You're viewing a single thread.
-
Somewhat unpopular opinion: Lightning was by far the better connector.
-
So why does Apple use USB-C on iPad Pro and MacBooks?
-
Phones go in pockets. Pockets have lint. Lightning ports are way easier to clean than USB-C.
iPads and Macbooks mostly stay in the house or get carried in a bag rather than a pocket. Way less lint, so the benefits of USB-C far outweigh the benefits of Lightning here.
-
How much more lint do you think will an USB-C port catch than a lightning port? Answer: Insignificantly little. You'r reaching for arguments here.
-
I said easier to clean not that it catches less lint. I could even use a toothpick for my iPhone. Nothing thicker than a sim tool worked for my Oneplus and that had trouble getting it all out. Even most NEEDLES I had were too thick.
-
-
-
Because they co-developed it and it is the better connector if you want to do anything other than charging.
-
If they co-developed it, why did it take the EU forcing them to switch to it?
-
Because they wanted to stick with their lightning ecosystem for iPhone
-
Read: they wanted to make money by being a huge pain in the dick
-
To a certain extent, yes
-
-
-
Because when they switched from the 30 pin connector to lightning, everybody removeded and moaned about it. So they promised they’d keep lightning for a decade. It’s been 11 years.
But I’m sure if they’d broken their promise and switched earlier, everyone would have been understanding.
-
Literally yes. Obstinance is not a virtue.
-
-
Because you can make more money when you abuse your market position to sell overpriced cables.
-
-
-
Because ports work better in some instances than others? Why don’t we just use rj45 for all our data transfer instead of USB? This has got to be one of the weirdest arguments I’ve seen around usb c v lightning.
-
That's a stupid comparison because of the size of RJ45 plugs.
-
It really isn’t. The lightning port is less than half the size of a USB C port. 6.7x1.5x6.7mm compared to 8.4x2.6x6.65mm. That’s 67.335 square millimeters vs 145.236 square millimeters. Lightning is significantly smaller.
-
-
-
-
Compared to what? Parallel? Maybe, if you don't need the structural rigidity. Banana plugs? Definitely. USB-C? Fuck no! But it is also older than USB-C, so that's fair.
-
Banana plugs? Definitely
Banana plugs are damn good for lab equipment.
As a speaker connector? Fuck banana plugs. Speakon is the only way.
-
What are you doing with your cables that “structural rigidity” is a major concern?
-
Use em
-
-
Lightning is rounded and thus easier to insert. It doesn’t scratch the surface of whatever you‘re trying to plug it in to and on top of that it slightly clicks into place. Just by itself, the plug is superior yes.
-
No, if the clamp-mechanism breaks, you habe to replace the connector on the device while with UsbC you only have to use a different cable.
-
Careful, those rounded corners are patented
-
-
-
It was the better connector of its time.
-
If sucking ass is a marker of excellence, sure.
-
The fact that only Apple was allowed to use it means it is a worse cable than any standardised cable
-