iPhone gets USB-C thanks to creative robotics engineer

Posted:
in iPhone
An iPhone has been modified to use a USB-C connection instead of Lightning, in a project that hints at what to expect from the often-rumored port changeover.




Apple has slowly been migrating its products over to USB-C connectivity, with the iPad mini the latest to make the transition. While the iPhone has yet to make the jump, a YouTube video shows one enterprising owner is already using USB-C with his smartphone.

In a YouTube Short titled "World's First USB-C iPhone," Ken Pillonel claims to have installed the component into the iPhone X, replacing Lightning in the process. In the video, the iPhone is said to receive power via the connection, as well as being able to handle data transfers over a USB-C cable.

In the description of the video, Pillonel says he reverse-engineered Apple's C94 connector, in order to make a PCB with a female USB-C port. After the schematics were set in place, it then became a challenge to shrink it down and install it into an iPhone.





Pillonel has spent a few months on his creation, with a blog post from May showing the thinking behind the replacement, and the challenges of replacing the Lightning port itself. A video at that time showed a DIY prototype that worked and laid out the work ahead to make it small enough to work within an iPhone enclosure.

A late September update advised he had designed and ordered a flexible PCB, a key component in enabling the port switch to occur. He adds a future video is in production, explaining how the board was made and squeezed into the iPhone itself.

While the project offers hope to those keen for Apple to leave Lighting behind, it is not an undertaking that regular iPhone owners can expect to perform for themselves. Pillonel has a background in electronics and has studied for a Master's degree in robotics at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, EPFL, meaning he has the skills and knowledge to pull of the feat.

According to Apple's Repair Terms and Conditions, unauthorized modifications could deem an iPhone to be considered as "Out-of-Warranty" when in need of repair, if they prevent Apple from addressing the reported issue with the device. Such additions could incur additional costs, or prevent Apple from performing a repair at all.

The European Commission proposed legislation in September that would designate USB-C as the standard charging port for all mobile devices. If enacted, Apple would have two years to add the connection to the iPhone.

Read on AppleInsider
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 31
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,931member
    Well, we knew it was always possible to replace the lightning port with a USB C port, it was simply a matter of whether apple wanted to replace it.

    Lightning works fine for iPhones but it’s becoming isolated as a connector. The USB C is more widespread and apple itself is using it on many other devices, not to mention the EU mandate. The main problem will be a lot of people will need USB A - USB C cables because the prevalence of USB A outlets/receptacles still dwarfs USB C.
    12StrangersbyronldoozydozenMacsWithPenguinsbaconstangOferKTR
  • Reply 2 of 31
    omasouomasou Posts: 576member
    Agreed, Apple could do it. They just don't want to. Like I have said before, I think it is related to keeping the phone waterproof.

    I believe we will see the deletion of the lightning port not a replacement. Apple's is waiting until enough owners start using wireless charging so the uproar will be less. Not helping is the impact of COVID, which resulted in some vehicle manufactures having to drop wireless charging for the time being.

    They probably took a similar approach to dropping the headphone jack and charger.

    A few more release and they'll drop the box too and our phones will come wrapped only in recycled paper.
    edited October 2021 12Strangerswilliamlondon
  • Reply 3 of 31
    shaminoshamino Posts: 527member
    I don't think it's so much a matter of want to as one of see a clear benefit.

    USB-C is very trendy right now, and the new EU law is definitely going to have an impact on Apple's business logic, but there are other things that they need to consider in addition, including:
    • Cost to add higher speed communication to the iPhone.  If a USB-C iPhone continues to use USB 2.0 data rates, that eliminates much of the technical advantage.
    • Other Lightening capabilities.  Lightening was originally designed to replace the 30-pin Dock connector, which had several things like analog A/V, that Lightening later incorporated.  I don't know how many of these features are still used, but they will be important to any transition plan.  For instance, a Lightening headphone adapter only has to (as far as I know) identify itself as such (via the ID chip) and then connect the analog I/O pins to the connector - so it can be a cheap and simple adapter.  But a USB-C adapter needs to include a full USB audio interface into that adapter.
    • Ticking off existing customers.  People over the years have bought a lot of Lightening-based devices.  When Apple dropped the 30-pin connector, there was a lot of complaining from people who had to toss out peripherals or buy adapters.  The Lightening-based ecosystem is even bigger and will probably generate an even bigger wave of complaints.
    Ultimately, it is (as you wrote) a business decision, but there are a lot of factors involved.  It's not just a matter of whether Apple management "wants to".
    williamlondonapplguybaconstangFileMakerFellerFidonet127watto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 31
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 18,016member
    omasou said:
    Agreed, Apple could do it. They just don't want to. Like I have said before, I think it is related to keeping the phone waterproof.

    I believe we will see the deletion of the lightning port not a replacement. Apple's is waiting until enough owners start using wireless charging so the uproar will be less. Not helping is the impact of COVID, which resulted in some vehicle manufactures having to drop wireless charging for the time being.

    They probably took a similar approach to dropping the headphone jack and charger.

    A few more release and they'll drop the box too and our phones will come wrapped only in recycled paper.

    If they are going to do that, they need to include a MagSafe charging puck. They don't even have to include the brick.  Selling it without either would require anyone without a wireless charger to buy one.  The lawyers are already salivating around the globe on that one.  
    MacsWithPenguinswatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 31
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 18,016member
    shamino said:
    I don't think it's so much a matter of want to as one of see a clear benefit.

    USB-C is very trendy right now, and the new EU law is definitely going to have an impact on Apple's business logic, but there are other things that they need to consider in addition, including:
    • Cost to add higher speed communication to the iPhone.  If a USB-C iPhone continues to use USB 2.0 data rates, that eliminates much of the technical advantage.
    • Other Lightening capabilities.  Lightening was originally designed to replace the 30-pin Dock connector, which had several things like analog A/V, that Lightening later incorporated.  I don't know how many of these features are still used, but they will be important to any transition plan.  For instance, a Lightening headphone adapter only has to (as far as I know) identify itself as such (via the ID chip) and then connect the analog I/O pins to the connector - so it can be a cheap and simple adapter.  But a USB-C adapter needs to include a full USB audio interface into that adapter.
    • Ticking off existing customers.  People over the years have bought a lot of Lightening-based devices.  When Apple dropped the 30-pin connector, there was a lot of complaining from people who had to toss out peripherals or buy adapters.  The Lightening-based ecosystem is even bigger and will probably generate an even bigger wave of complaints.
    Ultimately, it is (as you wrote) a business decision, but there are a lot of factors involved.  It's not just a matter of whether Apple management "wants to".

    I don't see any of those are being all that detrimental.  The cost is minimal.  There's no need for the "other" lightning capabilities you mention.  A lot of people aren't using wired earbuds anyway.  Now, there will always be complaints...that I get.  But a USB-C to lightning adapter can't be that much to to include.  Ultimately, they may go whole hog and just get rid of the port entirely, going to MagSafe completely.  
  • Reply 6 of 31
    We'll never see a USB-C iPhone. Portless iPhone by model 14 or 15 at the latest. A change from lightning to USB-C for a year or two would be stupid. The only tech obstacle is a fast enough charging speed to match wired, and we're not that far off now. Wireless data transfer is already there. We'd also need some sort of wireless dongle to plug into cars that are wired CarPlay only. Maybe I'm forgetting something, but I see no other major obstacles to a portless iPhone. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 31
    mazda 3smazda 3s Posts: 1,613member
    omasou said:
    Agreed, Apple could do it. They just don't want to. Like I have said before, I think it is related to keeping the phone waterproof.
    Aren’t Android rivals from Samsung and the rest with USB-C IP68 certified as well?
  • Reply 8 of 31
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,931member
    omasou said:
    Agreed, Apple could do it. They just don't want to. Like I have said before, I think it is related to keeping the phone waterproof.
    shamino said:
    I don't think it's so much a matter of want to as one of see a clear benefit.

    USB-C is very trendy right now, and the new EU law is definitely going to have an impact on Apple's business logic, but there are other things that they need to consider in addition, including:
    • Cost to add higher speed communication to the iPhone.  If a USB-C iPhone continues to use USB 2.0 data rates, that eliminates much of the technical advantage.
    • Other Lightening capabilities.  Lightening was originally designed to replace the 30-pin Dock connector, which had several things like analog A/V, that Lightening later incorporated.  I don't know how many of these features are still used, but they will be important to any transition plan.  For instance, a Lightening headphone adapter only has to (as far as I know) identify itself as such (via the ID chip) and then connect the analog I/O pins to the connector - so it can be a cheap and simple adapter.  But a USB-C adapter needs to include a full USB audio interface into that adapter.
    • Ticking off existing customers.  People over the years have bought a lot of Lightening-based devices.  When Apple dropped the 30-pin connector, there was a lot of complaining from people who had to toss out peripherals or buy adapters.  The Lightening-based ecosystem is even bigger and will probably generate an even bigger wave of complaints.
    Ultimately, it is (as you wrote) a business decision, but there are a lot of factors involved.  It's not just a matter of whether Apple management "wants to".

    Waterproofing shouldn't be an issue - there are other USB C phones that are waterproof. I don't know how much additional cost would be involved with increasing the data rates; Apple has already added USB C to the iPad, so I'm sure they know. 

    A lot of people were annoyed with the switch from 30-pin to lightning but lightning sold itself as it was clearly better. You're right that USB C has fewer advantages. On the other hand, Apple has repeatedly made clear that it's not afraid to piss people off. I don't think USB C to audio is a big deal, though, there are tons of USB C headphones around.

    Several people have said they think Apple will eliminate the connector totally. I'm not sure they can do this. Wired charging is still clearly superior to wireless both in terms of speed, functionality and energy efficiency. Additionally, the vast majority of CarPlay enabled cars require a wired connection. Eliminating a wired connection makes them obsolete. 
    nadrielFidonet127watto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 31
    charlesn said:
    We'll never see a USB-C iPhone. Portless iPhone by model 14 or 15 at the latest. A change from lightning to USB-C for a year or two would be stupid. The only tech obstacle is a fast enough charging speed to match wired, and we're not that far off now. Wireless data transfer is already there. We'd also need some sort of wireless dongle to plug into cars that are wired CarPlay only. Maybe I'm forgetting something, but I see no other major obstacles to a portless iPhone. 
    I can see this hold true for two reasons: Apple was very vocal about the force from EU to introduce a USB-C port. Had they already been planning it, they could have had kept quiet and had time to transition just in time for iPhone 14 or 15. Reason 2: they have neglected the USB 2 cable rate issue for people who want to transfer huge 4K 60 fps videos from iPhone to the Mac. At least the iPhone 13 Pro could have included USB 4 over USB-C to allow really speedy transfers of those movie files. I mean, just look at their ads for the cinematic mode.
    FileMakerFellerwatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 31
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,096member
    As much as I prefer the much sturdier Lightning connection, the writing it on the wall with USBc.  I do not believe USBc to be the superiors physical and rugged connector but it's time.  

    That being said, I see Apple ditching the connector completely and charging wirelessly to increase water resistance.  Then it will be moot.  The only time I ever care about data rates is when I back up my phone to my computer that one time I purchased a new phone.  That's rare.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 31
    M68000M68000 Posts: 728member
    charlesn said:
    We'll never see a USB-C iPhone. Portless iPhone by model 14 or 15 at the latest. A change from lightning to USB-C for a year or two would be stupid. The only tech obstacle is a fast enough charging speed to match wired, and we're not that far off now. Wireless data transfer is already there. We'd also need some sort of wireless dongle to plug into cars that are wired CarPlay only. Maybe I'm forgetting something, but I see no other major obstacles to a portless iPhone. 
    Can wireless charging recharge a phone that has completely drained battery?  I don’t know but wonder.  Having the wired connection puts a voltage on those pins to recharge a dead battery.  Also,  what about diagnostics that Apple might have to do to a customer unit?   I’m a fan of both wired and wireless charging and think the port should stay.  As far as appearance who looks at the bottom of their phone that much to care? LOL.   Would a port free iPhone really look that much better?  I doubt it. As for water resistance,  it’s already pretty good.  Nobody expects a phone to be brought back up from the depths by a deep sea diver do they?  Get another phone if that happens.
    edited October 2021 baconstangwatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 31
    Why is this interesting?
  • Reply 13 of 31
    M68000 said:
    Can wireless charging recharge a phone that has completely drained battery?
    Yes.
  • Reply 14 of 31
    charlesn said:
    We'll never see a USB-C iPhone. Portless iPhone by model 14 or 15 at the latest. A change from lightning to USB-C for a year or two would be stupid. The only tech obstacle is a fast enough charging speed to match wired, and we're not that far off now. Wireless data transfer is already there. We'd also need some sort of wireless dongle to plug into cars that are wired CarPlay only. Maybe I'm forgetting something, but I see no other major obstacles to a portless iPhone. 
    Wireless charging is never going to be as efficient as wired charging, so the energy consumption will go up. Eco-warriors will have a field day panning Apple on such a move.

    That said, Steve Jobs correctly pointed out that convenience trumps quality. Apple will probably find some way to market its approach as better for the environment when looked at holistically, and enough people will be ambivalent about the tradeoffs that sales will continue at record levels.
    muthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 31
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,870member
    shamino said:
    • Cost to add higher speed communication to the iPhone.  If a USB-C iPhone continues to use USB 2.0 data rates, that eliminates much of the technical advantage.
    There is no cost to implement higher data rates; A-series chips already support higher speeds, as evidenced by iPads with USB-C. Higher transfer rate is a necessity to make ProRes video on iPhone practically useable. As it is, it takes hours to transfer the footage, so who is actually going to use this feature? Wireless data transfer won't cut it.
    shamino said:
    • Other Lightening capabilities ... a Lightening headphone adapter only has to (as far as I know) identify itself as such (via the ID chip) and then connect the analog I/O pins to the connector
    This is not correct. The Lightning headphone adaptor communicates with the iPhone digitally and incorporates a DAC with headphone amplifier - https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Apple+Lightning+to+Headphone+Jack+Adapter+Teardown/67562
    edited October 2021 shaminowatto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 31
    citpekscitpeks Posts: 246member
    shamino said:
    I don't think it's so much a matter of want to as one of see a clear benefit.

    USB-C is very trendy right now, and the new EU law is definitely going to have an impact on Apple's business logic, but there are other things that they need to consider in addition, including:
    • Cost to add higher speed communication to the iPhone.  If a USB-C iPhone continues to use USB 2.0 data rates, that eliminates much of the technical advantage.
    • Other Lightening capabilities.  Lightening was originally designed to replace the 30-pin Dock connector, which had several things like analog A/V, that Lightening later incorporated.  I don't know how many of these features are still used, but they will be important to any transition plan.  For instance, a Lightening headphone adapter only has to (as far as I know) identify itself as such (via the ID chip) and then connect the analog I/O pins to the connector - so it can be a cheap and simple adapter.  But a USB-C adapter needs to include a full USB audio interface into that adapter.
    • Ticking off existing customers.  People over the years have bought a lot of Lightening-based devices.  When Apple dropped the 30-pin connector, there was a lot of complaining from people who had to toss out peripherals or buy adapters.  The Lightening-based ecosystem is even bigger and will probably generate an even bigger wave of complaints.
    Ultimately, it is (as you wrote) a business decision, but there are a lot of factors involved.  It's not just a matter of whether Apple management "wants to".

    Type-C is a connector standard, not a data or power delivery standard.  Examples of the latter, such as 20Gbps USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, or PD, may require the connector, but the reverse does not apply.  Apple has thus far seen no need to implement higher than 2.0 speeds on iPhones, and could switch to Type-C without any penalty.  And, if a $499 iPad Air 4 s capable of 5Gbps USB 3.2G1 speeds, there's little reason an $700 or $1000 iPhone could not, based on cost.  The USB IF has made every effort to push Type-C as the universal connector to fulfill any and every purpose,, so it does not represent a technical constraint.

    Lighting is a digital port.  There is analog out.  Apple's Lighting to 3.5mm headphone adapter contains a (very good) DAC/amp.  As does the USB-C version.  The Lighting dongles look simple, but do essential work in providing their various connections.

    There are little to no technical or cost rationales why Apple cannot employ Type-C on the iPhone,  They already produce and sell millions of iOS devices that have USB-C; the technical work has been done, and the support is there.  They just happen to have larger screens, run a slightly different version of the OS, and are called iPads.

    One could argue the reluctance is due a desire to support users' investments in Lighting accessories, but Apple is a forward-looking company that did not shy away from moving away from the Dock connector, or go all-in with USB with the original iMac, and force users to go cold turkey.  The legacy support argument fades more and more as time passes, USB-C adoption rises, and more users find Lighting to be a practical hindrance.

    What is hard to ignore is the the MFi licensing program, including the Lighting connector, Watch charging cables, and MagSafe chargers is also a business for the company, and one it is reluctant to give up, until forced to, whether by the market, or the regulators.

    Personally, I have no strong inclination to go either way..  I admire Lightning as a connector, and prefer it to Type-C in that respect.  But as a practical matter, it would also be nice to not have to carry a separate cable for the iPhone, but the Watch also requires one, and in that sense, it's a minor inconvenience at most.
    muthuk_vanalingamnadriel
  • Reply 17 of 31
    flydogflydog Posts: 1,124member
    MplsP said:
    Well, we knew it was always possible to replace the lightning port with a USB C port, it was simply a matter of whether apple wanted to replace it.

    Lightning works fine for iPhones but it’s becoming isolated as a connector. The USB C is more widespread and apple itself is using it on many other devices, not to mention the EU mandate. The main problem will be a lot of people will need USB A - USB C cables because the prevalence of USB A outlets/receptacles still dwarfs USB C.
    Thanks for sharing the obvious.  Not aware of anyone, including Apple, claiming that it isn’t possible. 
  • Reply 18 of 31
    flydogflydog Posts: 1,124member
    charlesn said:
    We'll never see a USB-C iPhone. Portless iPhone by model 14 or 15 at the latest. A change from lightning to USB-C for a year or two would be stupid. The only tech obstacle is a fast enough charging speed to match wired, and we're not that far off now. Wireless data transfer is already there. We'd also need some sort of wireless dongle to plug into cars that are wired CarPlay only. Maybe I'm forgetting something, but I see no other major obstacles to a portless iPhone. 
    Wireless charging is never going to be as efficient as wired charging,
    Never?

    That comment won’t age well. 
  • Reply 19 of 31
    omasou said:
    Agreed, Apple could do it. They just don't want to. Like I have said before, I think it is related to keeping the phone waterproof.

    Nah. Other device manufacturers make waterproof USB-C devices just fine. 
    nadriel
  • Reply 20 of 31
    flydog said:
    charlesn said:
    We'll never see a USB-C iPhone. Portless iPhone by model 14 or 15 at the latest. A change from lightning to USB-C for a year or two would be stupid. The only tech obstacle is a fast enough charging speed to match wired, and we're not that far off now. Wireless data transfer is already there. We'd also need some sort of wireless dongle to plug into cars that are wired CarPlay only. Maybe I'm forgetting something, but I see no other major obstacles to a portless iPhone. 
    Wireless charging is never going to be as efficient as wired charging,
    Never?

    That comment won’t age well. 
    Never, it's just physics. Simplified version: In a wire the internal resistance affects the efficiency. In a wireless connection there are coils that make a EM field that interacts with another coil. The EM fields weaken fast over distance (double a distance and the strength of a field is reduced to a quarter) plus the internal resistance in the coils. They'd have to be touching to reduce the loss due to distance (i.e. wired).

    It can be made more efficient than it is currently, yes. But never as efficient as wired, and never something approaching a superconductor.
    edited October 2021 muthuk_vanalingammr. hMplsPmazda 3s
Sign In or Register to comment.