Someone should really step up and tell apple to use the goddamned industry standard
[QUOTE=Sam Za Nemesis;36910901]According to rumors, It'll be compatible with the Micro USB connector too, Their new connector dock would be basically similar to HTC's ExtUSB format
[/QUOTE]
Reuters confirms a 19-pin and this size on a leaked casing
[IMG]http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/07/newdock.png[/IMG]
Don't really think you can fit almost 20 pins in that and still make it compatible with any standard USB.
[QUOTE=latin_geek;36910978]Don't really think you can fit almost 20 pins in that and still make it compatible with any standard USB.[/QUOTE]
So Apple aren't necessarily being greedy fucks by utilizing a proprietary design for their dock connector? There actually is a legitimate reason for it?
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;36911041]So Apple aren't necessarily being greedy fucks by utilizing a proprietary design for their dock connector? There actually is a legitimate reason for it?[/QUOTE]
I hate how facepunch stereotypes apple
I really do.
[QUOTE][h2]What's up dock? Apple to shrink connector for iPhone 5[/h2][/QUOTE]
help I can't handle Yahoo Finance's hilarious puns
[editline]24th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sam Za Nemesis;36911012]Phones with ExtUSB and some with MHL have quite a number of pins, who knows, Apple also joined the european MicroUSB commision a while ago[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://store.apple.com/uk/product/MD099ZM/A"]do you know what came from that[/URL]
they're basically just circumventing standards with overpriced adapters
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;36911041]So Apple aren't necessarily being greedy fucks by utilizing a proprietary design for their dock connector? There actually is a legitimate reason for it?[/QUOTE]
The current dock connector has dedicated pins for video/audio output, they could certainly put all that tech into the dock, but then it'd just increase the cost of the dock (And people would complain about that, etc.)
[QUOTE=latin_geek;36911130]
[URL="http://store.apple.com/uk/product/MD099ZM/A"]do you know what came from that[/URL]
they're basically just circumventing standards with overpriced adapters[/QUOTE]
8 quid is hardly overpriced considering how expensive apple cables are
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;36911105]I hate how facepunch stereotypes apple
I really do.[/QUOTE]
It's not really stereotyping if their business strategy is targeting rich kids and hipsters with old hardware on a shiny case with tons of brand recognition, making them pay out the ass for any adapters or accessories, and copyright trolling
That's literally all they do
[QUOTE=thisispain;36911194]8 quid is hardly overpriced considering how expensive apple cables are[/QUOTE]
Yeah I mean it's almost exactly the same price as just using MicroUSB for the actual port.
[QUOTE=latin_geek;36911211]It's not really stereotyping if their business strategy is targeting rich kids and hipsters with old hardware on a shiny case with tons of brand recognition, making them pay out the ass for any adapters or accessories, and copyright trolling
That's literally all they do[/QUOTE]
So do a lot of other companies, it's fairly normal behaviour (And that's unfortunately true for patents as well, lots of companies make money through patent lawsuits)
Apple [I]should[/I] move to USB3.0
it'd make life a whole lot easier for consumers
[QUOTE=latin_geek;36911211]It's not really stereotyping if their business strategy is targeting rich kids and hipsters with old hardware on a shiny case with tons of brand recognition, making them pay out the ass for any adapters or accessories, and copyright trolling
That's literally all they do[/QUOTE]
The old hardware statement doesn't really apply to their mobile devices, which is usually where you end up buying adapters and accessories. The A5 and A5X chips kick the crap out of supposedly more powerful SoCs like Tegra 3 due to iOS's GPU rendering and optimisations. No manufacturer has put out a phone with a GPU more powerful than the SGX 543, and no tablet has near the colour reproduction or resolution than the new iPad. After the launch of the iPhone 4 it took competitors over a year to beat the iPhone at 960x640.
Now I can definitely agree when it comes to their desktops and laptops, but Apple's hardware for mobile devices is far from old.
[QUOTE=The Baconator;36911241]Apple [I]should[/I] move to USB3.0
it'd make life a whole lot easier for consumers[/QUOTE]
And it'd probably convince other companies to move over as well
[QUOTE=kaze4159;36911293]And it'd probably convince other companies to move over as well[/QUOTE]
I'd rather see Thunderbolt, but that's got even less support than USB3 at the moment.
[QUOTE=The Baconator;36911241]Apple [I]should[/I] move to USB3.0
it'd make life a whole lot easier for consumers[/QUOTE]
they aren't compatible.
[QUOTE=thisispain;36911327]they aren't compatible.[/QUOTE]
With what?
Only reason I could think of is that they need more power, that's about it.
[QUOTE=danharibo;36911342]With what?[/QUOTE]
USB3.0 is not the same thing as Apple's dock connector. Apple's dock connector does more than just transfer power and syncing information.
[QUOTE=thisispain;36911448]USB3.0 is not the same thing as Apple's dock connector. Apple's dock connector does more than just transfer power and syncing information.[/QUOTE]
I don't understand what else it could sync. Once you rule out Power and Information, you've run out of things to put down a wire.
[QUOTE=danharibo;36911453]I don't understand what else it could sync.[/QUOTE]
the dock connector supplies analogue audio, video, iPod controls, and some other accessory functions, something USB3.0 doesn't do.
[QUOTE=thisispain;36911474]the dock connector supplies analogue audio, video, iPod controls, and some other accessory functions, something USB3.0 doesn't do.[/QUOTE]
USB 3.0 has a bandwidth of 640 MB/s, how could it not do all of those things.
[QUOTE=danharibo;36911488]USB 3.0 has a bandwidth of 640 MB/s, how could it not do all of those things.[/QUOTE]
heh?
USB purely transfers packet data. it cannot transfer analogue audio, video, iPod controls, etc.
i think you're seriously confused here.
the iPod dock connector already has USB for packet data, but in addition it has more stuff.
that's why when you connect an iPod to your computer, it's a USB device.
do you even know what you are arguing about?
[QUOTE=thisispain;36911507]heh?
USB purely transfers packet data. it cannot transfer analogue audio, video, iPod controls, etc.
i think you're seriously confused here.
the iPod dock connector already has USB for packet data, but in addition it has more stuff.
that's why when you connect an iPod to your computer, it's a USB device.
do you even know what you are arguing about?[/QUOTE]
I know what USB is, I'm arguing that instead of developing a proprietary connector, they could have used USB to transfer all of the data they use their cable for.
[b]Edit[/b]
And also the fact that there should be a standard for this sort of thing over USB, it already has [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_serial_bus#Device_classes]Devices Classes[/url], they weren't far off.
[QUOTE=danharibo;36911521]I know what USB is, I'm arguing that instead of developing a proprietary connector, they could have used USB to transfer all of the data they use their cable for.[/QUOTE]
but that's purely USB.
read this very carefully...
In addition to packet-data transferred via USB, the DOCK connector has, IN ADDITION, analogue audio (that's non-digital, non-packet), video (your TV doesn't accept USB packet data as a video signal), and iPod controls (so you can skip songs or pause/play without needing a separate USB control chip generating and sending packets).
do you understand the difference here? there's USB data ALONG with more stuff. if they purely used a simple USB connector they would lose the analogue audio, video, and iPod control because the USB standard doesn't call for it.
Does Mac support USB3.0?
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;36911547]Does Mac support USB3.0?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, the latest revision of their computers support it (Since Intel finally got around to releasing a chipset with native support)
[QUOTE=thisispain;36911546]but that's purely USB.
read this very carefully...
In addition to packet-data transferred via USB, the DOCK connector has, IN ADDITION, analogue audio (that's non-digital, non-packet), video (your TV doesn't accept USB packet data as a video signal), and iPod controls (so you can skip songs or pause/play without needing a separate USB control chip generating and sending packets).
do you understand the difference here? there's USB data ALONG with more stuff. if they purely used a simple USB connector they would lose the analogue audio, video, and iPod control because the USB standard doesn't call for it.[/QUOTE]
Well, how about they make part of the dock connector compatible with a standard microUSB plug, and the rest of the stuff can be on the side.
[QUOTE=ShaunOfTheLive;36911578]Well, how about they make part of the dock connector compatible with a standard microUSB plug, and the rest of the stuff can be on the side.[/QUOTE]
That would still require (an ugly) additional cable.
[editline]24th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=thisispain;36911546]but that's purely USB.
read this very carefully...
In addition to packet-data transferred via USB, the DOCK connector has, IN ADDITION, analogue audio (that's non-digital, non-packet), video (your TV doesn't accept USB packet data as a video signal), and iPod controls (so you can skip songs or pause/play without needing a separate USB control chip generating and sending packets).
do you understand the difference here? there's USB data ALONG with more stuff. if they purely used a simple USB connector they would lose the analogue audio, video, and iPod control because the USB standard doesn't call for it.[/QUOTE]
Except the bandwidth of USB is high enough that all of that could be transmitted as digital information, I'm not sure about the analog audio though.
[QUOTE=ShaunOfTheLive;36911578]Well, how about they make part of the dock connector compatible with a standard microUSB plug, and the rest of the stuff can be on the side.[/QUOTE]
that would likely be a mess, i'm pretty sure they've tried that before, it would be in their best interests to do so.
or maybe they really want to sell 8 quid microUSB adapters, but i don't think it's the big money maker
[editline]24th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=danharibo;36911580]
Except the bandwidth of USB is high enough that all of that could be transmitted as digital information[/QUOTE]
no because "digital information" isn't a thing. the USB data is USB packet info.
[img]http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/sc/33801629-2-300-OVR-1.gif[/img]
can you really expect that to send USB data? not gonna happen! you'd need an entire computer processing and transferring USB data. That's unreasonable.
[img]http://www.techfresh.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/ezgear-video-cable.jpg[/img]
again, you can't have USB packets flying around without a computer processing USB data. With your solution these [b]cheap[/b] ipod controls or video cables could not exist.
and analogue audio can't go through a digital port, you know that.
Well, all the other phones seem to have solved that nasty "analog" problem by including a 3.5" jack.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
