• MrGeekman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    233
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    They didn’t switch to USB-C out of the goodness of their hearts. They switched because the EU passed a new law that requires that new smartphones have USB-C ports.

    • Chozo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      153
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      And they actively fought against it for as long as they could, tooth and nail.

      • dunestorm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s an uphill battle, why would Apple bother when just using USB-C makes sense and saves them their lawyers sanity?

        • docmox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          56
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Money.

          Now that USB-C is the required cable, people can go out and buy any cheap cable they want. The law turned a proprietary cash cow into a low return commodity item.

          • Redcedar@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            This argument always cracks me up. I have been able to buy cheap lightning cables effectively since they started making lightning cables lol. It’s not like Apple somehow locks the phone from charging, physics is still a real thing and electricity can still flow through them, even without the MFi aspects.

            If you wanna hate Apple for being a massively bloated and money-hungry corporate nightmare, that’s fine, I’m with it, but do we really all think they made it to $3 trillion valuation on… fucking cables??? 😂

            • TheBlue22@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              No, they made it to 3 trillion with cables, overpriced PCs, overpriced notebooks, overpriced Phones, overpriced watches, and locking software of all these so the easiest way to use different devices together, is to use another apple product.

              Oh, and cultivating a fan base of people who uncritically buy anything they make with the notion that it’s “better than anything else” when in reality that could not be further from the truth.

              • Redcedar@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Ok, so you listed basically all of their business strategies, which is exactly my point. It’s not a business built SOLELY on proprietary ports and cables, yet that aspect is what gets the most attention and criticism.

              • Redcedar@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Ok, so you listed basically all of their business strategies, which is exactly my point. It’s not a business built SOLELY on proprietary ports and cables, yet that aspect is what gets the most attention and criticism.

            • jaybone@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yeah but there has to be some reason they were so opposed to this. I don’t get it either though.

              • kirklennon@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yeah but there has to be some reason they were so opposed to this.

                Because Lightning came out years before USB-C was ready and is already an established de facto standard. There are well over a billion devices in use right now with Lightning ports on them, and billions of Lightning cables. You’re balancing the advantages of switching to a “standard” against the reality that their customers already have Lightning stuff. I went several years with my Switch as literally the only thing I owned that used USB-C. Even now it’s still common for gadgets to ship with micro-USB. USB-C has taken a long time to reach real ubiquity.

                Lightning is also physically smaller and easier to plug in than USB-C.

                Anyway, the point is that USB-C was not (and is not) this significantly, obviously superior experience for Apple’s existing customers. There are real, tangible downsides that make it more expensive and more environmentally wasteful for at least hundreds of millions of iPhone users who will be upgrading.

      • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        41
        ·
        1 year ago

        If they were really fighting it that hard they could’ve stalled till 2025 when the EU law actually takes effect.

          • June@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            So wait…. Are you suggesting they were already planing to switch before the EU law was passed?

        • M500@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          They could have, but I think they saw the demand and speculation of a usb-c phone. Maybe they realized that the bad image it would give them if they held out.

          I’ve been waiting for a usb-c phone to upgrade. I’m at a point now that I really can’t wait any longer for a new phone. If they did not release a usb-c phone this year, I would have just bought the cheapest phone they offered.

            • gr522x@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              If the choice is paying unreasonable prices for Apple’s overpriced proprietary nonsense or reducing my yield as another data cow in Alphabet’s surveillance capitalism human farming machine, I begrudgingly pick the former.

              I think it’s safe to assume all corporations publicly traded are equally greedy, regardless of how much their marketing department assures us that they exist for altruism.

              Shareholders don’t by stock to make the world a better place, they invest in the companies sending the largest dividend checks. Apple and Alphabet are equally covetous of our money (money and data for Alphabet), but I trust the old business model of selling hardware more than giving up my data forever to be used for anything in the future.

              GrapheneOS is my true preference currently for personal use and it feels good to leave a corporation in favor of a community, much like my switch from Reddit to Lemmy. As the techie in my family and friend group I’m still going to have to recommend iOS to most people since using GrapheneOS as a daily driver is a big ask for my grandmother.

                • pips@lemmy.film
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  If you’re a power user there’s a minor learning curve to prevent shit from breaking and some mild inconveniences like being unable to use NFC. Location can also just not work at times. Overall, I’m glad I made the switch.

            • Nahvi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Same reason that people stick with Google.

              After years in the eco-system it is obnoxious to swap, and the other main competitor isn’t any better of a company to deal with.

              • El Barto@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                At least with Android I have options. Do I want USB-C? There’s a phone for that. Do I not want USB-C (for some weird reason)? There’s a phone for that.

                • Nahvi@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Options are definitely nice for those technical enough to understand and use them.

                  Though personally I am keeping an eye on Linux devices for my next upgrade.

                  Do I not want USB-C (for some weird reason)?

                  This is probably temporary until it is time to move past USB-C. Which will be a slower and more difficult process now that there are laws in place requiring it.

    • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Apple will never do anything for any other reasons besides: regulation and profit. They try and foster this image of humanitarianism and ethics, but meanwhile they build everything in sweatshops and make their own “standards” so that their loyal customers can only use the functions they need by purchasing additional dongles.

      I’m happy that they were forced into an actual standard, but I’ve already heard at least two apple users IRL claiming that USB-C is inferior for [insert random reasoning here]. Apple has cultivated the idea that they are above standards for a long time and it will take a long time to break.

        • mriormro@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Apple is a corporation with a market cap that rivals the GDP of France and a net income that rivals the GDP of Qatar. That much capital consolidated within a singular private entity doesn’t just make them any other company. Their profit seeking is wildly, wildly different than a vast majority of any other company today.

          • Pratai@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Get your head out of your ass. ALL companies will never do anything for any other reason besides profit. The size of said company doesn’t matter. A small company will fuck over its customers just as quickly if you let them.

            • Franklin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              This is just the “both sides of the same” argument with different dressing.

              It’s as false here as it is there. So you’re going to tell me a company like fairphone is as unethical as Apple or Samsung?

              Yes of course they work with two completely different yields but that’s really the point The only way you can get to that yield is to be unethical so choose smaller brands choose ones that make decisions you agree with and help them grow.

              There is no completely ethical capitalism but there definitely are choices that get us somewhere better.

              • June@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                So you’re going to tell me a company like fairphone is as unethical as Apple or Samsung?

                Absolutely. There is no ethical consumption under capitalism and even fair phone is profit driven. Even NPOs are profit driven. No one works for a loss in western society. No one. So literally every company will do everything it does for the sake of profitability. Even fairphone.

                You have to realize that fairphone’s whole model is a marketing gimmick. Does it happen to align with some good values? Sure, but it’s still a gimmick to separate you from your money at the end of the day.

                • Franklin@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  This is just false. Fairphone had audits that prove it’s an improvement in both sustainability and worker conditions.

                  Of course consumerism always negatively impacts the environment but to make it all equivalent is to forsake all nuance. It’s not at all to the same magnitude.

                  I don’t believe capitalism is the answer to the world’s problems but to not celebrate a positive initiative is throwing the baby out with bath water.

                  • June@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Fairphone had audits that prove it’s an improvement in both sustainability and worker conditions.

                    key word there is ‘improvement’. it’s still a for profit company and they will ultimately make whatever decisions are in the best interest of the company to make a profit.

                    they are undoubtedly better, but their baseline is still the same, to make money.

                    there is no nuance, at all, to the fact that there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. it’s pretty black and white. there are ways to be less unethical (e.g., fairphone), but not to be ethical.

            • mriormro@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The size, profits, and overall global reach of a company heavily impacts how that company further impacts the world. Do you honestly think that, I don’t know, American Girl dolls have had the same negative impact on the world as the East India Company?

      • M500@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        Apple fanboys are the most frustrating people to talk to.

        They find any illogical reason to justify what apple does.

          • M500@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            You are my example. You see how defensive you got when I criticized apple?

            • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I asked for an example or two. If that’s your best example of frustrating irrationality-pfft. :)

              • M500@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                What about having the ability to sideload apps?

                So many people are hard against that even though they are not being forced to use it.

                • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I used to be a jailbreaker, so I’m not against sideloading apps. However, I can see how if its not properly designed, sideloading could make it easier to trick people into installing dodgy executables and malware on their phone. It’s not just about that sweet 30% cut.

      • Kodemystic@lemmy.kodemystic.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The only reason they pass on an image of ethical environmentaly friendly company is because its good for business. People like that shit the products are good people buy. Its that simple. Companies give no shit about people or the planet.

      • MrGeekman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I know. That’s my point. A great example of this is when they used to brag about how eco-friendly their product were. I remember them bragging about their displays being mercury-free, BFR free, etc and their laptops having totally recyclable aluminum and glass enclosures - only to later deliberately make their laptops nearly impossible to repair and upgrade.