it doesn't need to be inserted as deeply into the devices as previous connectos. The only way that can be done is with a MagSafe like connector because the strength of the connection is determined not by the depth or some mechanical arrangement but by the strength of the magnetic attraction.
This also fits in with two other criteria of Apple's MO. It would be consistent with using something they invented for other larger products and that it's "cool".
There can only be two reasons as to why this wasn't done while Steve was alive. One, cost. It may have been too expensive to create a MagSafe connector so small and would fit all of their i devices. Second, it maybe that the Engineers found that such a small MagSafe connector isn't very reliable. That it fails much sooner than a plain mechanical connector. Both are things that may be overcome with time. They may have overcome these two hurdles.
One of the telling signs that Apple is going for a new connector soon is that they're about to refresh all of their i devices next month, with the exception of the iPad. Usually they announce iPhones and iPod's during different times of the year. It's not a coincidence that this year they will do that all at the same time. It's mainly to coordinate the replacement of the connector so that all of their i devices are on the same system.
Originally Posted by JCC
As for the excuses that many of you seem to be under the mistaken impression of; that such a small socket wouldn't make a good MagSafe connector. Well, you're wrong. There are some very strong magnets in the marketplace.
And that's exactly the opposite of what such a connector should have. These devices aren't multiple pounds. You don't want a magnet anywhere near as strong as on MagSafe or MagSafe 2. Single-spec hopefuls should really just drop their belief until launch so they're not disappointed. I mean, they'll still be disappointed, but at least they won't whine about something that was never going to happen in the first place after the product is released.
So, yea, it's completely feasible to make the connector MagSafe.
And also completely self-defeating. If the magnet is strong, there's no difference from a regular cable. If the magnet is weak, there's no point to having it. And when the connector is this small and this shallow, it's really not even needed.
That means that one of the goals of a new connector is to make it as shallow as possible so that it doesn't need to be inserted as deeply into the devices as previous connectos. The only way that can be done is with a MagSafe like connector because the strength of the connection is determined not by the depth or some mechanical arrangement but by the strength of the magnetic attraction.
We could be wrong, but I doubt it. I imagine that the first thing done to those leaked parts was running a magnet over them. And if they'd reacted in any way, we'd know about it right now.
If those leaked photos ARE the final connectors I can guarantee that they're NOT MagSafe as they're too deep to be such a connection. A deep connector means that they're going with a mechanical solution and not MagSafe. It could be that they didn't need a shallow connector as that's one of the reasons they relocated the headphone jack to the bottom of the phone so there's space for the new deep mechanical connector as well.
What this also means is that going forward, all of their small i devices will have their headphone jacks on the same side as their power connector.
As reported in the update, it states the design utilizes 16 pins (+ ground presumably). What is yet to be identified is if it is reversible (orientation independent, etc). If it is, then that means that there is hardware/software that can reverse the pin outs by sensing the orientation of the connector which although not the first example of this technology, (ethernet crossover/straight through detection in routers) at least somewhat revolutionary in the sync/charge phone implementation in that the physical connector has no upside down, which is quite unique to my knowledge.
No necessarily. It could be that the 8 wires split to have twice the connectors each crossing over so that no matter who you place it it's still going to match up. That would mean the device (not the cable) would only need to have connector plates for the 8 pins+plus the ground.
Whether it's 8,9, 16 or 17 pins that seems very low. I wonder a couple things.
First of all, could they be using the local host TB controller on the device and have it send/receive USB over that connector so that it's transparent if you were to use a USB cable (which is what I'd think it will come with by default no matter what). If they are changing up the connector I'd xpect them to plan ahead, like they did with the decade old 30-pin connector. Even if a TB controller isn't possible today I would expect them to plan for it being a possibility.
Secondly, nine pins does make sense as USB 3.0 is typically 9 pins. However there are all the other functions of the iDevice port interface that would be lost if those were dedicated to USB. Even at 16 or 17 pins it would still be too few with no room for growth. That makes me think that Apple could be using intelligent in the HW that will switch to the right output as needed. The problem with this is that it can be expensive, more finicky, use more power, and take up more room inside the device. That said, if anyone can make this work and be viable its Apple who can easily invest the time and money without any real long term costs as it's spread across dozens of millions of iPhones, iPads, and iPods per year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
Can't wait for Sammy to copy that with the AppleUSB port.
Why don't they just use a standard friggen connector? Didn't they come to some agreement with the EU that said they'd use the same microusb port all the other phones do so they could cut down on waste? WTF?
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanVoyeur
So USB 2.0 and USB 3.0 can connect every other kind of device in the world EXCEPT Apple products? Why? Does Apple use some secret faster-than-light subspace transmission mode that requires their connectors to think differently? Need more pins than USB 2.0? Guess what - USB 3.0 has more pins.
Everything coming out or going into the iPortables is either digital data or analog audio . None of which requires an exotic non-standard connector.
Why does it matter? Because when Apple abandons it non-standard connectors (ex 30 pin) it orphans a boatload of devices and cables made for that standard. And it means that you cannot use the same charging and sync cable that your sue for all your other devices - leading to more consumer confusion, needless duplication, and e-waste. This is why the EU has made micro USB the required standard connector for all phones.
^-- this
The waste was to reduce all those non-interchangable power adapters. Guess which company has use a USB-A port in the power adapters across PMPs, handsets and tablets for nearly a decade?