XPost: uk.telecom.mobile, misc.phone.mobile.iphone   
   From: usenet.tweed@gmail.com   
      
   Chris  wrote:   
   > Tweed  wrote:   
   >> Chris  wrote:   
   >>> Tweed  wrote:   
   >>>> Bill Powell  wrote:   
   >>>>> Apple should be able to make any connector it wants to make.   
   >>>>> Even one which is designed specifically to prevent interaction.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> If people would just stick only to Apple products, they'd be fine   
   >>>>> as there's no need for interoperability if you buy only Apple product.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> As Tim Cook openly said, "Buy your mom an iPhone" if you want your device   
   >>>>> to work with another company's products. It's all Apple around here.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> So it shouldn't matter if nobody else uses Apple's connector.   
   >>>>> It's a free and openly competitive world market, isn't it?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Thing is, Apple didn’t even have inter operability between its own   
   >>>> products.   
   >>>   
   >>> Agree. And I've said this before on here.   
   >>>   
   >>> Apple didn't transition to USB-C from USB-A well or consistently. When Macs   
   >>> lost USB-A ports phones should have gone the same way shortly after.   
   >>>   
   >>> What happened instead is that Apple bundled phones with USB-A - lightning   
   >>> charges for years without an ability to charge your phone with your Mac. In   
   >>> all that time they sold billions of phones with USB-A chargers.   
   >>>   
   >>> Then, when they transitioned to USB-C, only at one end of the cable, they   
   >>> also removed the charger (apart from ones model). So forced everyone to buy   
   >>> chargers.   
   >>>   
   >>>> MacBooks have had USB-C for years (you can’t push enough power   
   >>>> through a Lightning connector) So you couldn’t use your Mac charger to   
   >>>> charge your Lightning connector iPhone or iPad or ear phones. Now you can.   
   >>>> I’d understand reluctance to move to usb-c if there were any significant   
   >>>> technical downsides, but I can’t see any. It supports a wider range of   
   >>>> charge voltages than Lightning, has a more robust connector, (though some   
   >>>> disagree about this) and supports a much wider range of protocols   
   including   
   >>>> high speed video. Lightning was a much better technical and mechanical   
   >>>> solution than micro USB, but it is now technically and commercially   
   >>>> obsolete.   
   >>>   
   >>> Agree. Lightning should have died 3-4 years ago.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >> I wonder if Covid and the semi conductor shortage had anything to do with   
   >> Lightning hanging on longer than it should? All manufacturers in all   
   >> electronics sectors had supply problems, mainly with the dull low value   
   >> devices - such as usb and power supervisory chips. As Apple had a monopoly   
   >> with Lightning in phones perhaps they had fewer problems getting hold of   
   >> these parts. Just speculating.   
   >   
   > I guess that's possible. Not sure why lightning parts would be more   
   > sourceable than the more ubiquitous USB, though?   
   >   
   >   
      
   Existing monopoly supply contracts and nobody else competing for those   
   parts?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)