Apple iPhone 15 relegated to USB 2.0 unless you buy the Pro
Apple iPhone 15 relegated to USB 2.0 unless you buy the Pro
Apple has dragged the iPhone kicking and screaming into the USB-C era, but with an embarrassingly antiquated USB protocol.
You're viewing a single thread.
The only people who need the USB 3 transfer speeds are going to be Pro users. For everyone else, it doesn't matter.
What? Do you realize how insanely slow USB 2 is? Good luck transferring even a tiny ass video. I don't think you need to be a pro user to want to transfer some media from your phone and not take all day..
Most people using Apple devices don’t transfer media via cord anymore. The average user only uses the cloud for those things.
I’ve had an iPhone for the last 10 years and can count on one hand the amount of times I’ve needed to use a cable instead of iCloud/Dropbox/other file share service.
Transfering video via cord is actually apples suggested way of sending full res videos to android phones because Apple is too lazy and monopolous to adopt RCS.
RCS is also a google monopoly. Can’t call out Apple for being a monopoly without also applying the same standard to google. RCS is technically open, but in order to work they require googles servers.
I just send video over Dropbox if I want to share full res. But that is the first legitimate use I’ve seen.
What's to stop apple from using their own servers in accordance with the published specs from the GSMA, the industry nonprofit that started and steers the project by committee? Im not putting it past google to be a monopoly either, but I can't find any info that suggests apple is being shut out of doing it themselves. ATT has their own implementation away from googles RCS servers, or at least used to.
RCS is older than iMessage yet was still a total mess of compatibility just two years ago. E2EE isn’t part of the spec, but something Google tacked on to their implementation. Google has an abysmal track record for supporting chat services. So why should apple adapt to them again? Meanwhile Apple created a seamless experience for iPhone users and has been supporting it for a decade now.
They can, but why would they? RCS is essentially googles standard, it’s just more open than Apples equivalent.
For the most part Apple and Apple users just don’t care. iMessage works for most everyone, and for texting non-Apple users a 3rd party app is used.
It’s not impossible that it happens, but it’s only going to happen once their hand is forced.
So then the answer isn't "its a google monopoly" its 'google choose to work with the nonprofit and we didn't'. Im sure the 1200 company strong industry nonprofit would have loved to have apple at the table for a collaborative development on an open standard. They've done it before with usb c, they chose not to. If anything google would be asserting monopoly over other people who choose to provide RCS services, not anyone that chooses not to. I get it though, if I was Apple I'd be terrified of having to compete with googles net infrastructure, they would lose unless they got amazon on their team.
Permanently Deleted
Shit, the only place I even plug my phone into now is my car because I was too dumb to wait a few months for the refresh that came with wireless CarPlay.
I use MagSafe at home for all of my charging, and airdrop/airplay for pretty much everything else that isn’t synced to iCloud.
Get yourself a wired to wireless CarPlay adapter.
I’ve thought about it. I haven’t decided how long I’m keeping this car though. The practical mind in me says keep it until the wheels fall off.
The enthusiast in me really wants a dark horse Mustang though lol.
They are like $60 though
And wired CarPlay works for me. Wireless would be nice but it’s not a necessity for me, especially given that that dongle would be useless to me if I do change cars here soon anyway.
I’ve looked around at the wireless CarPlay adapters, the consensus seems to be that to get one without any significant latency and operates as close to native wireless CarPlay, it’s gonna be in the $1-200 range too. That’s a decent amount for something I might only use for a few months.
There is a little lag on mine. GPS is still usable, though the battery drain makes it less worthwhile on long trips. For me it’s been fantastic for short trips as I often just never took my phone out of my pocket when I wasn’t going far. It’s the CarLink 3.0 available on Amazon down to $52 with on page coupon.
Apple has been pushing users away from transferring data over cable for years anyway. Most users will sync files over wifi.
Annoying, as that should be the users choice, but I doubt the average iPhone user will even notice. Iirc the lightning connector was also limited to USB 2.0 speeds and only some particular power users ever complained about that.
It's not that slow, how'd you think I transferred stuff off a CompactFlash card with raw files off my DSLR before USB 3.0? I'd regularly dump several GBs worth of files out after a shoot. It'd take a few minutes but it's not the end of the world.
USB 2 can transfer 1 gigabyte in about 20 seconds
Why do Pro users need 3 transfer speeds?
Those giant high res videos can really hurt to transfer to your computer to edit.
Photo transfer.
Non pro users don't need to transfer photos?
The non pro phones don’t have the RAW photo and video that the pro phones do.
RAW takes up a massive amount more space per photo and video than normal compressed images.
Also, I don’t know anyone with an iPhone that doesn’t just automatically back their photos up to iCloud anyway, meaning that all of their non RAW photos and videos are constantly transferred throughout the day to iCloud. The only people I do know that transfer things over cable are the ones that actually use the ProRes and ProRAW photos and video.
This somewhat makes sense in that ra w media is higher volume in terms of data. But lossy compressed images and video can still be high data-volume even if they are not raw.
The aspect that is missing from this discussion is how much it would actually cost Apple to include high wired data transfer speeds in non pro models and whether non pro models cost enough to justify including this feature even if a small fraction of users use it.
As an addendum I will share my opinion that even pro model users are not gonna use wired transfer 99.99% of the time. I feel Apple is doing this to fabricate a separation between pro and non-pro models plus boosting their bottom line. Sadly there are a bunch of people in this thread that are uncritically defending a trillion dollar corporation for reasons I cannot fathom. This is not really a topic that I'm passionate about so I'm not gonna engage in this any further.
It will likely come to the non pro here in a couple of years at most.
The iPads that have thunderbolt and usb3 use a separate physical usb controller for those speeds. The iPhone doesn’t have the space for that so they handle on the chip itself.
The non pro 15 is using the A16 from last year’s pro model that only supports usb 2. The pro this year has the A17 pro chip that supports it.
I suspect that next year when we get the rumored “ultra” iPhone, it will have an even beefier A18 Pro chip that will support thunderbolt 4 like the iPad Pro does with 40 gig, and the non pro iPhone will get the A17 which will handle base usb3 speed like the iPad Air does.
People connect their phone to a computer with a wire?
iPhone strange speeds are >1GB/s, or >8 Gbit/s. WiFi is nowhere close in practice, but USB 3.0 is (recent versions are much faster).
What kind of a pro is taking photos using an iPhone?
A procrastinator.
It's the same guy at the construction site using his phone as a bubble level.
If they use their phone for it's internet connection and need to send large amounts of data, like after a photo shoot.