MiFi is one of the things that makes Apple suck as a electronics vendor. If Apple really wanted to do something constructive they would get rid of the MiFi program and free up their I/O.
You don't see any problem with that? Potentially deadly problems that are blamed on Apple?
The earpods Apple ships with current phones are Lightning, and analog, so the claim in this article that Lightning cannot carry analog audio is wrong. They also carry digital and power too, clearly.
Lightning does NOT carry analog audio signals. It can carry digital. The Lightning EarPods and 3.5mm adapter contain a DAC that converts the digital signal to analog and vice versa.
"Lightning does not carry analog audio. USB-C cables can, assuming that they are compliant with the USB Audio Device Class (ADC) 3.0 standard -- but decoding the signal requires a similarly equipped device at the other end of the cable."
"Decoding the signal?" WTF does that mean? You don't "decode" an analog audio signal.
The earpods Apple ships with current phones are Lightning, and analog, so the claim in this article that Lightning cannot carry analog audio is wrong. They also carry digital and power too, clearly.
Lightning does NOT carry analog audio signals. It can carry digital. The Lightning EarPods and 3.5mm adapter contain a DAC that converts the digital signal to analog and vice versa.
"Lightning does not carry analog audio. USB-C cables can, assuming that they are compliant with the USB Audio Device Class (ADC) 3.0 standard -- but decoding the signal requires a similarly equipped device at the other end of the cable."
"Decoding the signal?" WTF does that mean? You don't "decode" an analog audio signal.
Decode simply means convert. What do you find so wrong with usage?
MiFi is one of the things that makes Apple suck as a electronics vendor. If Apple really wanted to do something constructive they would get rid of the MiFi program and free up their I/O.
The MFI program ensures official gear works, and safely. What incentive would there be to have the market inhibabited soleby shoddy chinese no-namers? What is the value add to apple there?
That line struck me as well. Is it shaped like a T-bone steak or what?
Add me to the list of thinking, are they crazy. People had enough problems fumbling around and force pushing the smaller USB connectors in. Now they want to make something even smaller that's not symmetrical. You're going to have to buy a magnifying glass to know which way to put these things in and if you want to try to do it in the dark, forget about it.
The good news is that once everyone gets the peripherals, dongles, and cables for this needless port, Apple can say, Jony spent years in the labs and designed a new version of this needless port which is now symetrical, one micron thinner and made of aluminum. We can then go out and replace the peripherals, dongles and cables we just bought a few years back. It really keeps the economy going. Thanks Apple.
Call me crazy, but why can't they just update the lightning cable port spec to include analog audio, if that's what this is really about. I mean, the USB standard was upgraded several times using the same USB-A connector, why can't they do this with the lighting connector and maybe a specialized cable. Why are they going backwards with a non symmetrical port?
Because they aren't. This is not going to replace Lightning, you can bet on it.
That line struck me as well. Is it shaped like a T-bone steak or what?
Add me to the list of thinking, are they crazy. People had enough problems fumbling around and force pushing the smaller USB connectors in. Now they want to make something even smaller that's not symmetrical. You're going to have to buy a magnifying glass to know which way to put these things in and if you want to try to do it in the dark, forget about it.
The good news is that once everyone gets the peripherals, dongles, and cables for this needless port, Apple can say, Jony spent years in the labs and designed a new version of this needless port which is now symetrical, one micron thinner and made of aluminum. We can then go out and replace the peripherals, dongles and cables we just bought a few years back. It really keeps the economy going. Thanks Apple.
Call me crazy, but why can't they just update the lightning cable port spec to include analog audio, if that's what this is really about. I mean, the USB standard was upgraded several times using the same USB-A connector, why can't they do this with the lighting connector and maybe a specialized cable. Why are they going backwards with a non symmetrical port?
I've seen many posters who comment without having read the story properly.
But I think this is the first time I've seen a post from someone who, by the looks of it, didn't even read the headline.
I don't get what this is meant to be used for. Yes, I read the text describing it.
Well, for one thing, it will mean one less cable I have to carry on holiday. My camera has one of these connectors and so I had to take a separate cable when travelling. Now that Apple will now be certifying cables and adapters that use it as part of their MFI program, then I might be able to get hold of an adapter that just plugs onto the end of a lightning cable.
That line struck me as well. Is it shaped like a T-bone steak or what?
Yes, its insane and why don't nikon and any other camera manufacturer convert to USB-typeC as there are far more iPhones sold than cameras with this stupid port.
Those inconvenienced by Apple adopting USB Type C on their MBP because they use SD cards should be telling their camera manufacturers to adopt either USB typeC and/or TB3 for faster data transfers. Its been know for a while that this was coming.
USB-C is a rather new standard. Nikon and other camera maker had been use the old plug for sometime now.
When the iPhone 7 out, Apple don't even have a lighting to USB-C cable/adapter. So to blame a company not using a new standard but a standard that everyone else using is kinda pointless. Especially only very few products from Apple are USB-C equipped.
Not to mention the rest of electronic world only use USB-A/B. If Nikon make their stuff with USB-C, it means they will isolated their product to the rest of the world, e.g. MBP late 2016.
One more thing, most cellphone in this world are using Micro USB. Also, I don't think too many i-product can handle a 36mp jpeg/raw or 20min 1080p at 60fps.
What's worse is a symmetrical-looking connector that isn't really symmetrical when you try to plug it in the wrong way. Like legacy USB-A, the result of 1996's best thinking.
That line struck me as well. Is it shaped like a T-bone steak or what?
Add me to the list of thinking, are they crazy. People had enough problems fumbling around and force pushing the smaller USB connectors in. Now they want to make something even smaller that's not symmetrical. You're going to have to buy a magnifying glass to know which way to put these things in and if you want to try to do it in the dark, forget about it.
The good news is that once everyone gets the peripherals, dongles, and cables for this needless port, Apple can say, Jony spent years in the labs and designed a new version of this needless port which is now symetrical, one micron thinner and made of aluminum. We can then go out and replace the peripherals, dongles and cables we just bought a few years back. It really keeps the economy going. Thanks Apple.
Call me crazy, but why can't they just update the lightning cable port spec to include analog audio, if that's what this is really about. I mean, the USB standard was upgraded several times using the same USB-A connector, why can't they do this with the lighting connector and maybe a specialized cable. Why are they going backwards with a non symmetrical port?
I've seen many posters who comment without having read the story properly.
But I think this is the first time I've seen a post from someone who, by the looks of it, didn't even read the headline.
The first sentence of the article states how the design is non-symmetrical. My first two paragraphs are completely about how they should have learned from past small connectors that are non-symmetrical. I don't think that is wise choice unless they are planning to monetize the situation with another upgrade down the road.
The only logic I can remotely come up with that can justify your comment is that you completely misconstrued my last paragraph to believe I think this port is a replacement for the lightning port which I did not say at all. I think its written pretty clear that I said "Why" can't they update the lighting spec to incorporate the features "ultra accessory connector' for headphone interoperability" they want out of this new port.
I prefer one cable to do everything so ultimately USB-C for everything would be great, but I understand the benefits to Apple's proprietary lightning port. My point is, why do we need a secondary Apple proprietary port where now you need to drag two different cables around. Why can't they just combine the functionality into one.
Now, I can understand you disagreeing with me and I enjoy a good debate, but to say I didn't even read the headline, I really don't get. So for the sake of self improvement to prevent me from posting similarly in the future, can you please explain why you feel that what I posted is not only irrelevant to the article but its not even relevant to the headline. honestly, I don't get it.
What's worse is a symmetrical-looking connector that isn't really symmetrical when you try to plug it in the wrong way. Like legacy USB-A, the result of 1996's best thinking.
suddenly newton said: What's worse is a symmetrical-looking connector that isn't really symmetrical when you try to plug it in the wrong way. Like legacy USB-A, the result of 1996's best thinking.
1) USB-C is great, but I'm still amazed at the pushback from people that don't like the idea of a a change to a smaller, reversible, and faster standard that is better in every single way over USB-A.
2) TB3 is a standard, but since it's only available when connecting to an Intel-based system, and even then only on certain Intel chips, I'm not sure we should consider put in the same category as a truly universal standard that it licensable to all device makers.
That line struck me as well. Is it shaped like a T-bone steak or what?
Add me to the list of thinking, are they crazy. People had enough problems fumbling around and force pushing the smaller USB connectors in. Now they want to make something even smaller that's not symmetrical. You're going to have to buy a magnifying glass to know which way to put these things in and if you want to try to do it in the dark, forget about it.
The good news is that once everyone gets the peripherals, dongles, and cables for this needless port, Apple can say, Jony spent years in the labs and designed a new version of this needless port which is now symetrical, one micron thinner and made of aluminum. We can then go out and replace the peripherals, dongles and cables we just bought a few years back. It really keeps the economy going. Thanks Apple.
Call me crazy, but why can't they just update the lightning cable port spec to include analog audio, if that's what this is really about. I mean, the USB standard was upgraded several times using the same USB-A connector, why can't they do this with the lighting connector and maybe a specialized cable. Why are they going backwards with a non symmetrical port?
I've seen many posters who comment without having read the story properly.
But I think this is the first time I've seen a post from someone who, by the looks of it, didn't even read the headline.
The first sentence of the article states how the design is non-symmetrical. My first two paragraphs are completely about how they should have learned from past small connectors that are non-symmetrical. I don't think that is wise choice unless they are planning to monetize the situation with another upgrade down the road.
The only logic I can remotely come up with that can justify your comment is that you completely misconstrued my last paragraph to believe I think this port is a replacement for the lightning port which I did not say at all. I think its written pretty clear that I said "Why" can't they update the lighting spec to incorporate the features "ultra accessory connector' for headphone interoperability" they want out of this new port.
I prefer one cable to do everything so ultimately USB-C for everything would be great, but I understand the benefits to Apple's proprietary lightning port. My point is, why do we need a secondary Apple proprietary port where now you need to drag two different cables around. Why can't they just combine the functionality into one.
Now, I can understand you disagreeing with me and I enjoy a good debate, but to say I didn't even read the headline, I really don't get. So for the sake of self improvement to prevent me from posting similarly in the future, can you please explain why you feel that what I posted is not only irrelevant to the article but its not even relevant to the headline. honestly, I don't get it.
1.) this port isn't proprietary.
2.) Apple won't be using this port; they're merely certifying it for use WITH "Made for iOS" products.
I must say that every time I read another article about change of plugs, cables or adapters my wallet cringes because it knows new stuff ain't gonna be cheap.
I must say that every time I read another article about change of plugs, cables or adapters my wallet cringes because it knows new stuff ain't gonna be cheap.
Apple isn't changing anything. What are you forced to buy?
That line struck me as well. Is it shaped like a T-bone steak or what?
Add me to the list of thinking, are they crazy. People had enough problems fumbling around and force pushing the smaller USB connectors in. Now they want to make something even smaller that's not symmetrical. You're going to have to buy a magnifying glass to know which way to put these things in and if you want to try to do it in the dark, forget about it.
The good news is that once everyone gets the peripherals, dongles, and cables for this needless port, Apple can say, Jony spent years in the labs and designed a new version of this needless port which is now symetrical, one micron thinner and made of aluminum. We can then go out and replace the peripherals, dongles and cables we just bought a few years back. It really keeps the economy going. Thanks Apple.
Call me crazy, but why can't they just update the lightning cable port spec to include analog audio, if that's what this is really about. I mean, the USB standard was upgraded several times using the same USB-A connector, why can't they do this with the lighting connector and maybe a specialized cable. Why are they going backwards with a non symmetrical port?
I've seen many posters who comment without having read the story properly.
But I think this is the first time I've seen a post from someone who, by the looks of it, didn't even read the headline.
The only logic I can remotely come up with that can justify your comment is that you completely misconstrued my last paragraph to believe I think this port is a replacement for the lightning port which I did not say at all. I think its written pretty clear that I said "Why" can't they update the lighting spec to incorporate the features "ultra accessory connector' for headphone interoperability" they want out of this new port.
No, you pretty clearly showed you thought this was going to be some sort of successful to the Lightning port -- you made sarcastic comments thanking Apple for having to "go out and replace" current cables and accessories, and said "why are they going backwards". Pretty clear you were hand-wringing that future.
That line struck me as well. Is it shaped like a T-bone steak or what?
I think it simply means it has a "top" and a "bottom" shape, like a USB connecter or the older Apple connectors...? Or whatever the heck Kindles use.
That means reversible or non-reversible. Symmetry means that the left and right sides are the same, only mirrored, if divided down the middle.
Follow the link in the article to the picture...or the link in Spheric's post. 'Symmetry' isn't the opposite of reversible, but I think it is the distinction the article is referring to.
Comments
Asymmetrical is insane.
I've seen many posters who comment without having read the story properly.
But I think this is the first time I've seen a post from someone who, by the looks of it, didn't even read the headline.
Well, for one thing, it will mean one less cable I have to carry on holiday. My camera has one of these connectors and so I had to take a separate cable when travelling. Now that Apple will now be certifying cables and adapters that use it as part of their MFI program, then I might be able to get hold of an adapter that just plugs onto the end of a lightning cable.
The only logic I can remotely come up with that can justify your comment is that you completely misconstrued my last paragraph to believe I think this port is a replacement for the lightning port which I did not say at all. I think its written pretty clear that I said "Why" can't they update the lighting spec to incorporate the features "ultra accessory connector' for headphone interoperability" they want out of this new port.
I prefer one cable to do everything so ultimately USB-C for everything would be great, but I understand the benefits to Apple's proprietary lightning port. My point is, why do we need a secondary Apple proprietary port where now you need to drag two different cables around. Why can't they just combine the functionality into one.
Now, I can understand you disagreeing with me and I enjoy a good debate, but to say I didn't even read the headline, I really don't get. So for the sake of self improvement to prevent me from posting similarly in the future, can you please explain why you feel that what I posted is not only irrelevant to the article but its not even relevant to the headline. honestly, I don't get it.
2) TB3 is a standard, but since it's only available when connecting to an Intel-based system, and even then only on certain Intel chips, I'm not sure we should consider put in the same category as a truly universal standard that it licensable to all device makers.
2.) Apple won't be using this port; they're merely certifying it for use WITH "Made for iOS" products.