iPhone 15 Models Have 'Completely Standard' USB-C Port Without Restrictions on Accessories
(www.macrumors.com)
from L4s@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world on 16 Sep 2023 06:00
https://lemmy.world/post/5146932
from L4s@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world on 16 Sep 2023 06:00
https://lemmy.world/post/5146932
iPhone 15 Models Have ‘Completely Standard’ USB-C Port Without Restrictions on Accessories::Apple’s new iPhone 15, iPhone 15 Plus, iPhone 15 Pro, and iPhone 15 Pro Max are equipped with a “completely standard” USB-C port without…
threaded - newest
“W00T, THE BARE MINIMUM, TAKE THAT GOOGLE” *Apple fans, still stuck, like, in 2017
.
I can’t say that I’ve seen any comment like this where the user wasn’t being sarcastic.
Are you a robot?
I hope not, otherwise I have been charging myself the wrong way for decades!
It says “bot” next to your username for me in the Lemmy app. I think that’s why they asked lol. Beep boop
What really blows my mind is not that the lower-end models have USB2.0 speeds, but that all iPhones always have in the past.
Lighting truly was ancient.
Apple actually upgraded Lightning to USB 3.0 speeds for the first (and second?) generation iPad Pro. There’s a official USB 3 “camera adapter” (essentially a Lightning to USB-A + Lightning passthrough for charging dongle) that works with these iPads at 3.0 speeds.
That was a very short run though, I don’t even think Apple ever released a Lightning to USB-A/C cable with 3.0 speeds.
Neat I didn’t know that
Of course the top comment is some “Apple vs. Google” garbage.
.
I don’t think having a desire to elevate the level of discussion beyond, “Haha fuck you Apple!” and rather focus on the technology and its ramifications qualifies as bitter fanboy-ism.
.
For now…
Also the article states the lower price models will get 480Mbits, the more expensive ones will get 10Gbits. There is your artificial limitation. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the same hardware inside
Older chip doesn’t have a 3.0 controller. While disappointing, not really an artificial limit
(Android fan btw)
The cost difference to a 3.2 controller is trivial. It’s an arbitrary limitation to differentiate it from the Pro model. They are capitalising on the work done by USB-IF to improve the spec in a way no other member would dream of
Edit: Thanks for telling me about how a $1000+ flagship phone shipping with industry subpar connectivity is OK because they used the SoC from last gen. Truly a revelation.
Not just that, lightning was a similar speed to usb2. It’s in their interest to make the pro look like an upgrade rather than highlight just how bad the lightning was really for the consumer
Lightning WAS usb2. Like, USB 2.0 signalling was present on some of the pins on the Lightning port. Since USB 2.0 only needed two data wires that was easy to do.
The difference isn’t just upgrading to a 3.2 controller, it’s literally a different chip. The A16 vs the A17. Unless you’re suggesting they add a secondary controller to the board? Which doesn’t actually work, since the A16 wouldn’t be able to support the speed difference, so you’d have a 3.2 controller locked down to 2.0 specs anyway.
You ever see a comment that is so clearly ignorant. It just makes you shake your head… congrats my friend
Crack open an iPhone sometime. The mainboard is a tiny little thing with only a couple of chips on it. In general- CPU, storage, RAM, baseband (cellular radio). Sure they could add a USB 3.2 controller, but that’s another chip sucking power and taking board space, increasing BoM cost, and since most iPhone users never plug their phone into a computer it’d be wasted.
So they use the USB controller built into the SoC (system on chip), and with the old chip that’s 2.0 only.
Guess they must have a surplus of A16 chips and/or the A17 is proving expensive to make.
The controller is a part of the SoC. It would be a completely different SoC, not just an additional controller. The SoC in the 15 is essentially the 14 Pro SoC. Possibly binned from last year’s production line.
It’s like you’re making all these connections and then still coming to the conclusion that my premise is false. Yeah, the 2.0 controller is bad, because the choices Apple made to design the iPhone 15 SoC weren’t about bringing new features to users. They are about posturing features in a particular way for business reasons. Churning through models means each year they need new features to sell. They need to introduce compelling new features at a faster rate than they are being developed, so they drip-feed them instead. And if you actually care about getting the baseline i/o upgrades on new models you’d get from literally any other manufacturer, you have to buy a Pro.
They could use an external USB controller.
Well, they decided to stick to USB 2 instead of USB 3.2 for their base model, despite the high cost of the phone.
Why do all iphone articles currently have this picture of a toilet seat?
:-)
I cannot unsee this now lmfao
So no more MFI badges on accessories?
But how many people actually use this port for data transfer in uses cases where speed is vital? I haven’t transferred anything to my iPhone by cable since 2015 or something.
I for example loathe every time I need to do some kind of file transfer for my wifes iPhone, and I have a macbook from work.
Just let me open the phone and do my thing. No, you have to have everything in sync everywhere.
Actually that’s one of the frustrations I had with my old iphone. I don’t want to install itunes and sync stuff, I just want to connect my phone and transfer that one file from my friend’s computer.
With Android you can transfer data to a new phone over a direct USB C to C cable connection
Linus from LTT had a good idea where this comes from, the Apple Silicon in this generation of iPhone doesnt have a better usb controler. That could explain it, the time from defining a cpu to the first device are 4-5 years.
Surely with all the space they saved by removing the headphone port, they could get a controller in there
It’s not just the controller, it’s the bandwidth to the CPU too. The old controller was limited to USB 2 speeds and Apple probably wasn’t planning to expose more on that port.
They’re using an apb node of the main axi bus, they need to promote usb to a full axi node or put it on a faster clocked apb node.
Power Islanding, but also the IP isn’t drop in, if they’re using synopsys there’s a few changes they have to make, it’s a much bigger block.
The bigger question is, will developers be able to talk to their USB-C equipment without an MFi chip?
Yup, the ability to connect stuff and power it means very little if Apple doesn’t let you interact with it, they still have full control over drivers and APIs
Still no thunderbolt