by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Tuesday February 12, 2019 @03:31AM (#58108230)
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).
No, he's a potential new customer, which actually makes him more valuable. He's someone who, in large numbers, would change the market-share of the product. Getting people off competitors' products and onto yours is a higher priority for businesses, or do you think it's just an odd accident people switching from one broadband provider to another get discounts and loyal customers get nothing? Or that people get bonus rebates at their local Ford dealer when they trade in a similarly-classed Chevy vehicle?
Once you have a customer under your umbrella it's easier to keep them there, because many people don't want to go through the hassle change entails, so you can spend more energy trying to create churn that benefits you.
No, he's a potential new customer, which actually makes him more valuable.
Not necessarily. Not all customers are equal and sometimes the cost of winning a new customer exceeds the value that customer brings.
Getting people off competitors' products and onto yours is a higher priority for businesses
Definitely not in Apple's case. Apple has never tried to chase market share at any cost. They have always been happy having a smaller but more profitable and stable portion of the market. In the case of the iPhone they get the vast majority of the profits in the industry so it's unclear what point there would be to them in chasing low margin customers unless their market s
No, he's a potential new customer, which actually makes him more valuable
Business schools teach a "potential new consumer" is worth about 10% of an existing consumer. Because he is likely to have many reasons not to switch. (You think a new cord is a bigger deal than his entire app library?) You want to keep your customers happy first.
The Ford example is very wrong because it's not a potential new customer. It's a new customer.
And frankly, I don't see anyone switching to an iPhone who is going to care about the cables. If you're willing to pay a premium for the hardware/OS/store, then you're willing to pay a premium for a new cable. Meanwhile, if you think getting rid of the headphone jack made people not want to upgrade, get rid of their new lightning headphones, and all their other accessories. Getting rid of the lightning port hurts their best customers the most.
Also, the lightning cable is better than USB-C. It's more solid (can support the weight of the phone), and it's more wear resistant and it's designed so the wear goes more on the cable, not the phone.
If he's not a customer now, he can become one. Unless you're implying people sign some blood-oath never to change platforms. Even if he was on a contract paying off his phone, he could decide he is so fed up with his current phone he's going to get something else. I'm not saying that would happen over USB-C functionality (since the seems to be how you're misconstruing my post). I'm simply saying if he has the financial means he is always a potential customer.
He's someone who, in large numbers, would change the market-share of the product
Changing to USB-C would not pull in large numbers of new customers, obviously.
No, he's a potential new customer, which actually makes him more valuable.
There's a balance here. Switching to USB-C could mean gaining new customers but also losing existing customers.
What does anyone gain with USB-C over Lightning anyway? USB-C can handle more power but the battery in a cell phone is unlikely to take advantage of it. Lightning and USB-C can both give USB 3.0 speeds. USB-C can go faster because of more data lanes and such but, again, in a phone this is unlikely much of an advantage. Could USB-C mean the ability to use more accessories? Maybe, but that also
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 (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.
My new phone came with a USB-C fast charger. I didn't shop particularly for it, but I guess that's what new phones are supposed to come with now (I paid about $350 for it, so it's a midrange device).
I absolutely LOVE the fast charging. I can charge the phone in under an hour. I'm now pissed off by my older devices that charge so slowly. This will become especially important as the phone ages and the battery capacity goes down - because at that point charging overnight is not enough to make it last all day.
I consider all people willing to pay $1000 for a new phone without fast charging to be dumb, frankly.
To be fair you can get fast(er) charging with the iPhone if you buy their (expensive) USB-C to Lightning cable and one of their (expensive) higher voltage USB-C power adapters. I have this setup at home and it works substantially faster. I haven't timed it but it gets me most if not all of a charge in less than an hour.
Honestly though my complaint about the iPhone charging is that they continue to use Lightning connectors when USB-C has eliminated any technical reason for Apple to continue to use them. U
List of personally-owned devices that have an USB Type C port, and how many such ports they have: - Desktop PC (1) - Lenovo X1 Tablet (1) - Monitor (Samsung C34H890) (1) - Port Replicator for laptop (2) - nVME SSD external enclosure (1) - Phone (Samsung Note 9) (1) - Samsung DEX (1)
Add 5 or 6 chargers to that, that's a lot of USB type C cables needed for that.
And you missed the point of the whole article: iPhones do NOT use USB type C, contrary to what you are implying. Or maybe you got confused, I don't know.
It is worth noting that Apple has many devices with USB-C.
My MacBook Pro has *only* USB-C. Newer Apple TVs (last two or three gens) have only USB-C (in addition to HDMI and power). The new iPad Pro has only USB-C.
Apple isn’t anti-USB-C. But their existing customers are mostly longtime customers who have lots of cables and chargers, and do not want to be forced to buy new stuff.
That's one reason we are avoiding new Macbooks at work, it means buying all new adapters. Given that the existing ones are three years old maybe it's time to migrate to Linux (surprisingly, the dumbass move to standardize on Microsoft-everything-in-the-cloud at the corporate level means that we can get your corporate stuff done on Linux too).
I have a USB-C-to-Lightning cable. No adapter required.
In fact, I have more of those cables, than I have USB-C-to-USB-C cables. I have a bunch of USB-A-to-USB-C, but one USB-C-to-USB-C (not including my MacBook Pro power cables).
That's the point, the MacBook only has USB-C ports and ships with a USB-C-to-USB-C cable and the iPhone only has a Lightning port and ships with a Lightning-to-USB-A cable. What kind of ass-backwards nonsense is that? Apple used to pride themselves on an ecosystem of devices that worked seamlessly together and now if you buy their latest phone and laptop and you'll be supplied with an incompatible selection of ports and cables.
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
Macbooks froze with the 2015 model, anything after that time got rid of the precious Esc key, and also changed the finish from everyman brushed metal to hipster brushed metal. Also I use the Mac at work, I only have a 6 figure salary so I can't afford a Mac for home.
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:Rolling Eyes (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:Rolling Eyes (Score:5, Insightful)
Considering I have a total of ... zero Lightning cables and accessories, but a ton of standard USB-C?
Who cares? You’re not a customer.
Re:Rolling Eyes (Score:4, Insightful)
Who cares? You're not a customer.
No, he's a potential new customer, which actually makes him more valuable. He's someone who, in large numbers, would change the market-share of the product. Getting people off competitors' products and onto yours is a higher priority for businesses, or do you think it's just an odd accident people switching from one broadband provider to another get discounts and loyal customers get nothing? Or that people get bonus rebates at their local Ford dealer when they trade in a similarly-classed Chevy vehicle?
Once you have a customer under your umbrella it's easier to keep them there, because many people don't want to go through the hassle change entails, so you can spend more energy trying to create churn that benefits you.
Re: Rolling Eyes (Score:1)
If the insignificant cost of a new cable prevents you from being a customer, Apple does not want you.
Re: (Score:1)
If the insignificant cost of a new cable prevents you from being a customer, Apple does not want you.
If you won't blindly pay $30 for a $5 cable you mean.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah. There are many Apple-certified inexpensive Lightning cables these days.
Not all customers are worth the trouble (Score:2)
No, he's a potential new customer, which actually makes him more valuable.
Not necessarily. Not all customers are equal and sometimes the cost of winning a new customer exceeds the value that customer brings.
Getting people off competitors' products and onto yours is a higher priority for businesses
Definitely not in Apple's case. Apple has never tried to chase market share at any cost. They have always been happy having a smaller but more profitable and stable portion of the market. In the case of the iPhone they get the vast majority of the profits in the industry so it's unclear what point there would be to them in chasing low margin customers unless their market s
Re: (Score:2)
Apple has never tried to chase market share at any cost
Right, they seem more inclined to chase away market share with high prices.
Re: Rolling Eyes (Score:2, Interesting)
No, I donâ(TM)t think that he is. I doubt he would buy anything with an Apple logo on it, no matter what it was.
No no no no no (Score:4, Interesting)
Business schools teach a "potential new consumer" is worth about 10% of an existing consumer. Because he is likely to have many reasons not to switch. (You think a new cord is a bigger deal than his entire app library?) You want to keep your customers happy first.
The Ford example is very wrong because it's not a potential new customer. It's a new customer.
And frankly, I don't see anyone switching to an iPhone who is going to care about the cables. If you're willing to pay a premium for the hardware/OS/store, then you're willing to pay a premium for a new cable. Meanwhile, if you think getting rid of the headphone jack made people not want to upgrade, get rid of their new lightning headphones, and all their other accessories. Getting rid of the lightning port hurts their best customers the most.
Also, the lightning cable is better than USB-C. It's more solid (can support the weight of the phone), and it's more wear resistant and it's designed so the wear goes more on the cable, not the phone.
Re: (Score:2)
he's a potential new customer
False.
He's someone who, in large numbers, would change the market-share of the product
Changing to USB-C would not pull in large numbers of new customers, obviously.
Re: (Score:2)
he's a potential new customer
False.
If he's not a customer now, he can become one. Unless you're implying people sign some blood-oath never to change platforms. Even if he was on a contract paying off his phone, he could decide he is so fed up with his current phone he's going to get something else. I'm not saying that would happen over USB-C functionality (since the seems to be how you're misconstruing my post). I'm simply saying if he has the financial means he is always a potential customer.
He's someone who, in large numbers, would change the market-share of the product
Changing to USB-C would not pull in large numbers of new customers, obviously.
Yeah, and that's not what I said -- obviously. He
Re: (Score:2)
No, he's a potential new customer, which actually makes him more valuable.
There's a balance here. Switching to USB-C could mean gaining new customers but also losing existing customers.
What does anyone gain with USB-C over Lightning anyway? USB-C can handle more power but the battery in a cell phone is unlikely to take advantage of it. Lightning and USB-C can both give USB 3.0 speeds. USB-C can go faster because of more data lanes and such but, again, in a phone this is unlikely much of an advantage. Could USB-C mean the ability to use more accessories? Maybe, but that also
Re: (Score:2)
He's not their customer yet, so they do care.
Once you have swallowed the whole Apple infrastructure hook, line and sinker you can't bail anymore anyway without cutting your losses.
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.
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.
My new phone came with a USB-C fast charger. I didn't shop particularly for it, but I guess that's what new phones are supposed to come with now (I paid about $350 for it, so it's a midrange device).
I absolutely LOVE the fast charging. I can charge the phone in under an hour. I'm now pissed off by my older devices that charge so slowly. This will become especially important as the phone ages and the battery capacity goes down - because at that point charging overnight is not enough to make it last all day.
Fast charging on iPhones (Score:2)
I consider all people willing to pay $1000 for a new phone without fast charging to be dumb, frankly.
To be fair you can get fast(er) charging with the iPhone if you buy their (expensive) USB-C to Lightning cable and one of their (expensive) higher voltage USB-C power adapters. I have this setup at home and it works substantially faster. I haven't timed it but it gets me most if not all of a charge in less than an hour.
Honestly though my complaint about the iPhone charging is that they continue to use Lightning connectors when USB-C has eliminated any technical reason for Apple to continue to use them. U
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
List of personally-owned devices that have an USB Type C port, and how many such ports they have:
- Desktop PC (1)
- Lenovo X1 Tablet (1)
- Monitor (Samsung C34H890) (1)
- Port Replicator for laptop (2)
- nVME SSD external enclosure (1)
- Phone (Samsung Note 9) (1)
- Samsung DEX (1)
Add 5 or 6 chargers to that, that's a lot of USB type C cables needed for that.
And you missed the point of the whole article: iPhones do NOT use USB type C, contrary to what you are implying. Or maybe you got confused, I don't know.
Re: (Score:2)
It is worth noting that Apple has many devices with USB-C.
My MacBook Pro has *only* USB-C. Newer Apple TVs (last two or three gens) have only USB-C (in addition to HDMI and power). The new iPad Pro has only USB-C.
Apple isn’t anti-USB-C. But their existing customers are mostly longtime customers who have lots of cables and chargers, and do not want to be forced to buy new stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
That's one reason we are avoiding new Macbooks at work, it means buying all new adapters. Given that the existing ones are three years old maybe it's time to migrate to Linux (surprisingly, the dumbass move to standardize on Microsoft-everything-in-the-cloud at the corporate level means that we can get your corporate stuff done on Linux too).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have a USB-C-to-Lightning cable. No adapter required.
In fact, I have more of those cables, than I have USB-C-to-USB-C cables. I have a bunch of USB-A-to-USB-C, but one USB-C-to-USB-C (not including my MacBook Pro power cables).
Re: (Score:2)
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: (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
Re: (Score:2)
My single data point was made to counter the single data point of someone with the other position :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Macbooks froze with the 2015 model, anything after that time got rid of the precious Esc key, and also changed the finish from everyman brushed metal to hipster brushed metal. Also I use the Mac at work, I only have a 6 figure salary so I can't afford a Mac for home.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is this a contest?