Apple forced to ditch iPhone lightning charger::Apple confirms new iPhone 15 will have a common USB-C charging port after EU forces it into the change.

  • GooseFinger@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Eh, I don’t know Apple’s intentions but this specific design change isn’t that complicated. The lightning port still uses the USB protocol so the firmware will be the same or very similar. The supporting electronics also wouldn’t change much, but at most they’d omit/add a few small passives and slightly reroute that part of the circuit to make things fit together. They’d also have to lock down a large production run of USB ports, but any manufacturer would accommodate a customer as large as Apple. They’d need to test fit it with the new phone chassis but that’s relatively simple as well. Regulatory certification would also be smooth sailing for a change this simple, since most of what’s changing is simply the form factor.

    I figure it would take two years before customers would see this design change from the moment engineering was assigned it.

    I’m an electrical engineer who works in production if that matters.

    • bob_wiley@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      You say it would take about 2 years and the EU gave companies 24 months, which is all in line…. But it’s only been about 12 months since the directive was approved. Do you think Apple could pivot to get it done in a year if they weren’t already planning it, especially when there was no legal reason to rush it?

      • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I doubt Apple just learned of the pending EU rule 12 months ago as it was passed.

        The alternative is to take a gamble that it won’t be approved and then be stuck with phones that weren’t in compliance (ignoring the 24 month grace period) and having the development clock start immediately for future models. I’m sure they saw which way the winds were blowing, knew they had no populist counter argument opposing the change, and decided it was in their best interest to join literally every other manufacturer on the planet in using a standard port.

      • Rootiest@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Could they?

        Yeah probably. USB-C connectors are ubiquitous, I’m certain they could acquire the necessary components in short notice if they had to. From my understanding they essentially did just swap the connector and kept the same USB2.0 controller.

        Did they?

        I doubt it, they had plenty of notice this was coming and were likely already preparing for it.

        I wouldn’t be surprised if the second USB-C iPhone release gets a modern controller with USB 3.2 or even 4, and Apple talks it up like they have single-handedly made USB-C fast all by theirselves (and imply that other mobile devices haven’t had the same for far longer)

        • bob_wiley@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Only the standard iPhone is running at USB2 speeds. The Pro has a faster controller.

          If they were going to do a roll out like the iPads, the Pro would have gotten USB-C first, then the normal iPhone would get it next year. Maybe that’s why the Pro has the better and more modern controller… they were planning on doing that first, but with the EU thing, maybe they just decided to get it all out of the way instead of the phased roll out like they did with iPad.

          • Petter1@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Why are you getting downvoted 🤔 I’m pretty sure apple would have kept lighting on the “cheap” phones until the complete removal of any port (I assume they kill the port on the “cheap” phone in the next 5 years) and give the pro thunderbolt like they did this year. I’m thinking this, because I bet not even 1% of “cheap” iPhone users uses the port for data transfer (keep in mind that 1% of “cheap” iPhone users are still plenty talking in absolute numbers)

            • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Just because Apple forced their users to switch everything to wireless, doesn’t mean cables are obsolete.

              More users would use cable if it was actually decently implemented, like with many Android manufacturers.

              Because cable has many advantages over wireless, like having transfer speeds more than 10 times faster.

      • GooseFinger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s really hard to say without being personally involved. Two years is a very comfortable amount of time to implement that specific change. The biggest hurdle is passing regulatory testing early enough to begin manufacturing in time to build a large enough stockpile before release. If they really pushed it and threw enough people at it, manufacturing could begin as little as 6 months after starting. But that’s a very risky timeline because about a million things will still go wrong all throughout the process, and “simple” design changes like this are never, ever simple.

        I’m impressed if they began production one year after deciding to make the change. The EU directive might’ve been approved roughly a year ago, but Apple might’ve seen writing on the wall and started earlier too. Regardless of context, this is definitely not a >2-3 year process though.

        • bob_wiley@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I wasn’t saying they’d take 3 years, but that they would at least use the 2 years to avoid the risk of a rush job. The iPhone is their most important product and I don’t see them putting it at risk to rush something out when there was no requirement to rush.

          Maybe they started early, or worked on both in parallel, if they saw the writing on the wall and wanted a hedge. But typically, or maybe I should say historically, Apple hasn’t been one to do something just because someone tells them to, and if forced they would maintain their own vision as long as possible until they had to make the change. I remember years ago reading that they paid a daily fine in their stores for not displaying ‘no smoking’ signs, because they didn’t like how they looked. I want to say this was in England, but it was a long time ago and I couldn’t quickly find an article on it.

            • bob_wiley@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              What are you talking about? I said they didn’t legally need to move to USB-C until the end of 2024. A team of lawyers isn’t required to figure that out. I have no idea what point you’re trying to make.