dude usb 3.0 is 15 years old by now, and they’re a trillion dollar company. They’ll manage, this is 100% by choice
Comment on Apple to Limit iPhone 15 USB-C Cables to USB 2.0 Speeds: Report
DrRatso@lemmy.world 10 months ago
ITT people pretending this is a spite based move, when realistically it is probably cutting costs by reusing the same hardware they used for lightning ports just soldering on a USB-C port instead of a lightning one.
Sethayy@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
altima_neo@lemmy.zip 10 months ago
On a thousand dollar phone
Fauzruk@lemmy.world 10 months ago
One could argue that you don’t become a trillion dollar company by leaving money on the table.
1847953620@lemmy.world 10 months ago
One could argue, greed is a subset of malice, and spite isn’t mutually exclusive with any of it.
dx1@lemmy.world 10 months ago
- Public companies student
DrRatso@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Yes, the choice being the respective SoCs not needing 3.0 support because they were intended to be used with lightning connectors.
lud@lemm.ee 10 months ago
Pixel 6 has 3.1 gen 1 (3.0) and so did the Pixel 1
gsmarena.com/google_pixel_6-11037.php support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/7158570
DrRatso@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Sure, I’m willing to eat my words on that one, for some reason my memory said 6a 2.0
nathris@lemmy.ca 10 months ago
The SoC lacks the hardware. Even the USB C iPads with A series chips operate at 2.0 speeds. They can only do 5Gbit in host mode, like with an external SSD. Plugged in to a computer they are 2.0.
I would imagine future chips will have the capability, once the Pro chips trickle down to the base models.
DrRatso@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Yea, well, there you go. Pretty much straight up supports my original claim. If they need to full on change the SoC why in the hell would they fork up to support thunderbolt on iphones.
wieli99@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
You think this more likely than just creating a bigger artificial difference between the standard and normal model?
DrRatso@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I think that is most likely a lot of what drives that divide, but this almost certainly the case for the port. Some shit undoubtedly is software locked, and that is in fact scummy, but new hardware will always be more expensive than hardware you have already designed and maybe even have lying around.
To get thunderbolt in there they probably need a new board specifically for the iphone, while they can just cram in the lightning version with a new solder job and call it a day.
At the end of the day 95+% of the people who will use their phones will only use the port for charging anyway.
wieli99@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
Well we don’t know yet what port the pro model we have, so once we do, we’ll know whether it’s just scummy behavior once again, or if Apple decides to use low to midrange hardware on all their models
DrRatso@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Someone else commented that the SoC literally lacks the capability to run above 2.0. If this is the case it would be very hard to call this even scummy adjacent.
3laws@lemmy.world 10 months ago
by reusing the same hardware
I’m sure their engineers are competent enough to repurpose she iPad Pro’s TB4 hardware.
DrRatso@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Two factors. Do they still have lightning hardware sitting on shelves? Do they need to design to fit the iphone form factor? If the answer is yes to either of these, designing for TB this release cycle seems non-sensical when most people only use the cable to charge their phones.
PeachMan@lemmy.one 10 months ago
That, and also, how many iPhone users do you think will actually notice slower USB speeds? One percent? They literally do not need 3.0 to keep their customers happy. And they’re not going to poach many Android fanboys with this change, so who cares?
DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 10 months ago
I’m going over…
RIP Firefox phone and Samsung Pure.
netburnr@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I’m with you, people use the cable for power, it’s pretty rare to use them for data transfers. He’ll moving to a new phone is all wireless, just set them next to each other.
dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee 10 months ago
I believe it’s both. Apple said that they’d be compliant with the EU regulations of having usb-c as a port for any cell phone with a charging port. I don’t remember the exact wording, but a valid interpretation was that usb-c is not required if the device has no charging port. I believe apple is moving towards exclusively QI-charging and wireless connection. Reducing the capability of wired connections would in that case just be a way to move the users towards the planned infrastructure.
So it’s both a spiteful move regarding the regulations, but also a move which reduces costs and pushes users their desired way.
Rootiest@lemm.ee 10 months ago
A shining example of cutting edge Apple innovation
DrRatso@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I mean, it’s not like it matters much. Most of apple devices actually expected to transfer data over wire are on thunderbolt already aren’t they? Frankly I’m a little surprised they switched to C on 15 already, iirc they could have still released this cycle on lightning according to EU regulation (I think it only comes in effect end of 2024, right?) It comes to me as no surprise that they use up the controllers they had for lightning before they roll out thunderbolt. It will probably be 2.0 for base and thunderbolt for pro this cycle and likely thunderbolt for all next cycle. That would be the apple m/o.
lolcatnip@reddthat.com 10 months ago
Are you trying to suggest the company that invented rounded corners isn’t innovative enough?!
Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
Next they will claim they invented cutting corners…