Apple forced to ditch lightning charger in new iPhone
www.bbc.com
Apple confirms new iPhone 15 will have a common USB-C charging port after EU forces it into the change.

Apple forced to ditch iPhone lightning charger::Apple confirms new iPhone 15 will have a common USB-C charging port after EU forces it into the change.

  • Ocelot@lemmies.worldEnglish
    92·
    1 year ago

    It takes 35.5 minutes to transfer 128GB over USB 2.0, not 24 hours.

    128GB of 4k 60fps video on the iphone is roughly 5-6 hours of video. Considering MicroSD cards under ideal conditions can only write at roughly 1.5x USB 2.0 speed, you’re not really saving a whole lot of time. Especially considering that sustained writes cause a lot of heat in those cards and throughput is drastically reduced within under a minute of transfer time. No idea where you got the 24h empty time from, maybe there’s something wrong with your adapter.

    • Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      4·
      1 year ago

      It takes sooooo long to transfer like 10-30k photos though. Even though the data amount is the same, it takes way longer when it’s a billion 10MB files. I’m shocked that my high end 2018 phone still plugs in at USB2 speeds.

      I’m very jazzed iPhones are switching to USBC. I love the actual cable for lightning, it’s super unfiddly to plug in blind. But I DO have to wrap both ends with electrical tape and heat shrink to make sure they last. Well, I don’t HAVE to, but it does help.

    • GamingChairModel@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      Apple’s 4k/60 HDR Prores is about 6GB per minute of footage. The on-device storage is much, much faster than MicroSD cards.

      So if you shoot 10 minutes of footage, with 60GB of files:

      • USB 2.0 speeds (480 Mbps or 60MB/s): 1000 seconds, or 16 minutes, 40 seconds.
      • Airdrop speeds (1.0 Gbps or 125MB/s): 480 seconds or 8 minutes
      • USB 3.0 speeds (4.8 Gbps or 600MB/s): 100 seconds, or 1 minute 40 seconds.

      Note that Airdrop requires apple devices on both sides, which isn’t a given in a video workflow.

      Also, the faster data connection opens up possibilities for tethered shooting where the pipe is fat enough to pull down the whole video at full uncompressed quality, which might make a huge difference for any kind of project where the on-board storage is a limiting factor.

      • Ocelot@lemmies.worldEnglish
        2·
        1 year ago

        I mean…. sure but if youre going to invest that much in high speed massive storage devices to do tethered shooting you’re maybe someone who uses an actual camera instead of a phone? That adds huge benefits like wide aperture and multiple lenses.

        Your battery will die before you fill the internal storage. Attaching external storage occupies the charging port.

        • GamingChairModel@lemmy.worldEnglish
          11·
          1 year ago

          It’s a qualitative difference in investment when the phone you were already going to buy shoots video at quality settings that basically can’t be beat in the same form factor. Cameras of similar size and weight can’t compete with the quality, and cameras of similar quality can’t compete with the size and weight (or price).

          It’ll occupy a particular market, even if it won’t cover all of them. The $4000, 3 lb (1.3 kg) mirrorless+lens kit isn’t going to compete with the $1000 iPhone in every space, and there will be a use for high quality (but not the top professional quality) at reasonable price and accessibility.

          It already captures the quality. Might as well build on board the ability to transfer full quality video at reasonable speeds.