Hopefully Apple starts the introduction of USB 3.1 with the new type C connector. Even the current Lighting connector is still limited to USB 2.0 speeds.
Besides faster speed, USB 3.0 can also provide more power to the port, almost twice the power of USB 2.0.. This may finally allow iPad users to charge through a powered USB 3.0 hub without having to connect directly to a Mac.
Hopefully Apple starts the introduction of USB 3.1 with the new type C connector. Even the current Lighting connector is still limited to USB 2.0 speeds.
Huh? Why would they drop Lightning port when they finally move from USB 2.0 to USB 3.0 speeds and power on their iDevices? Just because the Lightning port only supports USB 2.0 right now doesn't mean it can't be made to support faster speeds. The PIN count difference also doesn't seem to be an obstacle.
Can the storage in iOS devices be written to at speeds significantly faster than USB 2.0 yet? I recall that being a bottleneck that would have made using a faster protocol (people kept asking for Thunderbolt) rather pointless.
The speed of the flash has little to do with the value of faster I/O. This especially if that I/O can handle several channels of data transfer. Also don't forget that you can read data pretty fast on these devices, decompress it and send it someplace as some sort of video signal.
The other aspect of this is high spped data transfer that never hits the storage flash. A classic example here is a digital oscilloscope device connected to a USB port. The trick here is to get the collected data onboard rapidly, get it processed and then wait for the next frame. The other option is to stream the data in real time. Either way faster USB transfers are enablers to better performance. So in a nut shell the speed of the flash is a non argument.
Huh? Why would they drop Lightning port when they finally move from USB 2.0 to USB 3.0 speeds and power on their iDevices? Just because the Lightning port only supports USB 2.0 right now doesn't mean it can't be made to support faster speeds. The PIN count difference also doesn't seem to be an obstacle.
They may not move to USB C connectors but there are lots of advantages in doing so for the consumer. This especially if Apple became a bit more open with I/O on the IOS devices. Seriously which would you rather have a well supported interface that is likely to be used for decades by all manufactures of electronics or an Apple proprietary jack?
It is probably wishful thinking at this point to beleive that Apple would migrate to a standized interface but realistically we can wish for it. The only thing that really bothers me about rumors of USB C and Apple is that the coming laptops will have only one port. That would be asinine in my mind and I really doubt it will happen.
In any event counting the days until the big reveal.
I don't see that Apple would put USB ports on a tablet, which is meant to be a portable device, for a keyboard or mouse. They have been pushing towards wireless input devices to start with, and as mentioned by others, they already have Bluetooth keyboard support (and USB keyboard support via the Camera Connection Kit). So all they would need to do is add mouse support.
Except I'm not convinced they're going to do that. If you want a keyboard and a mouse, why not just get a Macbook Air? It seems odd that they would produce a 12" iPad with mouse and keyboard input around the same time as a 12" Retina Macbook Air. You might expect the two devices to essentially compete for the same market. On current pricing, one would expect them to be around the same price point. So why produce two new products that are going to compete with eachother?
Apple's basic strategy seems to be to try and sell you something from each of their product lines. If you only want an iPhone and not a Mac, fine, but you'd be much better off if you had both. I don't see them saying "Here are two different things that can do X, pick one." They're more likely to go "Here's one thing that does X really well, and another thing that's really good at doing Y, so if you want to do both X and Y, your experience will be really great if you have both".
I'm now starting to doubt that they'll release both the iPad Pro and Macbook Air Retina. Or they'll at least wait around year between them. Still, Apple have done things I didn't think they would, and I don't run the world's most valuable company, so that shows me.
They may not move to USB C connectors but there are lots of advantages in doing so for the consumer. This especially if Apple became a bit more open with I/O on the IOS devices. Seriously which would you rather have a well supported interface that is likely to be used for decades by all manufactures of electronics or an Apple proprietary jack?
It is probably wishful thinking at this point to beleive that Apple would migrate to a standized interface but realistically we can wish for it. The only thing that really bothers me about rumors of USB C and Apple is that the coming laptops will have only one port. That would be asinine in my mind and I really doubt it will happen.
In any event counting the days until the big reveal.
I don't think we'll see it but I also don't think it's unprecedented. Consider Apple used to use AppleTalk as a proprietary networking protocol and then switched to Ethernet, and Apple used to use ADC as their proprietary external display protocol and port interface and then switched to a plethora of different open standards.
Having the 30-pin connector when PMPs had USB 1.1 and a sepeerate cable (or AA batteries) for power, or moving to the tiny, reversible Lightning cable when smartphones were using the horrible Micro-USB connector made a lot of sense for creating the best possible customer service experience; but with the USB 3.1 Type-C connector I'm not seeing any real benefit for Apple to not accept it. I guess we'd have to know Apple's future plans and how much they make from selling cables and licensing the port. I hope it's not so much that they would want to keep Lightning if the Type-C is actually a better choice for cuatomers.
PS: Do you think the tiny, reversible Type-C connector would exist if not for Apple making the Lightning connector? I don't.
Not Thunderbolt. That would require an Intel chip set. Theoretically iPad does have a USB already through the Lightning port. It wouldn't be so bad to actually have more than one so you could charge it and at the same time attach some breakout box for music/video input or output or for use as an auxiliary monitor or touch control to a Mac in editing in some professional capacity.
The speed of the flash has little to do with the value of faster I/O. This especially if that I/O can handle several channels of data transfer. Also don't forget that you can read data pretty fast on these devices, decompress it and send it someplace as some sort of video signal.
The other aspect of this is high spped data transfer that never hits the storage flash. A classic example here is a digital oscilloscope device connected to a USB port. The trick here is to get the collected data onboard rapidly, get it processed and then wait for the next frame. The other option is to stream the data in real time. Either way faster USB transfers are enablers to better performance. So in a nut shell the speed of the flash is a non argument.
I hear you, but digital oscilloscopes and streaming large amount of data via cable aren't exactly mass market features. If you're putting fast I/O on an iOS device then I can't see the primary intended use of such I/O being anything other than high speed sync and file movement.
I may be wrong, and since this is supposed to be the iPad Pro, maybe the narrower appeal is ok, but still, not entirely convincing.
Comments
USB 3.0 ?
Hopefully Apple starts the introduction of USB 3.1 with the new type C connector. Even the current Lighting connector is still limited to USB 2.0 speeds.
Besides faster speed, USB 3.0 can also provide more power to the port, almost twice the power of USB 2.0.. This may finally allow iPad users to charge through a powered USB 3.0 hub without having to connect directly to a Mac.
Huh? Why would they drop Lightning port when they finally move from USB 2.0 to USB 3.0 speeds and power on their iDevices? Just because the Lightning port only supports USB 2.0 right now doesn't mean it can't be made to support faster speeds. The PIN count difference also doesn't seem to be an obstacle.
The speed of the flash has little to do with the value of faster I/O. This especially if that I/O can handle several channels of data transfer. Also don't forget that you can read data pretty fast on these devices, decompress it and send it someplace as some sort of video signal.
The other aspect of this is high spped data transfer that never hits the storage flash. A classic example here is a digital oscilloscope device connected to a USB port. The trick here is to get the collected data onboard rapidly, get it processed and then wait for the next frame. The other option is to stream the data in real time. Either way faster USB transfers are enablers to better performance. So in a nut shell the speed of the flash is a non argument.
They may not move to USB C connectors but there are lots of advantages in doing so for the consumer. This especially if Apple became a bit more open with I/O on the IOS devices. Seriously which would you rather have a well supported interface that is likely to be used for decades by all manufactures of electronics or an Apple proprietary jack?
It is probably wishful thinking at this point to beleive that Apple would migrate to a standized interface but realistically we can wish for it. The only thing that really bothers me about rumors of USB C and Apple is that the coming laptops will have only one port. That would be asinine in my mind and I really doubt it will happen.
In any event counting the days until the big reveal.
Except I'm not convinced they're going to do that. If you want a keyboard and a mouse, why not just get a Macbook Air? It seems odd that they would produce a 12" iPad with mouse and keyboard input around the same time as a 12" Retina Macbook Air. You might expect the two devices to essentially compete for the same market. On current pricing, one would expect them to be around the same price point. So why produce two new products that are going to compete with eachother?
Apple's basic strategy seems to be to try and sell you something from each of their product lines. If you only want an iPhone and not a Mac, fine, but you'd be much better off if you had both. I don't see them saying "Here are two different things that can do X, pick one." They're more likely to go "Here's one thing that does X really well, and another thing that's really good at doing Y, so if you want to do both X and Y, your experience will be really great if you have both".
I'm now starting to doubt that they'll release both the iPad Pro and Macbook Air Retina. Or they'll at least wait around year between them. Still, Apple have done things I didn't think they would, and I don't run the world's most valuable company, so that shows me.
I don't think we'll see it but I also don't think it's unprecedented. Consider Apple used to use AppleTalk as a proprietary networking protocol and then switched to Ethernet, and Apple used to use ADC as their proprietary external display protocol and port interface and then switched to a plethora of different open standards.
Having the 30-pin connector when PMPs had USB 1.1 and a sepeerate cable (or AA batteries) for power, or moving to the tiny, reversible Lightning cable when smartphones were using the horrible Micro-USB connector made a lot of sense for creating the best possible customer service experience; but with the USB 3.1 Type-C connector I'm not seeing any real benefit for Apple to not accept it. I guess we'd have to know Apple's future plans and how much they make from selling cables and licensing the port. I hope it's not so much that they would want to keep Lightning if the Type-C is actually a better choice for cuatomers.
PS: Do you think the tiny, reversible Type-C connector would exist if not for Apple making the Lightning connector? I don't.
USB ports for a mouse and keyboard ?
Very un-Apple.
I expect 2 thunderbolt inputs at the most.
But there will most likely be no ports.
Not Thunderbolt. That would require an Intel chip set. Theoretically iPad does have a USB already through the Lightning port. It wouldn't be so bad to actually have more than one so you could charge it and at the same time attach some breakout box for music/video input or output or for use as an auxiliary monitor or touch control to a Mac in editing in some professional capacity.
I may be wrong, and since this is supposed to be the iPad Pro, maybe the narrower appeal is ok, but still, not entirely convincing.