They're referring to A-POC https://www.moma.org/collection/works/100361 In any case, these were sold in 10 Apple Stores worldwide, and only a single US store. They were aimed at an Asian audience, as far as I understand.
This isn't a new or unique move; Apple has never prioritized backwards compatibility.
If you're a Mac user, you expect this sort of thing. If running neglected software is critical to you, you run Windows or you keep your old Macs around.
It's a bizarre assumption that this is about "neglected software."
A lot of software is for x64 only.
If Rosetta2 goes away, Parallels support for x64 binaries in VMs likely goes away too. Parallels is not neglected software. The x64 software you'd want to run on Parallels are not neglected software.
This is a short-sighted move. It's also completely unprecedented; Apple has dropped support for previous architectures and runtimes before, but never when the architecture or runtime was the de facto standard.
Nevertheless, running x64 software including Docker containers on aarch64 VMs does use Rosetta. There's still a significant valid use case that has nothing to do with neglected software.
I seem to remember 68k software working (on PowerPC Macs) until Classic was killed off in Leopard? I'm likely misremembering the length of time, but it seems like that was the longest backwards-compatibility streak Apple had.
There was a company or two that made cases for the older Apple remotes with the express purpose of making them larger, which I always thought was kind of funny. I would buy one for the current remote if one existed.
It is more satisfying to plug in a lightning cable. I know it sounds crazy. I can’t explain it.
I don’t care about charging speeds or data transfer speeds. When it is done, it’s done. Until then I will find something else to do or use it while charging.
That's not crazy at all. If you look at a male lightning connector, you can see detents at the sides that snap into a (spring-loaded) retaining mechanism on the female side. USB-C doesn't have anything like that which results in less tactile satisfaction.
I don’t think this is correct? GP is talking about the indentations on the side of the male lightning connector, which get gripped from the side by the device. I don’t think the center tab on USB-C has those same features, nor do the cables have the grippy things.
I’d welcome correction. Certainly if those features are there they don’t feel the same. Lightning has a very satisfying snick.
If you look closely, you can see the springy retention clips in the plug. Below is a Stack Overflow answer with more details, it includes a link to the USB-C spec where you can also see the corresponding notches in the male part of the receptacle.
Also, some good USB-C cables have a very similar click to Lightning, including Apple's own USB-C cables. Lightning and USB-C are essentially the same design, except USB-C adds an automotive-style shroud around the male side.
Interesting. I stand corrected and thanks for the links! Seems I didn't look hard enough at my USB-C cables. Now I'm curious - like the person I responded to, I always felt that Lightning is more tactile and more consistent than USB-C (including Apple's own USB-C cables) and I wonder why that is. Maybe the Lightning spring is beefier or something?
I have magnetized adapters for most of my USB C devices. I've had a USB C port fail on a phone in the past.
They are very easy to use and have a satisfying snap when the cord connects.
My only issue with them is that we were recently at Great Sand Dunes National Park and my phone fell into the sand. The magnetic adapter was covered with sand (which wasn't too hard to clean) and very smart metallic bits that stick to the magnet. They were difficult and annoying to remove and prevented the adapter from connecting.
I guess on the plus side they protected the original port. I was able to remove the magnetic adapters and charge the phone with classic USB C.
I guess I do have two issues. The adapter on my MBP is very particular about the cable I use. And the adapter, that supports high speed data transfer and charging, appears to be directional. Although the plug seems to be symmetric, in practice it doesn't work on both sides.
Actually if they’d put a little magnet at the back of a USB (whatever type) port, that would be satisfying as heck. Like the computer is actively grabbing whatever you plugged in.
From my experience using various (work provided) devices in outdoors agriculture use, I consider the lightning connector/port less prone to failure as well. If something was to break (from torque), it seems like the tab on the cable should snap or the cable just pull out before catastrophic damage to the port can occur.
Though I still had to replace cables because the cable itself developed a break somewhere, even with one that had proper stress relief at the ends.
Meanwhile most of the USB C ports on my Lenovo laptop from 2022 are barely working because somewhere along the line either the soldering broke or the port got too loose. Possibly from too much torque but I’m not sure. So the cable has to be at just the right angle. I’ve also done some android phone battery/screen replacement for friends, and had to do a few USB-C ports when it was possible due to the same sort of thing.
However all that is pretty much moot now, thanks to wireless charging and magnetic attachment docks. As such the only time I connect a cable anymore is monthly for cleaning out photos and other data. Previously I’d be connecting cables several times a day to charge in between fields as the battery went to shit. Honestly the “MagSafe” concept is the only change I’ve seen to smart phones in the past decade that I actually really like.
Lightning had small pins inside the port that could be caught by debris and pulled out of alignment (or in worst cases, broken off altogether). USB-C has no moving parts on the device side. Apple was reportedly behind that design since Lightning was nearing release when design for USB-C started (and Apple is/was a member of USBIF)
> Lightning had small pins inside the port that could be caught by debris and pulled out of alignment (or in worst cases, broken off altogether).
Lightning has 1.5mm of height in the slot, debris has to be pretty large to get stuck and usually it's enough to just blow some compressed air into the slot to get dirt to release.
In contrast, USB-C has only 0.7mm between the tab and the respective "other" side, so debris can get trapped much much more easily, and the tab is often very flimsy, in addition to virtually everyone sans Apple not supporting the connector housing properly with the main device housing.
Does anyone have reliability data for USB-C ports? It seems to me like Lightning is more robust to repeated plug/unplug cycles. But this is only on my limited sample size of one laptop with a failed USB-C port and some vague hand waving.
It shouldn't be, my understanding is that the springy bits (the most likely wear part) in Lightning are in the port, whereas in USB-C they're intentionally in the cable so you can replace it. I'm surprised you have a failed USB port, but I've never experienced one fortunately.
I see Lightning as fragile on both sides of the connection, since the port has springy bits that can wear, and the cables also die, either due to the DRM chips Apple involves in the mix for profit reasons, or due to the pins becoming damaged (perhaps this? https://ioshacker.com/iphone/why-the-fourth-pin-on-your-ligh... ).
USB-C has an unsupported tab in the middle of the port. It's pretty easy for that tab to bend or break, especially if the plug is inserted at an angle.
Lightning doesn't have that failure mode. Also Lightning ports only use 8 pins (except on the early iPad Pros), so reversing the cable can often overcome issues with corroded contacts. That workaround isn't possible with USB-C.
I've never seen a device with a broken tab. One thing people seem to misunderstand grossly to keep regurgitating these claims is that there are thousands of USB-C ports from different manufacturers and price points. The Lightning connector is strictly quality controlled by Apple. The USB-C in your juul isn't the same as the one in a high-end device.
The tab in the USB-C port makes the port more durable since it moves the sensitive springy parts to the cable(s) which are easily replaced.
Quality control matters, Apple is arguably quite good at it. USB-C is more wild-west so if you're prone to buying cheap crap you'll be worse off.
Reversing works around some broken conditions for usb-c, power and usb 2.0 data are on both sides. Depending on how bad the corrosion is, reversing may help.
Usb 3 might be trickier, but then iPhone lightning doesn't have that anyway.
The springy bits never wear out anyway. I've never once seen an iphone that couldn't grip the cable unless the port was full of pocket lint. Main problem I see is USB-C has both a cable and port which are hard to clean.
The springy bits get torqued weirdly by debris and can be bent out of alignment and/or into contact with each other. It’s rare, but it happens. And the whole port needs to be replaced, which usually means the whole device.
The Lightning port itself might be more reliable, problem is Apple Lightning cables always break, and all third-party ones (even MFi) are prone to randomly not working after a while. I'd be perfectly fine with Lightning if it were an open spec, instead it singlehandedly created the meme of iPhones always being on 1% battery.
The Lightning connector is superior for everyday use. It's exeptionally reliable, tolerant of debris, and difficult to damage. It was designed to last, unlike every single USB device port ever made, which was designed to fail so you'd need to replace the cable and device eventually. MiniUSB, MicroUSB, and USB-C. It's all trash.
Lightning has a perfect mechanical design. The pins phone-side are nearly possible to damage because they're well supported and only poke out in a bump shape that can't hook on anything. The cable side is the same way - no pins to catch on anything. The port is easy to clean out. The cable end is trivial to clean. The retention mechanism doesn't rely on anything that can wear out or break.
Meanwhile the USB-C connector puts a fucking thin wedge of plastic in the middle of the connector and even worse, there are pins around that center thin wedge and they're easily broken/damaged because they have no protection whatsoever and poor mechanical support. Oh, and the retention mechanism sucks just like it has in every
The USB-C port on my airpods is contactly getting fucked up while once in a blue moon I need to tick a toothpick in and rummage around a little to get some lint out of my phone's Lightning plug, and it's good for a couple more months...and that thing lives in my pocket, whereas the Airpod case spends most of its life sitting around on tables.
It's also a substantial plus that Apple tightly controls the cable spec. Just go look at the pages where people document USB-C cables that are so shitty they'll destroy the electronics in one or both devices.
because you still need a cable with a lightning end in your spaghetti of cables in a drawer somewhere. if all of your devices had USBC on both ends, then you don't need the one cable with the special adapter. you just need USBC cables. this isn't rocket science, and it's not a hard position to be sympathetic with either.
Having everything be lightning makes sense too, but is infeasible. Lightning was never going to be good for almost all devices, like usb mini-b, micro-b, and now usb-c have managed to get to.
It's been 10 years since any Mac shipped with a FireWire port. That was only because they kept selling a single 13-inch non-Retina MacBook Pro model for several years. That model was also the last MacBook Pro to include a built-in optical drive, a spinning hard disk drive, and a built-in Ethernet port.
I still have a FireWire-based MiniDV cam I use for digitizing video, so this provides good reason to keep an older machine around for said purposes.
I believe that's what Apple did for AirDrop, "Everyone for 10 Minutes" is available in AirDrop settings. You can also use NFC (Near-field communication) to initiate a transfer with a non-Contact, while optionally establishing a Contact relationship. If only this were also available on Android.
I think it'd be great if Apple supported this, even if it meant an Apple AirDrop app for Android. Especially if it meant an Apple AirDrop app for Android.
> My ideal keyboard would be taking a Magic keyboard (in black or space gray) and splitting it into two.
Me, too. I feel there's a lot of us who want precisely this. I want every key that's on the Magic Keyboard. I already have a number of other Karabiner bindings, like the Hyper key, so I'm adding "layers" that way.
I can't repro this on macOS 15.3.1 with an Apple Studio Display. What display are you using? It's likely something related to color space translation.
Edit: Repro-ed using the additional steps you mentioned below. As someone who handles external bug reports and writes them, it's so often the case that there are additional steps or a specific start state required, which both prevents reproducing the bug and narrows the affected user base.
