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...

all 40 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 43 points 3 years ago* (12 children)

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

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    Of course the top comment is some "Apple vs. Google" garbage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -22 points 3 years ago (2 children)
  • [–] 9 points 3 years ago (3 children)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago (2 children)
  • [–] 27 points 3 years ago (11 children)

    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

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 66 points 3 years ago (9 children)

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

    (Android fan btw)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (7 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Why do all iphone articles currently have this picture of a toilet seat?

    :-)

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    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.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 3 years ago (1 child)

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

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    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.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago (2 children)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    So no more MFI badges on accessories?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    Still no thunderbolt

  • source