Which ‘port designed by Apple’? Apple’s Lightning is quite obviously more sturdy than usb-c, being just a puck with contacts, put into a hole with contacts and without flimsy plastic tongues. However, Lightning is more costly to produce, while afaik USB was always made from cheap sheet metal.
Though you might mean Thunderbolt, since afaik usb-c is made to be able to carry Thunderbolt. Not sure if that involved more than electrical concerns, however.
The moving parts are in the device rather than the cable with Lightning. The tongue on USB-C is required to be deep enough that you can’t torque it with the cable during insertion/removal.
It’s not an obvious comparison, but the mechanical engineers where I work seem to have a mild preference for USB-C
The expensive part of both is that you need a microcontroller in the cable
By ‘moving parts’ you mean the springed contacts? Yeah wow, that’s a lot of movement.
USB-C has more pins because it was made later and is required to carry standards like Displayport and Thunderbolt. If Apple made Lightning 2, nothing prevents them from slapping more contacts on it.
The EU commision did not decide on USB-C in a vacuum. It looked on already existing stanards and talked to many large electronics manufacturers in order to come to a proposal for USB-C as a universal standard. You are right to point out the role that both Intel and Apple played (Along HP, Microsoft and the USB-IF) in the development of the standard, but you’re missing the forest for the trees, since it was the EU making it a *universal * standard within it’s boarders that means we all use the same standard.
The USB standard was made by Intel and the USB-C port is based on a port designed by Apple…
Which ‘port designed by Apple’? Apple’s Lightning is quite obviously more sturdy than usb-c, being just a puck with contacts, put into a hole with contacts and without flimsy plastic tongues. However, Lightning is more costly to produce, while afaik USB was always made from cheap sheet metal.
Though you might mean Thunderbolt, since afaik usb-c is made to be able to carry Thunderbolt. Not sure if that involved more than electrical concerns, however.
The moving parts are in the device rather than the cable with Lightning. The tongue on USB-C is required to be deep enough that you can’t torque it with the cable during insertion/removal.
It’s not an obvious comparison, but the mechanical engineers where I work seem to have a mild preference for USB-C
The expensive part of both is that you need a microcontroller in the cable
USB-C also has way more pins for data/power
By ‘moving parts’ you mean the springed contacts? Yeah wow, that’s a lot of movement.
USB-C has more pins because it was made later and is required to carry standards like Displayport and Thunderbolt. If Apple made Lightning 2, nothing prevents them from slapping more contacts on it.
The EU commision did not decide on USB-C in a vacuum. It looked on already existing stanards and talked to many large electronics manufacturers in order to come to a proposal for USB-C as a universal standard. You are right to point out the role that both Intel and Apple played (Along HP, Microsoft and the USB-IF) in the development of the standard, but you’re missing the forest for the trees, since it was the EU making it a *universal * standard within it’s boarders that means we all use the same standard.