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…

  • Metal Zealot@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    41
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    “W00T, THE BARE MINIMUM, TAKE THAT GOOGLE” *Apple fans, still stuck, like, in 2017

    • Rootiest@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

    • evident5051@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can’t say that I’ve seen any comment like this where the user wasn’t being sarcastic.

  • abcd@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    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

    • Nate@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      62
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Older chip doesn’t have a 3.0 controller. While disappointing, not really an artificial limit

      (Android fan btw)

      • gila@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        29
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        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.

        • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          37
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

        • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.fmhy.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

        • LifeInOregon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • gila@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            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.

        • tristan@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          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

          • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.fmhy.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            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.

    • TheMadnessKing@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, they decided to stick to USB 2 instead of USB 3.2 for their base model, despite the high cost of the phone.

  • steven@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • eee@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • TheMediocreOne@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • Natanael@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      With Android you can transfer data to a new phone over a direct USB C to C cable connection

  • anlumo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The bigger question is, will developers be able to talk to their USB-C equipment without an MFi chip?

    • Natanael@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      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

  • Cookie1990@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • Player2@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Surely with all the space they saved by removing the headphone port, they could get a controller in there

      • Natanael@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • InvertedParallax@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

    • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      As the report notes, it is still possible that Apple will launch a “Made for iPhone” certification program for iPhone accessories with a USB-C port, but it appears that uncertified accessories will work just fine with the devices.