Apple reveals Lightning to microUSB adapter to pacify Europe | Hacker News Reader

Apple reveals Lightning to microUSB adapter to pacify Europe

slashgear.com

39 pointsdchichkov65 comments

How is an adapter a valid way to obey the law? The goal is that you don't have proprietary chargers in the box. i.e. the goal is the charger, not the phone.

If apple sells the phone with their charger, that has a proprietary interface that are not obeying the law, adapter or no adapter.

To obey the law the charger must have a microUSB connector on it, and they need to offer phones with no charger at a lower cost as an option.

The goal is to reduce waste, instead apple is increasing it with this adapter.

You want to apply to Apple for a job as a lawyer, you obviously think you know more about the law then they do.

Well, their lawyers apparently thought to know well the laws about warranty around Europe and they got fined...

The charger has a normal USB-A female connecter, so you can connect any USB cable that will fit in a computer to it. So the charger itself isn't limited to Lightning, but can be used with a USBA->microUSB cable.

Also see http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/rtte/chargers/questio... that says:

Which is the agreed common interface?

On the basis of the Micro-USB interface, the companies have agreed to develop a common specification in order to allow for full compatibility of chargers and mobile phones. These specifications have been translated in European standards.

N.B.: The agreement allows for the use of an adaptor.

> N.B.: The agreement allows for the use of an adaptor.

That doesn't make sense unless Apple ship adaptors for both the charger and phone.

As your parent said, the goal is very clearly to have one charger be capable of charging any mobile device.

So... can the Apple charger be used on the Nokia? If not, then they also need to make available an adaptor the other way around.

The whole point is to not ship chargers at some point. If Apple make it so that other chargers can charge the iPhone but the Apple charger cannot charge anything else, then Apple are still outside the spirit of the law.

They need to provide 2 adaptors. The charger must charge a Nokia, and a Nokia charger must charge an iPhone.

Yes. The current Apple Power->USB charger works just fine at charging Nokia devices. And no reason why it would be any different now.

If the only cable provided in the box with the iPhone is this one: http://store.apple.com/uk/product/MD818ZM/A/lightning-to-usb...

A USB > Lightning cable.

Then how can I take any phone off my desk and just charge it? The Nokia doesn't have a Lightning interface.

And if they don't supply a cable with a male microUSB end, then how are they complying?

It's not like the last video on this page doesn't make the purpose eminently clear: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/rtte/chargers/index_e...

In Europe, they should ship a microUSB charger and give everyone the adaptor too.

Then, we have one charger for all... and the iPhone can be charged using the adaptor.

That's not ideal for Apple and it is a less than elegant solution given the lightning port, but the whole point is to put a common consumer and the environment before the corporations and proprietary interfaces (and chargers).

Also, functionally speaking, the idea is that if you have your phone in your pocket and you have no charger with you, any charger of any other phone will do it. It is not the case if you need an adapter.

As I understand it, it's not a law but an agreement among the industry:

  > As a result, world leading mobile phone producers committed
  > themselves to ensure compatibility of data-enabled mobile phones,

I guess they will need to include the adapter with the phone here in EU, otherwise they can be in serious trouble with even a sales blockade by EU as one of the options.

Here is a FAQ about the Micro-USB from the European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/rtte/chargers/questio...

Apple isn't stupid. They always include the adapter and charger with every iPhone sold.

Not just to comply with regulations but because the iPhone is designed to be usable without a computer.

Of course they will include the charger, but now the question is if they will include the micro-USB adapter as well.

Instead of changing the old port with Lightning, they could've changed it to microUSB.

Except if, you know, microUSB specs don't cover everything they need the adapter to do.

They should have had two connectors, linked together.

That way you can plug in just a standard microUSB, or a larger cable with microUSB right next to extra pins.

And there's already a connector that does exactly that, namely a USB 3.0 SuperSpeed connector ( http://www.coolgear.com/images/USB3-Micro-3FT.jpg ). Since they don't need SuperSpeed transfer rates, they could have used the SuperSpeed pins for their own purposes.

NIH wins every time at Apple, it seems.

>NIH wins every time at Apple, it seems.

No not really. All of the ports on a Mac are standard.

1) The head of that "micro" cable is huge.

2) Does it have the same power characteristics, is it suitable for other needs (video, audio, etc)? Is the chipset needed to drive it small and capable enough or does it tax the main CPU? I'm pretty sure there's more to the story.

>NIH wins every time at Apple, it seems

You mean like: USB3, Firewire and Thunderbolt ports (cross industry standards)?

The only thing Apple does custom and change all the time is their monitor interfaces.

1) The point is, a standard connector that does what they needed already exists. Given Apple's history, I'm guessing they won't use the bulky $1.99 cable from Monoprice.com. Instead, they will ship a $19.99 cable with a much smaller connector, and with half the quality and durability of said $1.99 Monoprice cable.

2) Any part that can handle 5 Gb/s Superspeed differential signals is guaranteed to have the necessary electrical characteristics to handle any conceivable A/V and control stream formats used by a phone.

Physical-layer connectivity is not handled by the main CPU in any case. It's just a matter of selecting or designing the appropriate bus controller, which they will have done anyway in the course of switching to their new proprietary connector.

The point of the 30 pin adapter is to make it easy as sin to make 3rd party components.

The rewiring to go from the old 30pin to the new lightning doesn't appear to be very large.

To go from analog/multichannel digital to USB is a relatively large change.

What does microUSB not provide that they need?

microUSB has 4 ports, Lightning has 8 ports. Since only two of the microUSB ports are for data (the others are power and ground), that means Lightning has an additional 4 ports that can be dedicated to non-USB data I/O.

Lightening has 9 pins.

The ninth is the outer metal strip.

MicroUSB has 5pins, not 4. The additional pin is for USB host Mode switching. No more type a / type b nonsense.

USB/mhl can do audio and video quite nicely, so there's absolutely no need for additional data pins. Multiplexing works quite nicely.

The additional pins and aren't analog audio, apple said it was entirely digital.

I suspect the additional pins are there solely to support the reversibility of the connector.

Thanks, sorry, my mistake. I was working on memory, been some time since I read up on this. I appreciate the explanation.

It's certainly possible that the additional pins are for reversibility only, that's something I hadn't considered. I guess we'll have to wait until the first tear-downs and pin-out diagrams surface.

Looking at the connector again it's pretty clear that there are 8 pins on either side, plus the 9th pin on the side. So they're definitely not there for reversibility.

So whatever the purpose of the additional ports, the Lightning connector does have more ports than microUSB.

But that doesn't explain why they need that. I'm more interested inthat.

30pin dock connectors are designed to allow easy connections to the device by 3rd party devices (and to allow the collection of licensing fees from them, which are unlikely in the event of using a standard connector).

Then extend the microUSB port, similar to what HTC did with ExtUSB. That would allow charge / sync with a microUSB cable but still allow extended features through the same port.

Can anyone come up with a feasible reason why they haven't done this? Other than allow the connector to go in either way up, what advantages does Lightning provide?

Some weird Apple marketing strategy (to have different port than anyone else) would be my biggest guess. Also, the USB probably isn't the best choice (as others mentioned you want to have audio and other stuff in one port).. but Apple was among the manufacturers to agree on the micro-usb just few years back.

1. Force you to buy overpriced cables 2. Lock you in - once you have a bunch of iPhone-only peripherals, you're more likely to keep buying iPhones rather than switching brands

So you say what they just unlocked all the users of previous iPhones and iPods, because the connector is no longer the same.

Lightning is just a redo of the 30 pin dock connector. It's STILL a 30 pin dock connector.

The point of a 30 pin dock connector is to make it so it's easy as hell to make 3rd party accessories for the devices, which you'll notice are legion.

The adapter is the right choice. It's not just a charging port.

None of the adapters offered so far look like they're going to support use inside existing docks/devices -- the best you can do is the use the cable adapter and then sit the phone nearby.

On top of that, there isn't even a Lightning dock for sale from Apple!

This change seems badly thought out, and shaving a few mm from the overall device a poor justification for the massive expense and upheaval involved. When even hotel rooms have caught on to the popularity of the dock connector, changing it should have had better reasons.

> On top of that, there isn't even a Lightning dock for sale from Apple!

There aren't even any Lightning products for sale from Apple yet, how about waiting more than 24 hours?

There are four different Lightning adapters on the store (OK, for pre-order). You think a few days will make a difference? You think they'll announce a dock next week with an "oops"?

If they were doing a dock, it would be ready on day one.

Shaving a few mm is definitely a good justification for doing it. Every company is pushing for thinner devices.

The dock connector has been in use for years, it was fit for purpose then and it's not fit for purpose now. Apple as a company has never shown any remorse over killing technology and ports it thinks are outdated and pushing forward.

Personally I think it's the best thing of the new iPhone, the current connector sucks and is overly fragile, but I'm not invested in docks or similar mostly as the change has been expected since the iPhone 4ish.

"never shown any remorse over killing technology and ports it thinks are outdated and pushing forward"

Whenever it has done this, it has nearly always been in the name of progress -- it has made things better.

This makes them worse. It takes you from a world with nearly a half-billion usable dock connectors and devices in it to a world with none (unless you remember your adapter everywhere you go).

This is not them replacing ADB with USB. This is them replacing VGA with ADC (their ill-fated custom video adapter which was rightfully killed when the market adopted DVI.)

The market now is settling on Micro-USB (which would have equally given them their few mm back) The advantages of "adaptive digital interface" pale next to the advantages of "a charger and connection, wherever in the world you are".

Well, ADC was killed when Apple realised it was unsustainable in the market. It wasn't actually a bad idea, combining power, signal and USB over one cable. 20/20 hindsight though.

This thins out the device, it improves the connector and it makes it more durable and it builds for the future, it's a good thing (in my eyes).

It takes you into a world where there's many dock connectors that don't work with your device, and if you're an iPhone 5 buyer then you deal with that. And saying 'they should have used Micro-USB' (in not so many words) would also break compatibility with the docks, so the only thing they could have done is not change anything, which is also a bad idea.

But Micro USB sucks. I do not want that flimsy crap in any of my devices. No thank you.

It has been ten years or so. It’s allowed to change your connector every decade. That seems very reasonable to me – and in many way this seems like the perfect connector (durable, reversible).

Shaving mm would be a good enough excuse. But they're not. Lightning and microusb are about the same size, a third as thick as the phone body. They could easily put in both ports but it wouldn't be Apple enough.

What, side-by-side?

Sure. Maybe even vertically if they were so inclined. There is plenty of space when it comes to ports this small.

No offense but that would look horrible from a design perspective, and would take up too much space in terms of internal components. Apple is trying to reduce component size to get bigger batteries in, anything that can be cut down in size is going to be.

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MD823ZM/A/lightning-to-30-...

Why wouldn't this one allow the iPhone 5 to work with existing docks/devices ? So long as the device is sturdy enough (which I can imagine it would be) then there should be no problem.

This adapter is really designed for cables, like those in cars. The unit is too long for the existing docks to be able to provide support to the back of a phone, and hence the entire load is going to go on that tiny length of Lightning adapter.

That's not going to work: either the dock will tip or something will give.

That was my point. I suspect the adapter IS strong enough to support the iPhone.

My prediction: the internal of the adapter is made of LiquidMetal.

It's a shame Apple didn't design this new port such that a microUSB cable could plug straight into one half of it (for charging only).

I'm not familiar with the specifics of legislation, but surely it must be pretty shoddy if companies are allowed to charge for adapters which are needed to make the phone comply with the rule?

I'm not an expert, but yeah, I'm fairly sure these will need to be included in the box for iPhones sold in Europe.

Off topic, but the Lightening connector has 8 copper strips, and it's a 9 pin connecter. Presumably, the outer metal strip is the 9th?

Does this adapter lessen the capabilities of the connector?

I mean, are their legitimate functional requirements that the 9-pin connector addresses beyong the capabilities of a micro-usb? I've seen a comment or two on blogs, but no explanation.

Yes, the additional pins are for things like audio in/out & video out, making the Lightning connector more capable than microUSB alone. So this microUSB adaptor will be usable for charging only.

In terms of the legislation that's ok, as it only specifies a common charging format, not a common accessory connector format.

Thanks. Permit me another question, as my Google fu would surely fail me when trying to find the answer amongst the wash of 'its a money grab' 'Apple should just use micro-usb'.

Why was the original dock connector 13 pin, and why is 9 pin ok now?

The original was 30-pin, the new one is 8-pin.

The reason this could happen is that many of the pins in the old dock connector are now legacy and no-longer used. Examples include a number of FireWire interfaces and some iPod-only S-Video and composite outputs. 8 pins were for FireWire alone.

Also, the 30-pin's availability of dedicated ports for many functions let accessories connect directly to the inputs and outputs they needed without needing to go through a digital conversion process that would require additional software and require digital processing hardware. So an iPod dock could connect directly to the power and audio out ports, resulting in a simple and reliable circuit design.

Now, years later, the cost of processing hardware has dropped massively so it's more feasible for a number of accessories to incorporate digital processing hardware to get the stuff they need from the digital in/out pins rather than needing dedicated pins.

Many thanks!

(Apologies to anyone having to scroll past my Q&... appreciated.. A)

> Yes, the additional pins are for things like audio in/out & video out, making the Lightning connector more capable than microUSB alone

I don't think we know this yet, details on the Lightning connector specs are sparse, aside from it being "all-digital" and "adaptive".

This is what I was wondering about. You can do a heck of a lot of different things through a thunderbolt port. You don't need seperate copper pipes/pins for each function... It's not a miniature switchboard, with a bunch of tiny cables plugged into each pin.

Thunderbolt cables have very expensive, somewhat fragile controllers at each end of the cable.

The Lightening cables are designed to be cheap, simple and sturdy.

Not an answer to the question I asked. You've conflated 'connector sturdiness' with function. A micro-usb plug could be made rugged. Thanks anyway.

A lot of newer devices that use microUSB supports MHL, which allows for HD video signalling over the microUSB interface, so video / audio is not a good excuse for an incompatible port.

I assume in the box you'll get a charging cable that has lightning at one end, and standard USB at the other, which then plugs into a USB charger.

The USB charger and cable are then reusable seperately.

That's what you get with the current iPhones anyway, and I believe Apple were one of the one's pushing for that to be acceptable under this law, even though it's not really complying with the spirit.

I have very little first-hand experience with Apple products, but based on the wording in the EU FAQ linked to above, that assumption is a bit strange.

Since the EU "understanding" specifies micro USB, i.e. the connector on the phone, your solution goes completely parallel to this requirement. I don't think it would be said to comply in that case, what if the users have chargers with fixed cables, terminating in micro USB plugs?

Then you can't just substitute the Apple cable.

Please, please, stop saying that there is a law on microUSB compatibility in EU. There is memorandum of agreement, which is not binding. Vendors agreed that it would be awesome, if you could charge any phone via common external power supply. That's all. Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything.

Also, there are several standards, which also are not binding. One can implement them and wave hands, but one can also ignore them or work around them (via adaptor, for example).

It seems like something that will get lost after 2 seconds since its so small. Wouldn't it of been better if they made something really slim that just attached to the bottom of your phone? So if you did want to regularly charge with micro usb, you could just leave it on and not loose it.

The other thing I don't get is why Apple charge so much for this tiny thing. In 2 seconds flat we'll see clones of it coming on ebay for $1, if Apple actually priced it at $5 or something, people would actually buy it and Apple would still make a 1000% mark up on it.

Apple: NIH reinvented.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com