Comment by Dylan16807

Comment by Dylan16807 10 months ago

4 replies

Well they're not going to switch just for the sake of switching. USB-C has no capabilities that they care about compared to lightning (for phones), that's why they didn't change for so many years. It's just more compatible, and they didn't care about being compatible.

I think your argument against 1 is flawed, because I can say the same thing about USB-C, that they won't use it forever.

Or in other words, I pick (1b), they likely, not for sure but likely, would have kept using lighting until the same year they end up switching away from USB-C, whenever that may be.

In the future we might see (4) or (5). I note that you also think (5) might happen in a while, so your reasoning is compatible with (1) in the short term followed by (5) in the longer term.

kalleboo 10 months ago

> USB-C has no capabilities that they care about compared to lightning (for phones)

On the new Pro phones they have been heavily marketing the capability to record ProRes Log video to external USB C 3.1 drives (something not supported recording to internal storage and that Lightning was too slow for)

When they replaced 30-pin with Lightning, they announced it with "this is our connector for the next 10 years". Now it's been 10 years. Simple as that.

  • Dylan16807 10 months ago

    If a specific time promise was the main motivation to stick with lightning, they could have easily said that. I've never seen anyone bring up that mention of ten years before.

lotsofpulp 10 months ago

> USB-C has no capabilities that they care about compared to lightning (for phones),

Being able to share 1 cable type for charging laptops and phones and data transfer Ana basically everything else is pretty useful/convenient.

  • Dylan16807 10 months ago

    Right, but that falls under being compatible, and has been true since about 2015.