Apple could potentially force users to use a proprietary apple USB c charger instead of any random one. This can be done via a lockout chip inside of the cable itself that only apple produces and is already done on apples lightning cable (super cheap sketchy cables may not charge or have features missing).
Additionally the USB c port on iPhones will only run on USB 2.0 speeds, a standard from the year 2000 (yes, 23 years ago).
I don’t expect them to do that, much too easy to get slapped down on by the EU. I do expect that non-Apple/MFI chargers are USB 2.0, and I do expect are limited to slow charging and might come with a nasty-gram in the OS when using one. I lean against the nasty-gram as you can use some shit-ass lightning cables and iOS doesn’t generally care, but the other two I would say are near certain. What will be real fucky is if they don’t have a faster data transfer speed at all.
Sure, I expect it if I buy a cheap USB device. But if I’m paying hundreds of dollars for the device that I use daily? Having even slightly more modern speeds is a requirement for me
I kind of suspect that people who transfer their photos and music and whatnot over, manually, are very much in the minority compared to people who stream and use a cloud hosted photo app. And I’d suspect that a good handful of those that care enough to backup their files locally probably has OwnCloud or something similar running.
That said, such a shitty move. I can’t imagine it would be that much more bothersome to support high speeds, on a modern device. It is more than likely an ulterior motive to get those people to assimilate or leave, and then phase out the plug entirely, a move that will be mocked by every major Android manufacturer only to have it on all their flagship models a year or two later.
There’s definitely no defense for an expensive device like Apple to have inferior data transfer other than as you said, ulterior motives.
It doesn’t have to be photos and videos, literally any situation that requires plugging my phone into my computer to transfer anything would be better at faster speeds. A good example is when you get a new phone and you plug your old phone into it and a transfers is all of your information over quickly.
And it’s not like I’m transferring these files all the time, it’s just for a brief moment every once in a while, so some minor Bluetooth interference is really not an issue. I’ve never heard of this complaint in the last 7 years of Pixel phones with USB 3.
Thanks for providing the first somewhat reasonable argument that Apple could make in support of that design choice, other than cost cutting. What about USB 3.2 and 4? Also does USB 2 not produce any rfi?
I looked into it further, and couldn’t get much info. It seems the USB organization is one of the main places for information on this potential issue, and their conclusion is;
“Improving the shielding on the USB 3.0 receptacle connector can help reduce the amount of noise radiated due to USB 3.0 signaling. In addition, shielding of the USB 3.0 peripheral device plays an important role in reducing the amount of noise radiated in the 2.4–2.5 GHz range. This is particularly critical for peripheral devices that are placed close to the PC platform, such as a flash drive. Placement of the wireless antenna should also be carefully considered on a platform and be located as far away as possible from a USB 3.0 connector and/or device.”
Which makes sense to me. And Apple, the most profitable tech company in the world, seems to be best equipped to figure out how to shield their devices components to minimize or eliminate that issue.
It only interferes with 2.4 ghz signals, so if you have access to 5ghz wifi then that isn’t applicable. I’ve never noticed any interference and when I googled that I found some articles from years ago but it doesn’t seem to be a real issue
Oh yeah, I guess I’ve never noticed any issues with that in the last 7 generations of pixel phones with USB 3. Is this actually a measurable issue or is it just something that’s theoretically possible? I’m struggling to find anyone who has reproduced this issue.
Apple could potentially force users to use a proprietary apple USB c charger instead of any random one. This can be done via a lockout chip inside of the cable itself that only apple produces and is already done on apples lightning cable (super cheap sketchy cables may not charge or have features missing).
Additionally the USB c port on iPhones will only run on USB 2.0 speeds, a standard from the year 2000 (yes, 23 years ago).
I don’t expect them to do that, much too easy to get slapped down on by the EU. I do expect that non-Apple/MFI chargers are USB 2.0, and I do expect are limited to slow charging and might come with a nasty-gram in the OS when using one. I lean against the nasty-gram as you can use some shit-ass lightning cables and iOS doesn’t generally care, but the other two I would say are near certain. What will be real fucky is if they don’t have a faster data transfer speed at all.
deleted by creator
Universal* Serial Bus
Wow, what shitheads.
What if i told you Im pretty sure most of your usb devices run on those “23 year old” speeds?
Most of my USB devices isn’t a $1000+ brand new handheld computer though.
not the storage ones…
Sure, I expect it if I buy a cheap USB device. But if I’m paying hundreds of dollars for the device that I use daily? Having even slightly more modern speeds is a requirement for me
True, but when transferring lots of photos and videos between the phone and computer, USB 3+ is superior, no?
I kind of suspect that people who transfer their photos and music and whatnot over, manually, are very much in the minority compared to people who stream and use a cloud hosted photo app. And I’d suspect that a good handful of those that care enough to backup their files locally probably has OwnCloud or something similar running.
That said, such a shitty move. I can’t imagine it would be that much more bothersome to support high speeds, on a modern device. It is more than likely an ulterior motive to get those people to assimilate or leave, and then phase out the plug entirely, a move that will be mocked by every major Android manufacturer only to have it on all their flagship models a year or two later.
There’s definitely no defense for an expensive device like Apple to have inferior data transfer other than as you said, ulterior motives.
It doesn’t have to be photos and videos, literally any situation that requires plugging my phone into my computer to transfer anything would be better at faster speeds. A good example is when you get a new phone and you plug your old phone into it and a transfers is all of your information over quickly.
And it’s not like I’m transferring these files all the time, it’s just for a brief moment every once in a while, so some minor Bluetooth interference is really not an issue. I’ve never heard of this complaint in the last 7 years of Pixel phones with USB 3.
You’d be wrong
USB 3.0 and 3.1 are jank and produce RFI, so using 2.0 is an excellent idea. USB 3.1 could cause interference with Bluetooth.
Edit: I literally work with this stuff for a living, but downvote me… It’s fine.
Thanks for providing the first somewhat reasonable argument that Apple could make in support of that design choice, other than cost cutting. What about USB 3.2 and 4? Also does USB 2 not produce any rfi?
I looked into it further, and couldn’t get much info. It seems the USB organization is one of the main places for information on this potential issue, and their conclusion is;
“Improving the shielding on the USB 3.0 receptacle connector can help reduce the amount of noise radiated due to USB 3.0 signaling. In addition, shielding of the USB 3.0 peripheral device plays an important role in reducing the amount of noise radiated in the 2.4–2.5 GHz range. This is particularly critical for peripheral devices that are placed close to the PC platform, such as a flash drive. Placement of the wireless antenna should also be carefully considered on a platform and be located as far away as possible from a USB 3.0 connector and/or device.”
Which makes sense to me. And Apple, the most profitable tech company in the world, seems to be best equipped to figure out how to shield their devices components to minimize or eliminate that issue.
It only interferes with 2.4 ghz signals, so if you have access to 5ghz wifi then that isn’t applicable. I’ve never noticed any interference and when I googled that I found some articles from years ago but it doesn’t seem to be a real issue
Bluetooth is 2.4 GHz.
Oh yeah, I guess I’ve never noticed any issues with that in the last 7 generations of pixel phones with USB 3. Is this actually a measurable issue or is it just something that’s theoretically possible? I’m struggling to find anyone who has reproduced this issue.
Every other manufacturer has found a way to make it work