Considering I have a total of... zero Lightning cables and accessories, but a ton of standard USB-C? I would consider the 2019 iPhone line totally useless (but given by my lack of Lightning accessories, you can assume I use Android phones and thus consider all of the iPhones useless).
I've only ever seen one USB-C cable and the person who uses it finds it annoying (it's not even for an iphone but a raspberry-pi style device). I don't know why someone would have a "ton" of those cables, maybe two if they have a new iphone. Fast charge doesn't matter if you're able to actually let go of the phone and put it down, charging overnight should last all day.
I have now countered and balanced your data point, thus nullifying it.
I've only ever seen one USB-C cable and the person who uses it finds it annoying
Oh well clearly then your single data point proves that nobody uses USB-C despite it being on nearly every new computer and smartphone sold these days, including all the computers sold by Apple.
I don't know why someone would have a "ton" of those cables, maybe two if they have a new iphone.
Because even if you aren't trying you end up with a bunch over time. I've used iPhones for several product generations and so has my wife. I'm sure we have at least a dozen Lightning cables between us. I have 40+ USB-A/B cables, dozens of micro and mini USB cables, and probably 5 USB-C cables with more undoubtedly
Ye olde USB 1 isn't going away anytime soon, because it is cheap to implement. That makes it ideal for low-cost, low-bandwidth devices, especially input devices. And USB 2 has to stick around for another decade or so because of legacy flash drives and cameras. Consequently we will have all forms of USB for the foreseeable future.
Ye olde USB 1 isn't going away anytime soon, because it is cheap to implement.
Sadly this is undoubtedly true, at least the first bit. USB-C isn't hugely more expensive to implement but there is a large installed base of USB-A/B cables and ports out there already and that matters. I still haven't seen a printer with an USB-C port though I'm sure some exist. I've never seen a USB-C keyboard or mouse in person though again I'm sure they exist.
That makes it ideal for low-cost, low-bandwidth devices, especially input devices.
The cost argument isn't as significant as many people think. I make cables for a living so I'm more familiar than most with the costs involved
It's really not about the cables, but about the interface itself. USB2 is cooked right into the cheapest SoCs, USB1 is in cheap microcontrollers, keyboard interfaces, etc. The designs for those chips have been traded around, shared, transferred in fire sales etc. and as a result they are essentially free. The same thing will happen to the other forms of USB eventually, of course, but people will keep deploying the older forms at least up until that happens.
It's really not about the cables, but about the interface itself.
That's approximately the point I was trying to make, perhaps badly. Although to be fair the cables are part of the problem.
USB2 is cooked right into the cheapest SoCs, USB1 is in cheap microcontrollers, keyboard interfaces, etc. The designs for those chips have been traded around, shared, transferred in fire sales etc. and as a result they are essentially free.
Those are sunk costs and thus not really relevant to a cost analysis. The designs don't really cost much at this point but the components and assembly and supply chain do cost real money every time we build a machine that uses them. I'm fairly certain the main reason companies still include these legacy ports is because they fear (with some justification) that they will lose sales if
To be awake is to be alive. -- Henry David Thoreau, in "Walden"
Rolling Eyes (Score:2, Interesting)
Most customers want to keep the same connector, because they already have chargers and cables, and sometimes even accessories, for it.
USB-C is better in the long run, but that doesn't make it better now.
Re: (Score:1)
Considering I have a total of ... zero Lightning cables and accessories, but a ton of standard USB-C? I would consider the 2019 iPhone line totally useless (but given by my lack of Lightning accessories, you can assume I use Android phones and thus consider all of the iPhones useless).
Re: (Score:2)
I've only ever seen one USB-C cable and the person who uses it finds it annoying (it's not even for an iphone but a raspberry-pi style device). I don't know why someone would have a "ton" of those cables, maybe two if they have a new iphone. Fast charge doesn't matter if you're able to actually let go of the phone and put it down, charging overnight should last all day.
I have now countered and balanced your data point, thus nullifying it.
USB-C against the world (Score:2)
I've only ever seen one USB-C cable and the person who uses it finds it annoying
Oh well clearly then your single data point proves that nobody uses USB-C despite it being on nearly every new computer and smartphone sold these days, including all the computers sold by Apple.
I don't know why someone would have a "ton" of those cables, maybe two if they have a new iphone.
Because even if you aren't trying you end up with a bunch over time. I've used iPhones for several product generations and so has my wife. I'm sure we have at least a dozen Lightning cables between us. I have 40+ USB-A/B cables, dozens of micro and mini USB cables, and probably 5 USB-C cables with more undoubtedly
Re: (Score:3)
Ye olde USB 1 isn't going away anytime soon, because it is cheap to implement. That makes it ideal for low-cost, low-bandwidth devices, especially input devices. And USB 2 has to stick around for another decade or so because of legacy flash drives and cameras. Consequently we will have all forms of USB for the foreseeable future.
The agonizingly slow conversion (Score:2)
Ye olde USB 1 isn't going away anytime soon, because it is cheap to implement.
Sadly this is undoubtedly true, at least the first bit. USB-C isn't hugely more expensive to implement but there is a large installed base of USB-A/B cables and ports out there already and that matters. I still haven't seen a printer with an USB-C port though I'm sure some exist. I've never seen a USB-C keyboard or mouse in person though again I'm sure they exist.
That makes it ideal for low-cost, low-bandwidth devices, especially input devices.
The cost argument isn't as significant as many people think. I make cables for a living so I'm more familiar than most with the costs involved
Re:The agonizingly slow conversion (Score:2)
It's really not about the cables, but about the interface itself. USB2 is cooked right into the cheapest SoCs, USB1 is in cheap microcontrollers, keyboard interfaces, etc. The designs for those chips have been traded around, shared, transferred in fire sales etc. and as a result they are essentially free. The same thing will happen to the other forms of USB eventually, of course, but people will keep deploying the older forms at least up until that happens.
Network effects (Score:2)
It's really not about the cables, but about the interface itself.
That's approximately the point I was trying to make, perhaps badly. Although to be fair the cables are part of the problem.
USB2 is cooked right into the cheapest SoCs, USB1 is in cheap microcontrollers, keyboard interfaces, etc. The designs for those chips have been traded around, shared, transferred in fire sales etc. and as a result they are essentially free.
Those are sunk costs and thus not really relevant to a cost analysis. The designs don't really cost much at this point but the components and assembly and supply chain do cost real money every time we build a machine that uses them. I'm fairly certain the main reason companies still include these legacy ports is because they fear (with some justification) that they will lose sales if