Daniel Eran Dilger of AppleInsider on why the proposed move to the USB 3.1 Type-C connector is a necessary change:
Newer platforms and devices are reaching a point where existing USB receptacles and plugs are inhibiting innovation
Makes sense, so why the controversy? Because change.
This sounds familiar, doesn’t it? Seemingly well-placed criticism toward a company that just cannot seem to use the same connectors/plugs as everyone else.
When will we ever learn?
Some history: Almost two and a half years ago, dissension amongst Apple anti-apologists was quite high. Apple made a controversial change from the old 30-pin dock connector to Lightning, in lieu of using the then ‘industry standard’ Micro-B USB connector.
The Loop featured a report from Rainer Brockerhoff, an engineer, in which he denoted the reasons why Apple chose to go with a completely new connector for iPhone 5 and the original iPad mini:
People keep asking why Apple didn’t opt for the micro-USB connector. The answer is simple: that connector isn’t smart enough. It has only 5 pins: +5V, Ground, 2 digital data pins, and a sense pin, so most of the dock connector functions wouldn’t work – only charging and syncing would. Also, the pins are so small that no current plug/connector manufacturer allows the 2A needed for iPad charging.
And Apple SVP of Marketing Phil Schiller had an even more layman’s explanation for the change:
We use wireless to do a lot of what we used to use cables for […] So a lot has changed, and it’s time for the connector to evolve.With everything moving toward cloud storage, the consumer’s reliance on a physical connection for transferring data was an aging concept. Apple took advantage: By shrinking the charging port from the old size to the new size, Apple engineers were able to create the thinnest iPhone to date.Fast forward to the present: turns out Apple has a good reason for embracing the Type-C connector (assuming everything we think we know is actually true).
As Dilger noted above, the move to a single USB 3.1 and the Type-C connector would not be as limiting as we might think:
There are some real tradeoffs in getting rid of today’s MagSafe, dual USB ports, SD Card slot and Thunderbolt. However, as brisk sales of iPads have demonstrated, most buyers care more about price and utility (including mobility) than they do about hooking a light, thin mobile device up to a RAID array, an external HD display or even multiple USB peripherals. With AirPrint, AirPlay, AirDrop, Bluetooth, iCloud and other wireless networking features, wired ports are becoming less and less necessary, particularly as 802.11ac WiFi wireless speeds begin to compete with USB cables. WiFi is currently no match for Thunderbolt in either displays or for connectivity with external high speed devices. However, Apple and Intel have worked together to develop both Thunderbolt and the latest USB 3.1 specification.
Just like with iEEE 1394, Apple has had a hand in what just might be the next Thunderbolt, which was, coincidentally, the next FireWire, which was the next USB, and this is the song that doesn’t end. So, we can all breathe a sign of relief. Maybe Apple knows what its doing after all?
Apple is not afraid to buck the trends, nor is it afraid to go against the status quo when it needs to. Everyday we use products designed by Apple. Or, if we are so inclined, we might use products designed by one of Apple’s competitors, typically made to emulate closely the actual Apple product (whether or not they truly achieve this is up for debate). I am typing on one of those Apple products right now, while I sit next to another one that is playing a podcast put on by a bunch of nerds who love and use Apple products as much as everyone else. A few minutes ago I adjusted a thermostat, from my phone. This thermostat was designed by a guy who left Apple, but only after helping them make one of the most revolutionary Apple products of the past 15 years.
Pardon the last bit for coming off overly hyperbolic. But truly, if Apple had decided to play it safe all these years and just iterate on what was already out there, we would be in particularly different place today.
Consider UNPOPULARGEEK’s take on my postulate:
Had there been no iPhone, most of us would be stuck with di-chromatic Nokia screens, which seemed to be evolving in color and pixel density one step one decade at a time […] And obviously there would be no android, no camera phone. Phones sales would be based on physical features mostly rather than delivering actual value. I still remember those midi ringtones on Samsung/Motorola/Panasonic phones which were a fad in those days. And definitely one would not do without utility of the Maps using GPS.Spot on.In this no-iPhone, ‘whimpy-Apple’ scenario, I suspect the smartphone still would have eventually supplanted featurephones. The difference between that scenario and reality: the smartphone would have been merely a slow-burner in the market, rather than the industry explosion that was the original iPhone.
As painful as it is, we would be remiss without Apple continually pushing the boundaries, and concomitantly, continually forcing us go buy a new cable every few years.