Hacker News Reader

Comment by drewg123 | Hacker News Reader

I wish they'd have gone to USB-C for charging. I'm a recent (2 years ago) convert to iPhone and don't have a lightning ecosystem built up. Everything else in my life uses USB-C. Life would be so much simpler if they'd just convert the iPhone. Or even offer separate skews, where one had USB-C

View on HN

I very recently started using Apple products and have an M1 MacBook Pro (work) and M1 iPad Pro (home). Naively I thought this meant they were done with lightning so when work put out an email for a new round of meeting equipment I picked AirPods Pro.

I can't describe how disappointed I was when I went to go charge the case for the first time during a remote meeting and my MacBook charger didn't plug in. It just seemed like such a unnecessary hassle for a product that had otherwise been good in an ecosystem that had otherwise used the same cable as everything else in the world.

Just drop them on a wireless charger every 2 or 3 days - why plug AirPods in?

Because they may not have a wireless charger and thought they could re-use their existing USB-C cable?

Your AirPods came with a USB-C to Lightning cable. It’s unfortunate that you couldn’t use the power cable from your Mac, but at least the correct cable to charge the AirPods case was included.

The reason Apple keeps forcing us to use lightning cable while everybody else uses USB-C is, well, money. Apple gets paid for every lightning cable sold and would leave a lot of money on the table if we could simply use any of the USB-C ones available everywhere.

Life would be easier with USB-C, and that day will come, but Apple will certainly put it off as long as they can.

remember firewire?

you don't get to 2 Trillion without generating a ton of e-waste in your wake

... or mental waste, in the case of Microsoft

For pro versions I don't think it's money. They can charge me extra for not having to use an adapter (just make ipod air pro more expensive). I'm happy to pay extra for USB-C.

I think it's more to do with how Apple releases new products (no incremental updates without big announcements)

I think you're underestimating the amount of shared production/tech between the two tiers of iPhones.

I'd bet the cost of changing over to USB-C on only the expensive tier would outweigh the current MSRP difference. I'd also bet USB-C still isn't cheap enough at iPhone mass market scale.

They're either waiting to use USB-C across all new models, or they're convinced wireless is worth waiting another few years.

Disagree that it's about the relative pennies they make on cables. I think they were caught off guard by the enormous negative public reaction to Apple switching from 30-pin to Lightning.

They knew they had to abandon the 30-pin prior to 2010, and the Lightning spec didn't materialize magically, years of design went into it.

USB 3.1 and the associated USB-C wasn't even on Apple's radar when they started designing Lightning.

I'm completely convinced that Apple would've liked to move to wireless charging before entertaining the idea that the port on the iPhone should switch to USB-C. Unfortunately wireless charging tech hasn't been up to their standards, and we've seen Apple back itself into similar corners with other computers/devices, where they miscalculated future performance.

The fact of the matter is that families tend to have more than one iPhone, with cables that are shared, and iPhones get passed around as they age. I can't imagine how many articles will be written by the tech media and how many angry commenters on Facebook will be crying about perceived forced obsolecense if Apple were to switch USB-C.

The money they make on Lightning cables simply does not matter.

> I think they were caught off guard by the enormous negative public reaction to Apple switching from 30-pin to Lightning.

I dont record any negative reaction. Everyone was looking at what seemingly like a small problem, being able to plug in any other way around, and Apple finally did it.

>USB 3.1 and the associated USB-C wasn't even on Apple's radar when they started designing Lightning.

Apple donated part of the work to make USB-C. They are well aware of USB-C

>Disagree that it's about the relative pennies they make on cables.

>The money they make on Lightning cables simply does not matter.

Lightning Cable, or MFi is a multi hundred million dollar business a year. Most dont seems to realise the gigantic scale of MFi business.

Yup. It's incredibly irritating to have devices from the same manufacturer require different cords. Apple should have moved all the iDevices to USB-C at the same time OR left them all on Lightning. As it is now, I have phones with Lightning, tablets and laptops with USB-C, and watches with a proprietary dongle.

Le Sigh.

I almost made the plunge on the iPhone last year, but I simply cannot move backwards after USB-C. My Macbook and my Pixel charge on the same cable, it is bananas.

FYI it is spelled "SKU", a Stock Keeping Unit.

There's barely a lightning ecosystem left now—the only remaining products are the entry-level iPad, AirPods {,Pro, Max}, and the computer peripherals.

AirPods using lightning is one of the more obnoxious Apple decisions in the last 5 years or so. Even long after the iPhone has moved on to USB-C or no port at all, your AirPods Max will still force you to charge with Lightning.

I guess it's a good thing that everybody's AirPods and AirPods Pro are going to be dead in a couple of years, so if they update them to use USB-C they won't hang around too long. Thanks, poor battery longevity!

Apple took a lot of grief for retiring the 30 pin connector and USB-C didn't yet exist when they did so. At the time I recall Apple saying they would support Lightning for 10 years. That was 9 years ago. It makes sense that the AirPods would use the same connector as the iPhone - imagine the mess that would be if they didn't! Anyway, since next year is the 10 year anniversary of switching to Lightning I suspect that's when they're going to transition all the iDevices (except Watch) to USB-C.

iDevices won’t go USB-C, they’ll go straight to all wireless. No point in having just one or two years of iPhone on USB-C before they go wireless.

You're probably right. I know I don't use the wire to charge my phone any longer. Also eliminates a port which should improve the device's water resistance.

The lightning ecosystem is that a huge percentage of people in the united states expect their phones, and their friends' phones, to charge over lightning. This is a convenience for them. I'm not really defending it, since usb-C would be much easier for me, but I can understand why the transition would be painful for a lot of average users.

I also remember the huge uproar when Apple switched from the 30-pin connector to the lightning connector.

I recommend you switch to magsafe. You can buy really cheap magsafe charging stands. At this point I only have a lightning cable for my car, I basically never use one in my day to day life which rather lessens the pain.

If you want slower charging speeds and much worse energy efficiency, then that's an option.

Ironically MagSafe represents the best speeds and efficiency in the industry, but yet it still pales in comparison to a wire.

Fair, I use MagSafe next to my bed so I'm not worried about charging speed really at all. I do have a lightning cable around in the event that faster charging is required, I just genuinely barely use it.

Except charging speed is now intentionally throttled by the iPhone itself. AirPods do this too. The learn from your schedule and intelligently charge slower and to a lower capacity in order to maximize battery health.

I have a magsafe cradle on my desk. But its too bulky to fit in my bag.

Its funny, the last time I flew I was in a pickle. I had my M1 MBP, its charger, a USB-A to lightning cable, and a USB-C to micro USB for my headphones. Only when my phone was down to 20% did I realize I had nothing to plug the lightning cable into.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com