6 ms·

It was always a stupid rumor. Can you imagine if Apple required a different USB-C cable for your new iPhone rather than what already works with iPads and MacBoo

It was always a stupid rumor. Can you imagine if Apple required a different USB-C cable for your new iPhone rather than what already works with iPads and MacBooks? They would never do that.

zamalek 3y ago
> Can you imagine if Apple required a different [... snip ...] cable for your new iPhone rather than what already works with iPads and MacBooks? My alteration of your comment brings it in line with the status quo prior to the USB-C which, keep in mind, Apple fought tooth and nail against. It is a stupid idea, but Apple did it anyway. The world runs on stupid ideas daily; either because they are more profitable, or are too entrenched, or both.
- paulmd 3y ago
  let's recall that lightning came out before usb-c, because vendors within the USB-IF didn't want to upgrade their devices to replace micro-b with something more expensive and were stalling the acceptance of the standard. for everything you can say about apple, they have at least been consistent on connectors, some would say to a fault. when they deprecated the 30-pin they promised that iphone (not ipad, not laptop) would remain on lightning for 10 years.
  - zamalek 3y ago
    I'm not buying it. It's just a cable, and regular wear and tear (user error in Apple parlance) pretty-much dictates a lifetime far less than 10 years. The reason is profit, no more, no less.
    - turquoisevar 3y ago
      Them: “Apple promised to ship their iPhones with lighting for at least 10 years” You: “I don’t buy it, cables wouldn’t last 10 years” It’s a non-sequitur. As for profit motives, if that were the case then they wouldn’t voluntarily switch their iPad line over to USB-C.
      - zamalek 3y ago
        > It’s a non-sequitur. This isn't a formal debate, I am allowed to have different reasoning from the rest of the group.
        turquoisevar 3y ago
        You’re allowed to say whatever you want and I’m allowed to point out that it makes no sense within the context of the discussion at hand.

It was always a stupid rumor. Can you imagine if Apple required a different USB-C cable for your new iPhone rather than what already works with iPads and MacBooks? They would never do that.

zamalek 3y ago

> Can you imagine if Apple required a different [... snip ...] cable for your new iPhone rather than what already works with iPads and MacBooks? My alteration of your comment brings it in line with the status quo prior to the USB-C which, keep in mind, Apple fought tooth and nail against. It is a stupid idea, but Apple did it anyway. The world runs on stupid ideas daily; either because they are more profitable, or are too entrenched, or both.

paulmd 3y ago
let's recall that lightning came out before usb-c, because vendors within the USB-IF didn't want to upgrade their devices to replace micro-b with something more expensive and were stalling the acceptance of the standard. for everything you can say about apple, they have at least been consistent on connectors, some would say to a fault. when they deprecated the 30-pin they promised that iphone (not ipad, not laptop) would remain on lightning for 10 years.
- zamalek 3y ago
  I'm not buying it. It's just a cable, and regular wear and tear (user error in Apple parlance) pretty-much dictates a lifetime far less than 10 years. The reason is profit, no more, no less.
  - turquoisevar 3y ago
    Them: “Apple promised to ship their iPhones with lighting for at least 10 years” You: “I don’t buy it, cables wouldn’t last 10 years” It’s a non-sequitur. As for profit motives, if that were the case then they wouldn’t voluntarily switch their iPad line over to USB-C.
    - zamalek 3y ago
      > It’s a non-sequitur. This isn't a formal debate, I am allowed to have different reasoning from the rest of the group.
      - turquoisevar 3y ago
        You’re allowed to say whatever you want and I’m allowed to point out that it makes no sense within the context of the discussion at hand.