Apple's 2019 iPhone lineup may mark the end of the Lightning connector

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 62
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 526member
    It would be nice to have one cable for all Apple products without the the need to purchase adapters anymore, but Apple would not be able to make money on that except for older products, it will be interesting to see what they do in the near future with newer products.
    Exactly! It would totally destroy their dongle business!
    bruckheimercornchip
  • Reply 42 of 62
    queuequeue Posts: 28member
    I don’t think this will happen. Android phones all have a bottom chin/bezel due to the design of USB-C. iPhone Xs are able to extend the screen to the bottom due to the design of Lightning cable. Full screen iPhones have been planned for a long time.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 43 of 62
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,061member
    mike1 said:
    mac_128 said:
    mike1 said:
    brucemc said:
    Doesn't seem to make any sense to change away from Lightning.  As noted, it is possible for iPhones to have fast charging provided it is a USB-C at the other end and the right power adapter.  What other benefits are there (other than "I don't have to carry a separate cable for my other theoretical devices...")?

    I would say the next move Apple makes is to do away with such a port completely - going with inductive charging completely and high speed wireless.  That might not be for a number of years, but switching to USB-C on the iPhone itself seems an "un-Apple" move.

    Wireless charging is not for everyone. Personally, not being able to use the phone or iPad while it's charging is a major problem for me.
    To be clear, you’re saying you’re against this because you think you can’t use an iPhone X while it’s charging?
    I think mike1 is saying that wireless charging means one cannot easily use a phone while charging whereas wired charging means one can use the phone while charging.  Which is absolutely correct and a big part of many people's workflow.
    What he said.
    mazda 3s said:
    mac_128 said:
    mike1 said:
    brucemc said:
    Doesn't seem to make any sense to change away from Lightning.  As noted, it is possible for iPhones to have fast charging provided it is a USB-C at the other end and the right power adapter.  What other benefits are there (other than "I don't have to carry a separate cable for my other theoretical devices...")?

    I would say the next move Apple makes is to do away with such a port completely - going with inductive charging completely and high speed wireless.  That might not be for a number of years, but switching to USB-C on the iPhone itself seems an "un-Apple" move.

    Wireless charging is not for everyone. Personally, not being able to use the phone or iPad while it's charging is a major problem for me.
    To be clear, you’re saying you’re against this because you can’t use an iPhone X while it’s charging?
    For me, yes. I have a wireless charger on my nightstand for my iPhone X and a 10-ft Lightning cable that I also use for charging. I usually fall asleep in bed flipping through my iPhone. Considering that I normally doze off somewhere in between browsing on my phone, the wireless charging pad has become useless to me -- I just wake up with a dead phone by pillow. But when I plug it in to the charger at night, I can still lay in bed, browse, fall asleep, let it charge and wakeup in the morning with a topped off device.

    The only time I really use the wireless charger is in the car, where I am not actively using the phone.
    Got it. I'm not sure I agree 100%. All it does is introduce a pad to the end of the Lightning cable a person is already using, and more or less requires them to use it on a flat surface. In most cases, the use of the device is limited by the cord length anyway. For instance, I have a cord on my kitchen counter which just reaches the center of the countertop from the wall below it. So I am pretty much forced to use the Lightning stand it's plugged into, or lay it flat on the counter with the cord plugged directly in. The cord also forces me to orient my iPhone in a particular direction, usually determined by which direction the cord is coming from, and that doesn't always work when using it upside down. A charging pad allows the phone to be oriented at any angle. In the past, I have used the charging adapters on some Starbucks counters, allowing me to recharge my iPhone while using it without carrying any additional cords or adapters with me. I believe the iPhone X is natively compatible with it, requiring nothing extra. 

    At the moment, there's not a lot of choice in the matter with a charging pad. However, and I'm surprised Apple didn't introduce it this way, a magnetic charger like the one the Apple Watch uses would solve all these problems. A little round puck on the end of a Lightning cable would snap to the back of the iPhone at any angle. In the interim, a simple snap-on case with a built-in charging pad would likewise solve the problem. Not sure what's available, but I know there's at least a few out there for those who have adopted wireless charging strategies for their iPhone X. I would hope that by the time Apple removes the Lightning connector, they'd have worked out the wireless charging solution to address these issues.  I had thought the Smart Connector was going to be that solution, but perhaps not.
    edited June 12 Alex1N
  • Reply 44 of 62
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,048member
    Mildly related: a cool solution for the wireless magic mouse and wireless keyboard now shipping with iMacs could have a wireless charging/ mouse pad under both, eliminating 2 lightning ports. Still sorta curious about a standalone touchbar keyboard for an iMac. 

    Also only tangentially related: could a macbook be made to be charged wirelessly? If it could be done so quickly, maybe...
  • Reply 45 of 62
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,547member
    Isn’t usb-c larger than lightning? It takes up more space and Apple loses the “made for iPod/iPhone” cash. 
    cornchip
  • Reply 46 of 62
    M68000M68000 Posts: 6member
    Being that I work in IT, i get to deal with all kinds of video cables,  its a circus of VGA, DVI, mini display port, display port, hdmi 1.3, hdmi 1.4, hdmi 2.0, usb-c, blah blah blah...  and don't forget all the adapters that go with it.... LOL...   I bring this up because quite frankly it's getting very tiring dealing with so many cable technologies in general..  The move to lightning from the 30pin iPhone connector was a great advance.  But is lightning now obsolete after just a short time relatively?   So, if iPhones get usb-c like the android phones and Apple phases out the old iPhones and all new ones have the "notch" look in the screen and no home button, we risk iPhones no longer looking like iPhones but rather just like any other android phones... what would be next after that?  change iOS to look like android too?   if that stuff happens, people may say that they remembered a time when they saw somebody with an iPhone and they knew it was an iPhone...
    watto_cobraAlex1N
  • Reply 47 of 62
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,507member
    GG1 said:
    The Lightning cable is both elegant (mechanically and electrically symmetrical) and robust (thick "tongue"). USB-A is probably the worst connector, as it appears mechanically symmetrical but is not due to the offset tongue (it is not reversible). USB-C is symmetrical but still has that fragile tongue.

    If Apple do change the Lightning connector, I hope it is an iteration on it, and not a change to USB-C.



    You do know that USB-C can plug in either way right? Its no more fragile than the lightning connector. I actually think its stronger because it doesn't have something sticking out. This is how the Lightning Connector should have been IMO, rather than have something sticking out. 

  • Reply 48 of 62
    nhtnht Posts: 4,177member
    macxpress said:
    GG1 said:
    The Lightning cable is both elegant (mechanically and electrically symmetrical) and robust (thick "tongue"). USB-A is probably the worst connector, as it appears mechanically symmetrical but is not due to the offset tongue (it is not reversible). USB-C is symmetrical but still has that fragile tongue.

    If Apple do change the Lightning connector, I hope it is an iteration on it, and not a change to USB-C.



    You do know that USB-C can plug in either way right? Its no more fragile than the lightning connector. I actually think its stronger because it doesn't have something sticking out. This is how the Lightning Connector should have been IMO, rather than have something sticking out. 

    He said that USB-C was symmetrical in his post (now bolder).

    I prefer lighting over USB-C because the solid tongue does seem stronger than the hollow tongue on usb-c. Both has something “sticking out”.  I suspect that mechanically lighting suffers less from wear and abuse than the more complicated usb-c.
    watto_cobrachia
  • Reply 49 of 62
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,061member
    macxpress said:
    GG1 said:
    The Lightning cable is both elegant (mechanically and electrically symmetrical) and robust (thick "tongue"). USB-A is probably the worst connector, as it appears mechanically symmetrical but is not due to the offset tongue (it is not reversible). USB-C is symmetrical but still has that fragile tongue.

    If Apple do change the Lightning connector, I hope it is an iteration on it, and not a change to USB-C.



    You do know that USB-C can plug in either way right? Its no more fragile than the lightning connector. I actually think its stronger because it doesn't have something sticking out. This is how the Lightning Connector should have been IMO, rather than have something sticking out. 

    Of course it still has something sticking out. The difference between Lightning and USB-C is if the cable plug is broken off the device, the damaged USB-C tab in the port will require a motherboard swap to fix. The Lightning port will likely be fine and you’ll just need a new cable.
    mattinozwatto_cobra
  • Reply 50 of 62
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,460member
    mac_128 said:
    macxpress said:
    GG1 said:
    The Lightning cable is both elegant (mechanically and electrically symmetrical) and robust (thick "tongue"). USB-A is probably the worst connector, as it appears mechanically symmetrical but is not due to the offset tongue (it is not reversible). USB-C is symmetrical but still has that fragile tongue.

    If Apple do change the Lightning connector, I hope it is an iteration on it, and not a change to USB-C.



    You do know that USB-C can plug in either way right? Its no more fragile than the lightning connector. I actually think its stronger because it doesn't have something sticking out. This is how the Lightning Connector should have been IMO, rather than have something sticking out. 

    Of course it still has something sticking out. The difference between Lightning and USB-C is if the cable plug is broken off the device, the damaged USB-C tab in the port will require a motherboard swap to fix. The Lightning port will likely be fine and you’ll just need a new cable.
    Huh?  I don't follow your reasoning there at all, why would the USB-C need a motherboard swap, and the Lightning not?  Surely both of them would be left with an awkward removal process?  Not to mention that I've never seen or heard of a cable plug breaking off; does that ever happen?

    My understanding is that USB-C put the flexible connection points on the cable, while Lightning puts them in the port.  Since these are the parts most likely to suffer wear, USB-C could be considered a better design, since breakage would mean you only have to replace a $5 cable, whereas with Lightning if those connection points wear out you're left with a dud port.
    cornchip
  • Reply 51 of 62
    tmaytmay Posts: 2,864member
    crowley said:
    mac_128 said:
    macxpress said:
    GG1 said:
    The Lightning cable is both elegant (mechanically and electrically symmetrical) and robust (thick "tongue"). USB-A is probably the worst connector, as it appears mechanically symmetrical but is not due to the offset tongue (it is not reversible). USB-C is symmetrical but still has that fragile tongue.

    If Apple do change the Lightning connector, I hope it is an iteration on it, and not a change to USB-C.



    You do know that USB-C can plug in either way right? Its no more fragile than the lightning connector. I actually think its stronger because it doesn't have something sticking out. This is how the Lightning Connector should have been IMO, rather than have something sticking out. 

    Of course it still has something sticking out. The difference between Lightning and USB-C is if the cable plug is broken off the device, the damaged USB-C tab in the port will require a motherboard swap to fix. The Lightning port will likely be fine and you’ll just need a new cable.
    Huh?  I don't follow your reasoning there at all, why would the USB-C need a motherboard swap, and the Lightning not?  Surely both of them would be left with an awkward removal process?  Not to mention that I've never seen or heard of a cable plug breaking off; does that ever happen?

    My understanding is that USB-C put the flexible connection points on the cable, while Lightning puts them in the port.  Since these are the parts most likely to suffer wear, USB-C could be considered a better design, since breakage would mean you only have to replace a $5 cable, whereas with Lightning if those connection points wear out you're left with a dud port.
    Any anecdotal evidence that the flexible connection points wear out? Most issues that I have heard of are for lint buildup in the port.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 52 of 62
    GG1GG1 Posts: 190member
    nht said:
    macxpress said:
    GG1 said:
    The Lightning cable is both elegant (mechanically and electrically symmetrical) and robust (thick "tongue"). USB-A is probably the worst connector, as it appears mechanically symmetrical but is not due to the offset tongue (it is not reversible). USB-C is symmetrical but still has that fragile tongue.

    If Apple do change the Lightning connector, I hope it is an iteration on it, and not a change to USB-C.



    You do know that USB-C can plug in either way right? Its no more fragile than the lightning connector. I actually think its stronger because it doesn't have something sticking out. This is how the Lightning Connector should have been IMO, rather than have something sticking out. 

    He said that USB-C was symmetrical in his post (now bolder).

    I prefer lighting over USB-C because the solid tongue does seem stronger than the hollow tongue on usb-c. Both has something “sticking out”.  I suspect that mechanically lighting suffers less from wear and abuse than the more complicated usb-c.
    I'm guessing that the Lightning tongue (on the plug end) is stronger than the USB-C tongue (in the receptacle end) just based on the beefier Lightning tongue. See USB-C receptacle end below.

    But in the real world, if you bump either cable really hard to cause something to break, what breaks first? Does the Lightning tongue break before the receptacle? Does the USB-C tongue break before the plug end? I'm not a mechanical engineer, but I would hope that in either case the plug end would be designed to break first so as to save the receptacle end (which is soldered in the PC/laptop/device), making the damage (much) cheaper. But I really don't know. Any ME's here to comment?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 53 of 62
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,518member
    Note to self... don't order the 100-pack of Lightning cables.
    Alex1Ncornchip
  • Reply 54 of 62
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,518member
    GG1 said:
    The Lightning cable is both elegant (mechanically and electrically symmetrical) and robust (thick "tongue"). USB-A is probably the worst connector, as it appears mechanically symmetrical but is not due to the offset tongue (it is not reversible). USB-C is symmetrical but still has that fragile tongue.
    I've seldom had an issue plugging in USB-A, but I hear people say this... is it a common problem? But, neither Lightning or USB-C seem as robust as a good-ol' 3.5mm jack. :) But, for data cables, it doesn't make much difference to me... I'll probably pick the latest, most universal one, so USB-C.

    mac_128 said:
    mike1 said:
    Wireless charging is not for everyone. Personally, not being able to use the phone or iPad while it's charging is a major problem for me.
    To be clear, you’re saying you’re against this because you think you can’t use an iPhone X while it’s charging?
    I think mike1 is saying that wireless charging means one cannot easily use a phone while charging whereas wired charging means one can use the phone while charging.  Which is absolutely correct and a big part of many people's workflow.
    Bingo!
    If I'm charging my phone while not using it, I can easily just plug it in. If I'm needing to charge while using, it has to be a cable. I just don't see the point of wireless charging.

    brucemc said:
    I would say the next move Apple makes is to do away with such a port completely - going with inductive charging completely and high speed wireless.
    That would be a horrible move... but given Apple's fetish for port removal, possible, I suppose. Remember, physical connections are also about reliability and stability.
    Alex1N
  • Reply 55 of 62
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,061member
    cgWerks said:
    GG1 said:
    The Lightning cable is both elegant (mechanically and electrically symmetrical) and robust (thick "tongue"). USB-A is probably the worst connector, as it appears mechanically symmetrical but is not due to the offset tongue (it is not reversible). USB-C is symmetrical but still has that fragile tongue.
    I've seldom had an issue plugging in USB-A, but I hear people say this... is it a common problem? But, neither Lightning or USB-C seem as robust as a good-ol' 3.5mm jack. :) But, for data cables, it doesn't make much difference to me... I'll probably pick the latest, most universal one, so USB-C.

    mac_128 said:
    mike1 said:
    Wireless charging is not for everyone. Personally, not being able to use the phone or iPad while it's charging is a major problem for me.
    To be clear, you’re saying you’re against this because you think you can’t use an iPhone X while it’s charging?
    I think mike1 is saying that wireless charging means one cannot easily use a phone while charging whereas wired charging means one can use the phone while charging.  Which is absolutely correct and a big part of many people's workflow.
    Bingo!
    If I'm charging my phone while not using it, I can easily just plug it in. If I'm needing to charge while using, it has to be a cable. I just don't see the point of wireless charging.

    brucemc said:
    I would say the next move Apple makes is to do away with such a port completely - going with inductive charging completely and high speed wireless.
    That would be a horrible move... but given Apple's fetish for port removal, possible, I suppose. Remember, physical connections are also about reliability and stability.
    I have broken a few USB-A ports on Macs this wayover the years, when a cable was accidentally jerked out, or pressure otherwise applied to the plug. Go to any airport to those charging bars, and you’ll find USB-A charging ports with missing tongues. Half the ports on those bars don’t work in my experience, requiring me to pull out my charging brick anyway.

    in some situations, it’s not any easier to use the phone while charging depending on where the cord has to be plugged. Whereas inductive charging pads on table tops, like Starbucks has would solve that problem, as well as the aforementioned problem at airports where half the USB-A ports are broken. If it “has to be a cable” then something like the Apple Watch charging puck is for you, and easily adapted to the iPhone. 

    Inductive charging is a reliable, stable, physical connection. As for data, I rarely, if ever anymore, plug the iPhone in to transfer data, rendering the need for a physical data port moot. I suspect that is the case for the vast majority of Apples customers.
  • Reply 56 of 62
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,518member
    mac_128 said:
    Inductive charging is a reliable, stable, physical connection. As for data, I rarely, if ever anymore, plug the iPhone in to transfer data, rendering the need for a physical data port moot. I suspect that is the case for the vast majority of Apples customers.
    That's my concern... that Apple is going to go the 'most users' route like they seem to be doing in so many other ways.

    Not only do I plug in my iPhone (iPad) to transfer data, do backups, etc. I also plug it in to record the screen/audio, to do things like tutorials or to use as a device with podcasting (play clips) or things like that. And, it is my understanding there are many 3rd party devices that plug in for all kinds of speciality uses to accessibility equipment.
  • Reply 57 of 62
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,061member
    cgWerks said:
    mac_128 said:
    Inductive charging is a reliable, stable, physical connection. As for data, I rarely, if ever anymore, plug the iPhone in to transfer data, rendering the need for a physical data port moot. I suspect that is the case for the vast majority of Apples customers.
    That's my concern... that Apple is going to go the 'most users' route like they seem to be doing in so many other ways.

    Not only do I plug in my iPhone (iPad) to transfer data, do backups, etc. I also plug it in to record the screen/audio, to do things like tutorials or to use as a device with podcasting (play clips) or things like that. And, it is my understanding there are many 3rd party devices that plug in for all kinds of speciality uses to accessibility equipment.
    If Apple goes this route, and they likely will, it's my belief they wouldn't eliminate a physical connection option for precisely this reason. In which case, just as inductive charging is a physical method, so too would something like the Smart Connector provide a similar connector for data, while allowing the device to be completely sealed. So it means yet another adapter, but then again, it's the exception, and not the rule. 
  • Reply 58 of 62
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,518member
    mac_128 said:
    If Apple goes this route, and they likely will, it's my belief they wouldn't eliminate a physical connection option for precisely this reason. In which case, just as inductive charging is a physical method, so too would something like the Smart Connector provide a similar connector for data, while allowing the device to be completely sealed. So it means yet another adapter, but then again, it's the exception, and not the rule. 
    I guess I'd be OK with that for the kinds of uses I outlined... if it performed similarly. Where I'm not really OK with it is for an iPhone and headphone use. I don't want to be forced to use AirPods, so they'd have to have some kind of physical connection that would work when walking around, running, etc. Lightning was already a step in the wrong direction, IMO (durability), but I'm not sure about going yet another step of 'disconnection'.
  • Reply 59 of 62
    xiao-zhixiao-zhi Posts: 72member
    Pro: Faster charging, fewer adaptors, more choice of accessories 
    Con: Lighting male end is more robust, all the existing docs, cables, etc.

    From my viewpoint, the change doesn’t offer a significant advantage for the use case so would be a nuisance. 

    I’d be interested in knowing what additional benefits it might have for iPad, however, because the use case is more similar to PCs.
    cornchip
  • Reply 60 of 62
    cornchipcornchip Posts: 1,068member
    cgWerks said:
    Note to self... don't order the 100-pack of Lightning cables.
    My wife & brother would blow through that by time new phones come out.
Sign In or Register to comment.