Slashdot Mirror


Apple Kills a Kickstarter Project - Updated

Nerdfest writes "Venturebeat is reporting that a successfully funded Kickstarter project for a portable phone charger that works with both Apple and Android devices has been canceled because Apple wouldn't let the creators license its Lightning connector. Quoting: 'Edison Junior, the technology and design lab behind the POP portable power station, is returning the full $139,170 in funding it received from Kickstarter backers to develop the device. Unfortunately, Apple has refused to give the project permission to license the Lightning charger in a device that includes multiple charging options. ... "We didn’t get a yes or a no up front," Siminoff said. "But as we kept going back and forth it was clear that it was getting harder. Then, when we saw that they weren’t even going to allow a Lightning connector and a 30-pin connector together, we knew it was over." He also said that, while Apple is a private company and can do whatever it wishes, it should watch out. "When you do things that are bad for the customer I think it will be bad for them.”''" Update: 12/21 22:16 GMT by S : Apple has relented. A spokesman for the company told Ars, "Our technical specifications provide clear guidelines for developing accessories and they are available to MFi licensees for free. We support accessories that integrate USB and Lightning connectors, but there were technical issues that prevented accessories from integrating 30-pin and Lightning connectors so our guidelines did not allow this. We have been working to resolve this and have updated our guidelines to allow accessories to integrate both 30-pin and Lightning connectors to support charging."

471 comments

  1. Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Dear Apple

    Fuck you!

    Yours sincerely

    The sane people on the planet

    1. Re:Dear Apple by jo_ham · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Dear Apple

      Fuck you!

      Yours sincerely

      The sane people on the planet

      Ah yes, the kickstarter project that began before the official release of the connector, that also features powered USB ports for charging "other devices with incompatible ports" and yet somehow the inability to roll in the Lightning port to a product that was begun before Apple even acknowledged it exists is "doomed".

      I wonder, what's to stop iPhone 5 users from plugging in a Lightning cable into one of the powered USB ports on this device? Nothing? So why the need to cancel it?

      Very odd.

    2. Re:Dear Apple by Zocalo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Exactly my thoughts. I'm actually wondering if they fscked up somehow and are trying to set Apple up as a scapegoat. What is stopping them from just pressing ahead with every connector except the Lightning port and simply saying "we'd like to have done that, but Apple didn't let us" if they really want to draw attention to Apple's supposed monopolistic behaviour. It would still have been useful to everyone who doesn't have one of Apple's latest devices and if Apple ever changed their minds then a v2.0 version of the device, or maybe they could just make the connectors modular like some PSU connectors are and enable a potential compatability upgrade later?

      Very odd indeed.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    3. Re:Dear Apple by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 5, Informative

      RTFA.

      This is not necessarily the end of the Edison Junior’s portable power project. Siminoff told me that the team will be re-focusing on a device that supports Android phones and tablets and Apple products as well, if backers wish to use a Lightning-to-USB connector, or an older 30-pin connector. They’ll only build that device, however, if the crowdfunding community wants it.

      They want to do that, but they'd be building a different project than what people pledged for. So for obvious reasons they would need to start over.

    4. Re:Dear Apple by LWATCDR · · Score: 2

      Hey want to buy this new charger that only works with old iPhones, iPads, and iPod touches but none of the current generation.....
      Yea what is the problem with this?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    5. Re:Dear Apple by jo_ham · · Score: 3, Insightful

      RTFA.

      This is not necessarily the end of the Edison Junior’s portable power project. Siminoff told me that the team will be re-focusing on a device that supports Android phones and tablets and Apple products as well, if backers wish to use a Lightning-to-USB connector, or an older 30-pin connector. They’ll only build that device, however, if the crowdfunding community wants it.

      They want to do that, but they'd be building a different project than what people pledged for. So for obvious reasons they would need to start over.

      But they already are - the Lightning connector was not official when the project began, so how could they offer it?

      If they started the project based on rumours of the new connector, or with a plan to include it *without* discussing terms with Apple first, then that was just silly.

    6. Re:Dear Apple by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Interesting

      RTFA.

      This is not necessarily the end of the Edison Junior’s portable power project. Siminoff told me that the team will be re-focusing on a device that supports Android phones and tablets and Apple products as well, if backers wish to use a Lightning-to-USB connector, or an older 30-pin connector. They’ll only build that device, however, if the crowdfunding community wants it.

      They want to do that, but they'd be building a different project than what people pledged for. So for obvious reasons they would need to start over.

      Or team up with someone who does have the license. If there is anyone.

      Then again, could they manufacture a connector which coincidentally works?

      Ah, such are the things a patent suit lawyer dreams of.

      "Well kill them, then eviscerate them, then flay them, then give them a wedgie!"

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    7. Re:Dear Apple by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      and yet somehow the inability to roll in the Lightning port to a product that was begun before Apple even acknowledged it exists is "doomed".

      Why would they bother developing yet another USB charging hub? The entire point of this project centered around not needing to carry around 27 different dongles to all do effectively the same task at the same Li-ion-friendly voltage. Ironically enogh, we shouldn't even have a need for this, since Apple promised (and lied to) the EU to switch to a unified charging standard. Did they break the letter of the law? Apparently not. But does their latest proprietary CashGrab-enabled CopperInPlastic(tm) technology serve any purpose (to the end user) at all?

      No. No, it does not. So yeah, Fuck Apple.


      I wonder, what's to stop iPhone 5 users from plugging in a Lightning cable into one of the powered USB ports on this device? Nothing? So why the need to cancel it?

      Just $20. Though I have no doubt, if they could make these things teleport nickels and dimes straight to Cupertino, they would have gone with that approach per-use instead.

    8. Re:Dear Apple by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hey want to buy this new charger that only works with old iPhones, iPads, and iPod touches but none of the current generation.....
      Yea what is the problem with this?

      The design had USB ports on it from the start that work with any device that doesn't have the ports it includes.

      No problem with this... apparently, yet still cancelled.

      Maybe they realised that they can't compete with things on Amazon that do exactly the same thing for $20.

    9. Re:Dear Apple by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      Not to mention this thing was already a questionably useful product. I've got a battery with a bit less than half the capacity, it cost less than half as much, and since it's much less wasteful with empty space, easily slips into a bag or pocket. This POP thing is bulky and awkward. I'm just not seeing a market for it.

    10. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This was supposedly supposed to ship to customers in december. It is now mid december, and they pull the plug.

      Obviously they are no where near a shipping product, if they had been, they would have shipped anyway.

      And for the iPhone 5 there are nifty little micro-USB-adapters available.

    11. Re:Dear Apple by jo_ham · · Score: 2

      The iPhone does come with a Lightning cable, so $0.

      Unless you want a spare.

      Yes, the entire point of the project was to create a device where you didn't need a dongle... in a saturated market that is already flooded with portable charing devices. It also promised to supply a connector that Apple did not even officially acknowledge the existence of until later, without checking what the licensing terms would be (which was impossible because the connector did not exist officially yet).

      I'm not seeing how this is Apple's fault - it's not as if their usual behaviour is uncommon here. The licensing around the original 30 pin was equally obtuse.

      They gambled that it would be smooth sailing with the as-then-unannounced connector and pushed ahead with product development without having all of their ducks in a row.

    12. Re:Dear Apple by crazyjj · · Score: 2

      The fact is that they saw a niche in the charger market that wasn't being fulfilled (a mufti-purpose charger for Apple and Android devices). What they didn't know is that there was a REASON no one else had built said device (because Apple won't license it). I guess it pays to ask around a little before you start asking for funding. Sometimes you think to yourself "Why isn't anyone making this thing?" and find out the hard way that it's not just because they're short-sighted or hadn't thought of it too.

      --
      What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    13. Re:Dear Apple by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      For people that don't have, or ever intend to have, a device that uses Apple's Lightning connector? None at all. Believe it or not, there are plenty of people out there who would love to have a charging station like this that don't even own a single Apple product, depsite the obviously Apple inspired design elements.

      As for those who have bought Apple's newer devices, or are considering doing so, it was pretty clear almost from the connector's launch that Apple was going to be heavily restricting access to third party licenses for the connector, at least in the early days. Apart from those who pre-ordered before the restrictions came to light, anyone who gets a device with a Lightning connector either didn't do their homework or decided they were happy with locking themselves into Apple's own products until (or if) that changed.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    14. Re:Dear Apple by somersault · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe you haven't actually look at what the device does. You wouldn't get one with a built in battery for $20. Obviously they were offering something different or people would have just bought a $20 device off of Amazon rather than choosing to fund this project.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    15. Re:Dear Apple by Dupple · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It was a scam all along.

      1. Start a new website, competing with Kickstarter
      2. think up a way to generate some media attention by creating an Apple-related product that's never intended for release.
      3. Then tell everyone how Apple screwed you over.

      Why not just supply multiple USB ports so people can use their own cables? Why not just make an alteration to BYO cables and offer a refund to any who didn’t want it like that?

      No headlines and publicity for the site - that's why

      --
      Watch those corners
    16. Re:Dear Apple by monkeyhybrid · · Score: 1

      They cancelled it because without the lightning connector, although still useful to many people, it would not be the device people pledged money for.

    17. Re:Dear Apple by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not seeing how this is Apple's fault - it's not as if their usual behaviour is uncommon here. The licensing around the original 30 pin was equally obtuse.

      I'd call it Apple's fault for using a proprietary connector in the first place.

      Yes, I'd also call it the fault of patent law for allowing something so absurd intended solely to block interoperation with 3rd party devices; but Apple chose to use it.

      If it makes you happier, I also condemn Intel for the abomination they call "Thunderbolt" - Though unlike iThings, at least Thunderbolt never really caught on.

    18. Re:Dear Apple by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      And that's both of us!

    19. Re:Dear Apple by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      Exactly my thoughts. I'm actually wondering if they fscked up somehow and are trying to set Apple up as a scapegoat. What is stopping them from just pressing ahead with every connector except the Lightning port and simply saying "we'd like to have done that, but Apple didn't let us" if they really want to draw attention to Apple's supposed monopolistic behaviour. It would still have been useful to everyone who doesn't have one of Apple's latest devices and if Apple ever changed their minds then a v2.0 version of the device, or maybe they could just make the connectors modular like some PSU connectors are and enable a potential compatability upgrade later?

      Very odd indeed.

      Really? You wonder why they aren't going to go ahead selling their lightning-capable dock when they aren't allowed to, by instead saying "hey it has a USB port on it instead!" Talk about mislabeling, you must be in marketing. That's like selling an extension cord as "iPhone 5 compatible" with a tiny asterisk pointing to the footnote that "your own dc brick and cable are required". If I were in on this kickstarter (I don't own any lightning-equipped Apple shit so...) I would want my money back too. I have plenty of USB ports around.

    20. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear Apple

      Fuck you!

      Yours sincerely

      The sane people on the planet

      Ah yes, the kickstarter project that began before the official release of the connector, that also features powered USB ports for charging "other devices with incompatible ports" and yet somehow the inability to roll in the Lightning port to a product that was begun before Apple even acknowledged it exists is "doomed".

      I wonder, what's to stop iPhone 5 users from plugging in a Lightning cable into one of the powered USB ports on this device? Nothing? So why the need to cancel it?

      Very odd.

      $99 for a fucking USB hub? What the fuck is wrong with you? Not even Apple fans would be fooled by that garbage. Without a lightning cable built in to it, there is no point in buying one, period. End of story. If you want to buy a $99 USB hub, I will be happy to sell you one (that i snatch off of Amazon for $9.) Their high capacity battery option isn't bad but those too are very cheap (despite their claims) and I can easily get one for under $50 while they want $150 for the kickstarted version.

      This is a clear cut example of Apple deciding to screw over consumers so they can be the only one to pillage their loyal base. Get over it.

    21. Re:Dear Apple by Cwix · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually I think you are still wrong, the device they were promising to build had a 25,000 mAh battery. It could charge your phone ten times on one charge. You CANNOT find one that large for that price on Amazon.

      But by no means should you read the article or actually look anything up before you insist that your two cents is right in multiple posts.

      I went and checked, the closest thing I could find only had a 16,000 mAh battery, and it was $100.
      http://www.amazon.com/dreamGEAR-iSound-ISOUND-4591-Back-Up-Flashlight/dp/B0063GM6O8

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    22. Re:Dear Apple by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Dear Apple

      Fuck you!

      Yours sincerely

      The sane people on the planet

      Ah yes, the kickstarter project that began before the official release of the connector, that also features powered USB ports for charging "other devices with incompatible ports" and yet somehow the inability to roll in the Lightning port to a product that was begun before Apple even acknowledged it exists is "doomed".

      I wonder, what's to stop iPhone 5 users from plugging in a Lightning cable into one of the powered USB ports on this device? Nothing? So why the need to cancel it?

      Very odd.

      $99 for a fucking USB hub? What the fuck is wrong with you? Not even Apple fans would be fooled by that garbage. Without a lightning cable built in to it, there is no point in buying one, period. End of story. If you want to buy a $99 USB hub, I will be happy to sell you one (that i snatch off of Amazon for $9.) Their high capacity battery option isn't bad but those too are very cheap (despite their claims) and I can easily get one for under $50 while they want $150 for the kickstarted version.

      This is a clear cut example of Apple deciding to screw over consumers so they can be the only one to pillage their loyal base. Get over it.

      I think you just accurately made my point for me.

      The price of the device was the whole problem, since you can buy cheaper USB-compatible high-capacity chargers from Amazon for much less.

      No one was complaining about the price of it - you brought that up - but the difference between the device with a built in Lighting cord and one without... is simply the USB>Lightning cord that comes with the iPhone.

      ie, if it's a bad deal without the port then it was a bad deal to begin with. I think that realisation hit the owners of the project given that their original shipping date is around now. The product simply isn't viable.

    23. Re:Dear Apple by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But they already are - the Lightning connector was not official when the project began, so how could they offer it?

      Presumably they felt their actual offering was "whatever the contemporary connector Apple uses is", given that a device which can only be connected to obsolete devices is .... obsolete.

      If they started the project based on rumours of the new connector, or with a plan to include it *without* discussing terms with Apple first, then that was just silly.

      Erm, yes, how silly of them to not anticipate that Apple would require licensing for a goddamn power plug. Since when have you had to sign exclusivity agreements to connect a battery to another battery? Can you name any other manufacturer that uses custom authentication chips to prevent people making charging cables? Maybe at the time the Kickstarter project proposal was made, they figured Apple might actually pull its head out of its arse and use the same connector the rest of the world was already standardizing on. Then when the reality turned out to be far worse than they had imagined they realized they'd effectively take peoples money to build a device that wouldn't charge most of their customers iPhones. I think they did exactly the right thing in the circumstance.

    24. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that's exactly what they were hoping for, and are whining about.

    25. Re:Dear Apple by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      At the time they made the project proposal the Lightning connector did not exist. The whole concept of licensing it therefore also did not exist. So that can't have been the reason nobody was making them.

    26. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. I mean, I hate Apple more than any company, even Intellectual Ventures, but damn, USB cables exist for everything.

      Something doesn't add up here. But since they are also giving back all the money, even more confusing. It isn't like they are scamming anyone out of money or anything.

    27. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Erm, yes, how silly of them to not anticipate that Apple would require licensing for a goddamn power plug

      It's not even that; they clearly tried to work within the licensing restrictions they knew would be in place, but Apple's response was completely unreasonable and it forced them to scrap the inclusion of the connector even though they probably had at least $10-$15 worth of margin built in to each unit to account for that.

      If Apple can't be wooed to sell the details of EIGHT FUCKING COPPER TRACES for $10 a unit, then yes, FUCK APPLE.

    28. Re:Dear Apple by Lumpy · · Score: 0

      Says the uneducated of the world.

      Try reading the article.. the guy was a moron for promising something that he had no business promising.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    29. Re:Dear Apple by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Or team up with someone who does have the license. If there is anyone."

      Why? just buy belkin cables and include them in your box. No need to "license" anything. It's an end run I have seen on a lot of devices.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    30. Re:Dear Apple by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      I'm not seeing how this is Apple's fault ...... they gambled that it would be smooth sailing with the as-then-unannounced connector and pushed ahead with product development without having all of their ducks in a row.

      That's the kind of statement that might make sense if Apple and its connector was some kind of inherently unpredictable thing, like a hurricane or an earthquake or the results of cutting edge research. But it's not. It's an electronics company. They deliberately chose to make Lightning proprietary even though it's nothing more than a cable, and then kill this product for, apparently, no reason at all. How is this not Apples fault? Can you come up with any scenario in which you would accept that something was Apples fault?

    31. Re:Dear Apple by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      They sold it as being compatible with current Apple products, on the understanding that it would be when released. This sort of thing has happened before when Apple decided to add some resistors to the standard USB charger so that 3rd party ones wouldn't work, so naturally they wanted to assure backers that the same thing wouldn't happen again.

      Well, it did happen again, but this time Apple put in place some stronger protections. Only official Apple chargers can fast charge Apple devices now.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    32. Re:Dear Apple by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Here's one that costs $9.70. The Batteries cost $7.31. For a total price of $17.01. If you want more power (personally, I think the first one has more than enough, it can recharge my phone at least twice over) you can get this one for $10.40 which uses 4 of the same batteries I linked to. Total price with batteries for that unit would be $25.02

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    33. Re:Dear Apple by jeffmeden · · Score: 2

      They cancelled it because without the lightning connector, although still useful to many people, it would not be the device people pledged money for.

      How could they pledge money for a device promising the Lightning connector when the connector had not been officially announced when the project began?

      Were they pledging for a rumoured product? I guess they can receive a rumour in the mail after paying up.

      While some (many in the tech community) share your complete lack of scruples, apparently Mr. Siminoff does not and did the morally acceptable thing which is to not take someone's money when he cannot deliver what he promised.

    34. Re:Dear Apple by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ever tried to charge an iPad 3 with one of those $20 devices? It takes a long time because only official Apple chargers are allowed to provide 2A. A standard USB charger can't even prevent the battery level from falling when the device is in use, let alone boost it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    35. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RTFA.

      This is not necessarily the end of the Edison Junior’s portable power project. Siminoff told me that the team will be re-focusing on a device that supports Android phones and tablets and Apple products as well, if backers wish to use a Lightning-to-USB connector, or an older 30-pin connector. They’ll only build that device, however, if the crowdfunding community wants it.

      They want to do that, but they'd be building a different project than what people pledged for. So for obvious reasons they would need to start over.

      But they already are - the Lightning connector was not official when the project began, so how could they offer it?

      If they started the project based on rumours of the new connector, or with a plan to include it *without* discussing terms with Apple first, then that was just silly.

      Seriously, it's only in the eyes of the most dedicated of the iFaithful that the assumption that Apple would license the plug for a simple charger is NOT a valid assumption.

      No, really. Rejecting licensing for the plug because of some grandiose decree from on high of "THOU SHALT TARNISH NOT the GLORY and HONOR of the ALMIGHTY APPLE by placing its DIVINE CONNECTOR of iHEAVEN in the proximity of the lesser plugs the LOWER BEINGS use, INCLUDING our older plugs OF THE DARK TIMES; so sayeth the APPLE your LORD"? That's nothing more than an asshole decision. Yes, we hear about Apple doing asshole things all the time, but we expect at least SOME modicum of reasonable behavior out of them.

      But clearly, this expectation was unfounded. What, are they afraid that if the iFaithful bear witness to other plugs, their faith will be shaken? The same if they're reminded of the 30-pin plug? What gives?

    36. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iPop, coming soon to an Apple Store near you!

    37. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd call it Apple's fault for using a proprietary connector in the first place.

      It's *so* much better than a micro-USB connector that it makes clear how short-sghted it is to enforce by law such a shitty solution. I feel lucky they never got around to making floppy drives and parallel ports mandatory.

    38. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you just accurately made my point for me.

      The price of the device was the whole problem, since you can buy cheaper USB-compatible high-capacity chargers from Amazon for much less.

      No one was complaining about the price of it - you brought that up - but the difference between the device with a built in Lighting cord and one without... is simply the USB>Lightning cord that comes with the iPhone.

      ie, if it's a bad deal without the port then it was a bad deal to begin with. I think that realisation hit the owners of the project given that their original shipping date is around now. The product simply isn't viable.

      Get real. The difference is the lightning cord, which Apple is happy to (be the only one to) sell you for $19. $19 is a significant portion of the price of the whole damn thing, so yes it is a big deal if you have to supply your own (monopolistically priced) $19 cable to charge each lightning-equipped device. He collected $140,000 to deliver less than 1000 of these things, which for contract manufacturing isn't huge but he could still make a pretty good profit IF he lacked the moral character to completely fail on what he promised.

      If you would have done differently, then good for you but I sure as shit would never buy anything you are selling.

    39. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You write that from your iPhone, nerd-fag?

    40. Re:Dear Apple by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Can you name any other manufacturer that uses custom authentication chips to prevent people making charging cables?

      Used to be all the rage with Dell and HP, though I havent seen the behavior in quite some time.

    41. Re:Dear Apple by LordLimecat · · Score: 0

      Technically USB chargers are not permitted by the USB standard to provide more than 500mA, I believe. I think thats changing /changed with USB 3 tho.

    42. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder, what's to stop iPhone 5 users from plugging in a Lightning cable into one of the powered USB ports on this device? Nothing? So why the need to cancel it?

      Probably the fact that no moronic rationalizing Apple fanboy would buy it, and no one who isn't a moronic rationalizing Apple fanboy is stupid enough to buy a universal charger that can't even charge the second most popular phone.

    43. Re:Dear Apple by jo_ham · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No, you can't find a 25k maH one for $20... but you can find 5,000 aH ones.

      The price differential makes the big one a bad deal. It doesn't have to be identical, it just has to attempt to fill a niche that other products already do *well enough* for less.

      Look, I'm not claiming it's without merit - I use an Apple device, which is the definition of a more expensive product in a market where there are many other cheaper competitors that work "well enough" - just that if that is your business model, you have to be realistic about your expectations and be *totally sure* your market research and product details are bullet proof.

    44. Re:Dear Apple by Grizzley9 · · Score: 1

      Or you could, you know, just have a usb splitter and plug in the corresponding cables. Done. I'm failing to see the benefit of their device.

    45. Re:Dear Apple by noh8rz9 · · Score: 0

      The MagSafe connector for MacBooks is proprietary and apple doesn't allow anybody else to make them. So it's not a surprise thAt they would do the same on the iPhone.

      --
      let's have a conversation! let me know what you think.
    46. Re:Dear Apple by sglewis100 · · Score: 2

      The Kickstarted project had a 26000 mAH battery, could output 2.1amps on each of four cables (enough to charge four iPads simultaneously at full speed), and was going to have built in, retractable cables supporting micro USB, 30 pin dock and Lightning connections.

      The product you linked to takes two AA batteries. You suggest a battery with a MODEL NUMBER of 18650, but a mAH rating of 2400 mAH, for a total of 4800. 9600 if they bought the four battery model you suggest. It has *ONE* USB port, no built in cable, and can only output 1 amp, or roughly the bare minimum to charge one iPad.... SLOWLY.

      For me, I'd have taken the Kickstart project. As it is, I carry a high powered battery. I find in hotels, when I want to charge things and lock them up in a safe, it's ideal. Battery and tablet in safe. Charged when I get back. I bought a 10000 mAH battery on Amazon for $50. Has three USB ports, 1 is 2.1 amp, the others 1 amp each. 10000 mAH isn't quite enough when you have a thirsty iPad plus an iPod charging, and maybe a digital camera as well. And I have to travel with lots of cables.

      Your link may work to charge *A* cell phone, but that's not really the same target audience as someone who wanted a device that could charge a couple of iPads at the same time to 100% and still have ports left for a phone and an MP3 player.

    47. Re:Dear Apple by sglewis100 · · Score: 1

      Ever tried to charge an iPad 3 with one of those $20 devices? It takes a long time because only official Apple chargers are allowed to provide 2A. A standard USB charger can't even prevent the battery level from falling when the device is in use, let alone boost it.

      There are many chargers providing 2 amps out.

    48. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, they deliberately chose to make it better than the micro-USB.

      God forbid we move forward with electronics, or anything.

    49. Re:Dear Apple by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      I'm not seeing how this is Apple's fault ...... they gambled that it would be smooth sailing with the as-then-unannounced connector and pushed ahead with product development without having all of their ducks in a row.

      That's the kind of statement that might make sense if Apple and its connector was some kind of inherently unpredictable thing, like a hurricane or an earthquake or the results of cutting edge research. But it's not. It's an electronics company. They deliberately chose to make Lightning proprietary even though it's nothing more than a cable, and then kill this product for, apparently, no reason at all. How is this not Apples fault? Can you come up with any scenario in which you would accept that something was Apples fault?

      Yes, there are a number of times where Apple has been at fault, but this is not one of them.

      The connector *did not exist* when this product was conceived. They chose to make the new connector proprietary, but with a licensing scheme for third party manufacturers. The project starters gambled on what they thought those terms would be (and gambled that the connector would even be used at all, based on leaked product details) and then collected venture capital *without having everything nailed down*.

      Had they waited and gone to Apple, and Apple would say no (as it has now), you can say "that sucks Apple!", but when you press ahead and promise to deliver features that you have not managed to officially secure the licence for then you are gambling. That gamble did not pay off.

      If Apple had agreed to the inclusion of the port, and then changed the terms of the agreement after the fact, then that would be Apple's fault.

      As it was, they did not approach Apple for a licence (or even the terms of the licence, since it did not exist at the time) until after they had promised they could deliver the feature.

    50. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it is just EIGHT COPPER TRACES, maybe they can do it themselves?

    51. Re:Dear Apple by necro81 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Since when have you had to sign exclusivity agreements to connect a battery to another battery?

      Whether you are aware or not, you have to pay a license fee to incorporate USB into any device, too. I'm not defending Apple, nor making any judgment about this project. But, yes, licenses need to be obtained, and it is well known that Apple retains a choke hold on their connectors and licenses them only quite sparingly. Arbitrary? Yes. Capricious? Yes. Ought to be loosened and made less exclusive? Definitely. But it's also well known and should have been anticipated.

    52. Re:Dear Apple by jo_ham · · Score: 0

      They cancelled it because without the lightning connector, although still useful to many people, it would not be the device people pledged money for.

      How could they pledge money for a device promising the Lightning connector when the connector had not been officially announced when the project began?

      Were they pledging for a rumoured product? I guess they can receive a rumour in the mail after paying up.

      While some (many in the tech community) share your complete lack of scruples, apparently Mr. Siminoff does not and did the morally acceptable thing which is to not take someone's money when he cannot deliver what he promised.

      Ah, yes. The moral highground of a guy promising to deliver a feature that he does not have a licence for, gambling that he will get one late in the product design stage.

    53. Re:Dear Apple by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      That might not be allowed for this particular connector. There could be some agreements in place forbidding Belkin from selling their Lightning-connector cables in bulk, to prevent this very thing. Obviously, this won't stop anyone from buying them off store shelves at retail price and including them, but that's expensive and impractical for anything that ships in large quantities, but companies frequently have contracts which govern how they sell items.

    54. Re:Dear Apple by necro81 · · Score: 1

      Hey want to buy this new charger that only works with old iPhones, iPads, and iPod touches but none of the current generation

      Of which there are several hundred million?

    55. Re:Dear Apple by Myopic · · Score: 1

      Probably because -- and I'm just guessing here -- then it wouldn't be an integrated cord thus making it a completely different product. Note that the world already has USB hubs; presumably this product was supposed to be different than that.

    56. Re:Dear Apple by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      Not true; every Android phone out there has a USB charger which provides at least 1A, maybe 2A. Yes, the original spec was 500mA, but there's nothing preventing you from making a charger that supplies more. The spec is only important if you're dealing with a USB port on a computer; those generally still are stuck at 500mA (and only if the device requests 500mA from the OS, otherwise it only gets 100mA). With a charger, there is no OS and no USB data communication, so it just supplies 5A at whatever current the charger can handle.

    57. Re:Dear Apple by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Lightning cables, unlike any other connector I can think of outside of HDMI connectors, have custom chips inside them designed to prevent people making their own cables or accessories. So unfortunately you can't make your own.

    58. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not when apple owns the specific implementation of 8fucking coppery traces of goodness.

    59. Re:Dear Apple by BitZtream · · Score: 0

      I DID get one with a built in battery for about $20 from the local Kohl's department store. What makes you think its so hard? What they were offering is something they couldn't deliver as they were promising to sell you Apple tech BEFORE Apple released it and BEFORE they had permission to do so ... in fact, it was BEFORE THEY EVEN ASKED.

      Dumbasses.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    60. Re:Dear Apple by BitZtream · · Score: 0

      Nothing preventing you ... OTHER THAN THE SPEC ITSELF.

      It stops being USB when it stops adhearing to the spec.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    61. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like someone else said, dell and HP. I have personally have had a samsung phone that required a samsung charger to work. No simply plugging the proprietary cable into a wall plug usb adapter.

    62. Re:Dear Apple by andydread · · Score: 1

      Yes lets use multiple posts here to deflect the blame from your beloved Apple with the same damn talking points propogated in other forums. The point is not whether they should have checked first. The point is that this is yet another example of Apple's anticompetitive culture. Your relentless advocation for this destructive behaviour in the marketplace is sickening. You don't happen to work for Burson-Marsterller do you?

    63. Re:Dear Apple by MisterSquid · · Score: 0

      Yes, I'd also call it the fault of patent law for allowing something so absurd intended solely to block interoperation with 3rd party devices; but Apple chose to use it.

      If it makes you happier, I also condemn Intel for the abomination they call "Thunderbolt" - Though unlike iThings, at least Thunderbolt never really caught on.

      Some companies innovate by producing proprietary technology, which is not to say all proprietary technologies are innovative. This is also neither to say that Lightning and Thunderbolt technology are or are not innovative.

      I do, however, want to take a quick look at the claim (not yours, but related to the idea of "standard" as opposed to "proprietary") that Apple should have used USB instead of implementing the new proprietary Lightning connector.

      One of my coworkers was on the bandwagon of people complaining that iPhone 5 used an unnecessary proprietary connector. I offered that some of the write-ups I'd seen explained that the Lightning port and its required adaptors did things that could not be (easily/presently) achieved using USB. My coworker asked for some examples and, being the only-slightly-more-techie-than-average guy I am, I said I'd heard about audio affordances and that I'd only read and could not fully detail other differences and that there may be business reasons we don't understand for introducing the new connector.

      My coworker stood firm in his opinion that making chump change from wires and cables was Apple's (Apple's!) ultimate motive for introducing a new proprietary cable.

      Within the next couple of weeks, my coworker had to order a new Android phone (G3, I believe, I don't recall and don't know all the models. Sorry.) and he was grateful he was being allowed to receive one as a fulfillment of his warranty. Why, you (should) ask, did he need to make a warranty claim?

      Good of you to ask.

      He had plugged his G3 into one of the (micro/A/B/whatever) USB plugs from his other "standard" USB-charging phone and fried his G3.
      In other words, the pseudo-standard USB<—>micro/A/B/whathaveyou USB allows (wait for it) incompatible specifications to be interconnected which, in this case, yielded a catastrophic result.

      So much for sticking with existing "standard" technology.

      I'm not saying standards are impossible or undesirable. I'm only saying that in the case of USB vs. Lightning, USB is not a real standard and Apple's decision to produce a proprietary connector was a choice that Apple deemed best (whether selfishly or also in consideration of their users as well).

      --
      blog
    64. Re:Dear Apple by Stewie241 · · Score: 1

      You could argue that they were pledging for a device that would charge both Android phones and Apple phones. Apple went and changed the connector for the new iPhone so the device would then by obsolete by the time it was released.

    65. Re:Dear Apple by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Tell that to every Android phone maker out there. It isn't possible to recharge a modern phone in any decent amount of time at 0.5A.

    66. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Promised product was too expensive to produce, they would have lost more than the 11k they lose by refunding.

      They promised too much and needed a reason to bail. The found a reason and jumped ship.

    67. Re:Dear Apple by samkass · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, they have custom chips. [Citation needed] that they're "designed to prevent" copying. Near as I can tell, the best guess is those chips are there because the 8+1 copper lines are completely configurable and thus need active logic. Considering there are already unofficial Chinese reverse-engineered cables around, I don't think this is insurmountable technically. It's just that Apple isn't going to put their official stamp on it-- and I'm surprised these people expected them to.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    68. Re:Dear Apple by Kelbear · · Score: 3, Informative

      This lady figured out how to make your own apple cables, apparently it's pretty simple:

      "Reverse-engineering Apple's secret charging methods"
      http://vimeo.com/13835359

      But even if you can make your own, I think the licensing issues prevent the possibility of selling them.

    69. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That video is two years old. It was simple with the old 30-pin connector. That's why the market is flooded by dirt cheap connectors and chargers that does not comply with any safety regulations and in many cases break devices.

    70. Re:Dear Apple by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Yes, but Apple's DRM means that the iPad 3 will only charge slowly from them anyway. It has to be an Apple charger otherwise the iPad refuses.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    71. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear Apple

      Fuck you!

      Yours sincerely

      The sane people on the planet

      Dont be a retarded dick head please? You make the rest of us look bad.

      They were using the lighting technology that they did NOT license for use from apple so apple shut them down for it. Its apples property, or are you one of those people that will blindly ignore everything just so you can bitch about whats cool to bitch about on the internet at the moment because youre a slave to trends? I hope youre not stupid enough to not understand the concept of when you own a copyright that means others cant use it unless they give you permission and if they use it without your permission you can stop them from doing so.

      Obviously you arent too bright though if that is your entire posting. Dear apple fuck you sincerely the sane people on the planet? You didnt have one intelligent, savvy, insightful or informed word in that entire thing. You just spat out some kind of mindless drone garbage that has absolutely no bearing on the topic at hand. You just ran into the room, blabbed some nonsense and ran back out. I bet you didnt even read the article you just skimmed the headline and said "Uhhhh doy! Apple dem is bad mes gonna go say stuff about dem! huh huh huh hu!"

    72. Re:Dear Apple by Theaetetus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Erm, yes, how silly of them to not anticipate that Apple would require licensing for a goddamn power plug

      It's not even that; they clearly tried to work within the licensing restrictions they knew would be in place, but Apple's response was completely unreasonable and it forced them to scrap the inclusion of the connector even though they probably had at least $10-$15 worth of margin built in to each unit to account for that.

      If Apple can't be wooed to sell the details of EIGHT FUCKING COPPER TRACES for $10 a unit, then yes, FUCK APPLE.

      It's not just eight fucking copper traces, but a chip that automatically detects orientation of the plug and reroutes signals between said traces so that pin 8 always acts like pin 8, even if you flip the plug and it's actually pin 1.

    73. Re:Dear Apple by sglewis100 · · Score: 2

      Yes, but Apple's DRM means that the iPad 3 will only charge slowly from them anyway. It has to be an Apple charger otherwise the iPad refuses.

      Not with any of three chargers I use.

    74. Re:Dear Apple by phorm · · Score: 1

      Because then it's no different from many of the other "universal chargers" out there?
      Add to that that people pledged for a product /w a lightning connector, and well... would you pledge for a universal charger when so many already exist?

    75. Re:Dear Apple by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      But they already are - the Lightning connector was not official when the project began, so how could they offer it?

      Presumably they felt their actual offering was "whatever the contemporary connector Apple uses is", given that a device which can only be connected to obsolete devices is .... obsolete.

      How nice that you call the iPhone 4S as well as the iPad 3 "obsolete". Not to mention that you should have said "whatever the future (then contemporary) connector Apple one day will use will be".

      Last but not least - if the device is suposed to be future-proof, why doesn't it support the new USB Power Delivery Specification? Isn't this supposed to be a super charger?

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    76. Re:Dear Apple by shellbeach · · Score: 1

      I wonder, what's to stop iPhone 5 users from plugging in a Lightning cable into one of the powered USB ports on this device? Nothing? So why the need to cancel it?

      Well, you clearly didn't RTFA. If you had, you'd have read this:

      "This is not necessarily the end of the Edison Junior’s portable power project. Siminoff told me that the team will be re-focusing on a device that supports Android phones, tablets, and Apple products, if backers wish to use a Lightning-to-USB connector, or an older 30-pin connector. They’ll only build that device, however, if the crowdfunding community wants it."

      The problem was that they'd promised a specific product to their backers, and they couldn't deliver it because Apple pulled the plug (pardon the pun).

      Incidentally, what most people are missing is that Apple didn't prevent licensing of the lightning adapter by itself, but rather of the lightning adaptor in combination with other plug options. How crazy is that??

    77. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Can you name any other manufacturer that uses custom authentication chips to prevent people making charging cables?"

      I am fairly sure Motorola Razrs used to do that same thing

    78. Re:Dear Apple by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Yes lets use multiple posts here to deflect the blame from your beloved Apple with the same damn talking points propogated in other forums. The point is not whether they should have checked first. The point is that this is yet another example of Apple's anticompetitive culture. Your relentless advocation for this destructive behaviour in the marketplace is sickening. You don't happen to work for Burson-Marsterller do you?

      I wish I did. Alas, the chemistry lab pays far less than industry lobbyists. Don;t have to wear a suit though, so that's a plus.

      This is not a demonstration of Apple's anticompetitive culture (we all knew the Lightning connector was proprietary), as much as it;s a demonstration of not planning ahead in business and making promises you cannot guarantee because it relies on assumptions made about what Apple will agree to before even talking to them. Then, when it doesn't go your way, calling them assholes officially.

    79. Re:Dear Apple by Bodhammer · · Score: 1

      Whether you are aware or not, you have to pay a license fee to incorporate USB into any device, too..

      No you don't, you only have to pay if you want a unique vendor idea and/or want to use the official USB logo.

      --
      "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
    80. Re:Dear Apple by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Actually I think you are still wrong, the device they were promising to build had a 25,000 mAh battery. It could charge your phone ten times on one charge. You CANNOT find one that large for that price on Amazon.

      But by no means should you read the article or actually look anything up before you insist that your two cents is right in multiple posts.

      I went and checked, the closest thing I could find only had a 16,000 mAh battery, and it was $100.
      http://www.amazon.com/dreamGEAR-iSound-ISOUND-4591-Back-Up-Flashlight/dp/B0063GM6O8

      So for half the announced retail price of a POP, you can a device with two thirds the capacity.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    81. Re:Dear Apple by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Because then it's no different from many of the other "universal chargers" out there?
      Add to that that people pledged for a product /w a lightning connector, and well... would you pledge for a universal charger when so many already exist?

      That's the point when it all boils down to it. There was no lightning connector when this project started, and they simply assumed they could add one when it was announced. They were wrong.

      It is trying to be a very expensive charger in a market saturated with cheaper ones (even if those cheaper ones are not as good). If they wanted a USP they could use, they probably should have confirmed with Apple that they would be able to get a licence before promising it.

    82. Re:Dear Apple by kilodelta · · Score: 1

      Ditto! It's a fucking connector, not an intellectual property!

    83. Re:Dear Apple by andy.ruddock · · Score: 1

      Well that's just being "clever" for the sake of it. Why can't they just use a simple, keyed, connector - I mean, apart from the obvious?

      --
      God: An invisible friend for grown-ups.
    84. Re:Dear Apple by Theaetetus · · Score: 2

      Well that's just being "clever" for the sake of it. Why can't they just use a simple, keyed, connector - I mean, apart from the obvious?

      Because you can't flip over a keyed connector, which is why we all know the fail-flip-fail-flip-succeed routine of USB.

    85. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your destroyed any credibility your posting had when you said the following:
      abomination they call "Thunderbolt"

    86. Re:Dear Apple by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Not true; every Android phone out there has a USB charger which provides at least 1A, maybe 2A. Yes, the original spec was 500mA, but there's nothing preventing you from making a charger that supplies more.

      Yeah, the only ones who should be forced to stick to standards is Apple.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    87. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you saying that you've actually tried one of those and the iPad 3 will accept all 2A from the device, or does it only draw a smaller amount of what is available? I have neither an iPad 3, nor one of these devices, so I don't know, but I'm guessing you are just guessing as well.

    88. Re:Dear Apple by GuldKalle · · Score: 1

      But do Apple products take advantage of that amount of current?

      --
      What?
    89. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you think buying 5 $20 chargers is a better deal than buying 1 $99 charger with every imaginable connector at higher amperage?

      You logic is beyond faulty. Not only is "inferior product at lower price" obviously not the 100% bulletproof way to launch a successful product, but these people already had the production fully funded so OBVIOUSLY THERE WAS A MARKET.

    90. Re:Dear Apple by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      What's better about it? I've read a lot about lightning vs USB, but have yet to see what makes Lightning anything more than an expensive way to get a marginal improvement.

    91. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could the chip really prevent it from charging across copper, or would it just prevent command signals from being sent/received across said copper?

    92. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the real world, capacity is rarely linearly proportional to price. To argue otherwise is absurd. Easy to understand examples include:

      4 Ghz Sandy Bridge > 10 times the price of a 400 Mhz Atom
      691 hp Lamborghini Aventador has just over 6 times the horse power of a mid-nineties Ford Escort, and 300 times the price
      A good .338 target rifle uses only twice the powder as a good .308, shoots only twice the distance at the same accuracy, but is 4 times as expensive

      Would your assertion that the "...price differential makes the big one a bad deal." apply to these products as well? Your Apple may be a better example than you think, in specs. it could be provably inferior to a Samsung GS3, for more money, and there will still be plenty of Apple fans waiting in line for the next one.

      Marketing is about understanding your customers and delivering something they want. Price is a separate issue. Whether you're trying to shoot someone at a mile distance before they shoot you, or survive on the autobahn or play flash-based games, the upgrades above will probably seem like good investments, regardless of price/performance ratios.

    93. Re:Dear Apple by omglolbah · · Score: 2

      This is the old type of charger logic that just tells the phone it can draw more than 100/500 milliamps.

      The lightning connector has an actual controller in it which prevents this kind of reverse engineering.

    94. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear Apple

      Thank you!

    95. Re:Dear Apple by sglewis100 · · Score: 1

      iPads ship with a 10 watt power adapter specifically to allow them to charge faster, given the massive size of the battery. Yes, they highly, highly take advantage of it. Even iPhone will charge about twice as fast with a 1 amp charger versus a standard USB connection.

    96. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thunderbolt will catch for the simple fact that there will never be a USB 4. In other to get to the speeds necessary for USB 4 you will need to do all the tricks that thunder bolt does now. This is a marathon not a sprint and thunderbolt has a head start.

    97. Re:Dear Apple by spire3661 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Thats not just any lady, thats Ladyada, Entrepreneur of the Year.

      --
      Good-bye
    98. Re:Dear Apple by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Even my computer (Asus Z77 mini-itx) has a 2 Amp USB charger in it.

      --
      Good-bye
    99. Re:Dear Apple by mosb1000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The lightning connector is better than a "standard" USB connector in many ways. It's easier to plug in because you don't have to worry about which way to plug it in. It carries more power so it will charge faster. It is smaller, so it will fit on smaller devices. Saying that everyone should use the "standard" is basically saying that what we have now is good enough for all time and should never improve. But I don't think we're there yet.

    100. Re:Dear Apple by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      WTF are you talking about? I never said any such thing. The original ~1996 USB spec is clearly outdated and unsuitable in today's world: 500mA is simply not enough, just like 640K is not enough memory. There's nothing wrong with USB phone chargers exceeding this ridiculously small limit. Apple does the same thing. The only thing wrong with Apple is that they added some resistors to their USB chargers/cables so that third-party chargers couldn't be used, a move clearly designed to break compatibility. Exceeding 500mA is totally different; if your USB device only needs 500mA, you can still plug it into a 2A phone charger, it'll just use 500mA. If your device needs less than 500mA by design, yet uses more than that when plugged into a higher-capacity charger, then your device is broken. And phones can still charge at 500mA (like if you plug them into a PC USB port), it just takes them a week to do so at that rate.

    101. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erm, yes, how silly of them to not anticipate that Apple would require licensing for a goddamn power plug

      It's not even that; they clearly tried to work within the licensing restrictions they knew would be in place, but Apple's response was completely unreasonable and it forced them to scrap the inclusion of the connector even though they probably had at least $10-$15 worth of margin built in to each unit to account for that.

      If Apple can't be wooed to sell the details of EIGHT FUCKING COPPER TRACES for $10 a unit, then yes, FUCK APPLE.

      It's not just eight fucking copper traces, but a chip that automatically detects orientation of the plug and reroutes signals between said traces so that pin 8 always acts like pin 8, even if you flip the plug and it's actually pin 1.

      Are you kidding? Pin 8 is always pin 8 (since it is the same on both sides), the only time it's not is if the thing is actually a 16 pin connector that needs to mediate 1 and 16 vs 7 and 8 to make sure things are "rerouted". But instead, it's just a connector that does the same thing on both sides, so your theory about how fucking fantastic it is just went out the window. Try again though, that was fun.

    102. Re:Dear Apple by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      It was a scam all along.

      The claim is they are returning the money... So what exactly is the scam? What is the website that is competing with kickstarter?
      1. Scam people out of money
      2. Return said money
      3.???
      4.Profit!!!

    103. Re:Dear Apple by Elldallan · · Score: 1

      I think the EU needs to make reality of it's threat to enforce a unified standard port for charging devices and tell apple to either start using MicroUSB or get the fuck out of our market, Apple's response to that would be predictable considering that the entire EU is a pretty sizable market.

    104. Re:Dear Apple by Elldallan · · Score: 1

      Some time ago EU threatened mobile/smartphone makers to create a unified port standard for charging devices or the EU would do that(in the name of green standards) and enforce it, I think it's about time that the EU told Apple to get on the MicroUSB train or get the fuck out of EU. Considering the size of EU as a market their reply would be predictable.

    105. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well that's just being "clever" for the sake of it. Why can't they just use a simple, keyed, connector - I mean, apart from the obvious?

      Because you can't flip over a keyed connector, which is why we all know the fail-flip-fail-flip-succeed routine of USB.

      If you fail-flip-fail, then you might want to make sure you're not trying to plug your USB into the headphone jack. ;)

    106. Re:Dear Apple by emj · · Score: 2

      (G3, I believe, I don't recall and don't know all the models. Sorry.) [....] He had plugged his G3 into one of the (micro/A/B/whatever) USB plugs from his other "standard" USB-charging phone

      I had a friend who bought what he believed to be a genuine Apple charger and fried his tablet, the cheap stuff will always be there wether you use an Apple connector or the standard USB version.

      Your story would be more interesting if you knew the specifics, i.e could supply make and model of both charger and phone.

    107. Re:Dear Apple by Cwix · · Score: 1

      I thought the POP was $149. According to the graphics on their kickstarter page, it does look like it is $149. So the Pop gives you 167mAh per dollar and the link I posted gives you 160 mAh. So you were wrong. Good for you. Read the article.

      Even if it was 200 dollars, I still did not see any battery out there with an equivalent size. So the extra cost could be justified that way.
      .
      You seem to fail to realize my point, and that was that you cannot get a device with similar capabilities for 20 dollars.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    108. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whether you are aware or not, you have to pay a license fee to incorporate USB into any device, too.

      No you don't, at least since USB 2.0.

    109. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      18650 are not "AA batteries". They might look like regular old AAs but they're very different, they're lithium ion batteries -- exactly the same batteries used in laptops, led flashlights, electric cars, model airplanes, etc.

      There's 18650 with much more than 2400 mAH, those were from 2011 or something. I have some 3400mAH on my flashlight currently, and 4000 are to be released soon, in the beggining of '13.

    110. Re:Dear Apple by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Those are not AA batteries, as the other guy said, they are lithium ion rechargable batteries and are actually quite a bit bigger than AA batteries. Also, I'm not sure who the target market is who wants to charge 4 ipads at the same time. Sure if you get together with friends and you all have iPads, it would work, but then when to go your separate ways 3 are stuck without a backup battery. Better for every user to just own their own backup battery.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    111. Re:Dear Apple by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      I thought the POP was $149. According to the graphics on their kickstarter page, it does look like it is $149.

      That's the reduced price for investors. Try to look at more than the pictures next time.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    112. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the EU needs to make reality of it's threat to enforce a unified standard port for charging devices and tell apple to either start using MicroUSB or get the fuck out of our market, Apple's response to that would be predictable considering that the entire EU is a pretty sizable market.

      You mean a EU only iPhone

    113. Re:Dear Apple by sglewis100 · · Score: 1

      Ok they just look like AA batteries, and provide 2400 mAH each, which is isn't even impressive compared to a good AA battery. But saying there's no use for being able to charge 4 iPads doesn't begin to cover how the original suggestion of using a device that provides 4800 or 9600 mAH at 1 amp is off target. Neither will charge ONE ipad at full speed or to 100%. This device can charge an ipad, iPhone and iPod without breaking a sweat, or at least it would have.

      If you wanted to find something cheaper, you can, but not for $20, especially if you actually want to charge an ipad, and do it at regular charging speed.

      So look, if you can't find the value in something like this, that's great, but it doesn't mean $20 and 4800mah works in all situations.

    114. Re:Dear Apple by tristes_tigres · · Score: 0

      Look at how neatly organized are the electronic spare parts and tools. What a nice rack she got!

    115. Re:Dear Apple by GuldKalle · · Score: 1

      I meant, do they take advantage of an off-brand charger? I seem to recall they have some circuitry that lets the iPad detect how much current it should pull. But I don't know if that tech is proprietary.

      --
      What?
    116. Re:Dear Apple by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

      That always puzzled me as well. Stupid USB. Just have the female connector have 4 pins on both sides, the male connector with 4 pins on only one side. Hey look, it's a self orienting mechanical interconnect! Even cheaper than an 8 pin auto-orienter cable! Ah, but you couldn't prevent folks from duplicating the design so easily. Sometimes, it's like everyone's a moron but me.

    117. Re:Dear Apple by ByteSlicer · · Score: 1

      Hint: 2 identical batteries of 12500 mAh plus some extra charging circuits equals 1 of 25000 mAh. Or did you think electric cars run on a single battery?

    118. Re:Dear Apple by sglewis100 · · Score: 1

      The three off brands I have seem fine. Two are from mainstream vendors, the third is a no name Chinese brand. They all charge seemingly as fast as the Apple charger, and about twice as fast as with a 1 amp iPhone charger. In fact, one charger two USB ports, one 2 amp, the other 1 amp, and I can tell the difference.

    119. Re:Dear Apple by Elldallan · · Score: 1

      If they insist then that would be one way to do it yes but that would probably increase production costs and the iPhone is already expensive enough as it is and an increased price point is probably not the best way to do things, they could also just add a MicroUSB port for charging and keep the lightning port for everything else.

    120. Re:Dear Apple by Theaetetus · · Score: 0

      That always puzzled me as well. Stupid USB. Just have the female connector have 4 pins on both sides, the male connector with 4 pins on only one side. Hey look, it's a self orienting mechanical interconnect! Even cheaper than an 8 pin auto-orienter cable! Ah, but you couldn't prevent folks from duplicating the design so easily. Sometimes, it's like everyone's a moron but me.

      Yeah, that must be it. I just have one question - if the female connector has 4 pins on both sides and the male connector has 4 pins on one side and a big honking metal shell on the other, then how do you avoid shorting out those 4 pins in the female connector with the shell of the male connector?

    121. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh... Wrong on technical grounds...but then, technically, it's /. so...

      Stock USB 1.0 and 2.0 ports that do not conform to the 1.2 version of the USB charging specification are supposed to only source 500mA. USB 3.0 is only allowed 900mA in the normal mode of oprtation.

      Ports and devices conforming to the BC1.2 profile for USB 2.0/3.0, can source 1.5 A in data mode and 5A maximum in pure charging mode. In fact, my main computer has orange connector ports that conform to the BC1.2 profile.

    122. Re:Dear Apple by sdsucks · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Thunderbolt never caught on?

      I use ThunderBolt on a daily basis, and have since the first Macbook Pro supported it. Honestly, it kicks ass. Let me know when you've got another interface as fast AND convenient as TB.

      Just like Firewire it may never be as mainstream as USB, but, again, just like firewire was much faster than USB2, TB is much faster than USB3 - and there is a market for that. (And if you actually think USB2 was even close to as fast as FW400 or FW800, or that USB3 is as fast as TB, don't bother replying until you educate yourself.)

      So, just because you don't use it, does not mean it has not "caught on".
       

    123. Re:Dear Apple by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The spec itself requires a device to act a certain way when connected to another device that meets the spec. In this case the slave device needs to act accordingly when connected to a host in order for both the slave and the host to be certified USB devices. Power adapters are NOT certified USB devices.

      In mobile charging systems the slave (phone) will detect the presence of the host pulldown resistors when the device is plugged in. If it detects the presence of power on the bus but no host pull down resistors then it knows that it is not plugged into a certified USB device and that it doesn't need to adhere to the 200mA (without driver intervention) limit on power draw and then goes all out on trying to charge itself. If it burns out the device on the other end it doesn't matter since the device on the other end wasn't a certified USB device.

      There is no breach of spec here. Incidentally this is the same trick as used to identify if a device is a car cradle, or in some devices the presence of certain resistances will put the devices into a development mode (See Samsung Galaxy S which can be forced to a download mode via a resistor on the USB data lines even when the bootloader has been corrupted).

      The spec is only relevant when connecting two certified devices.

    124. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a multi-purpose charger for Apple and Android devices - it's called a portable USB hub. That, coupled with - at worst, two apple charging cable (lightning and 30-pin) and a single micro-usb charging cable - will charge any device magically, as well.

      As far as I can see, "retractable cord reels" is the only thing this had going for it. cheap, mechanical parts that will break down (it's only a $100 device, after all) after a handful of uses, leaving the cords unable to retract, or constantly under tension trying to retract.

      Fuck that. Give me a usb strip and let me just plug my cables into it.

    125. Re:Dear Apple by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      not be allowed? you can disallow me from buying something and reselling it. At least not yet, The Supreme court has not made that illegal yet.

      And who cares what apple tells belkin, they cant stop me from buying all of them that newegg has on hand.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    126. Re:Dear Apple by Americano · · Score: 2

      Why not just sell the device with user-loadable "retractable reels" then?

      Most of these devices come with a charging cable... why not just build your "retractable reels" to support the charging cables that are included with the devices?

    127. Re:Dear Apple by Rich0 · · Score: 2

      The iPhone is priced at what the market will bear, not more, and not less. Prices for premium products have nothing to do with their costs. If it cost Apple more to build the iPhone they'd charge the same for it. If it cost Apple less to build the iPhone they'd charge the same for it.

      The only thing that is going to affect the price of the iPhone is the price and popularity of other comparable products in the market.

      The only time cost comes into play is if the cost is so high that the product cannot be sold at a profit. In that case, the product would be discontinued. Why wouldn't they just charge more for it? They already figured out that charging more brings in less money, otherwise they'd already be doing it. So, if you lose money bringing in as much as possible and anything you do brings in less, your only option is to discontinue and cut your losses, unless you're trying to break into a market and operating at a loss is a strategic decision.

      This logic applies to all manner of products - just basic microeconomics. It applies most strongly to premium products, which tend to be priced way above their marginal cost. Commodity products tend to be priced close to cost, but that is all the market will bear anyway.

    128. Re:Dear Apple by ottothecow · · Score: 1
      You don't see a market for it? What about the fully funded kickstarter project?

      A fully funded kickstarter project means that by definition, there is a market for the product (since people already lined up and paid for it). Heck, for some kickstarter projects, that's all there is--one kickstarter run and that's it, even if people still want more. Usually that's for the more artistic (or at least artisan) items...pure manufactured utility items like this are likely intended to become a regular product available for sale, but you never know.

      --
      Bottles.
    129. Re:Dear Apple by sdsucks · · Score: 1

      Ummmm. A few things:

      0) Do you have a source for "only official Apple chargers are allowed to provide 2A"? Until you do, it's just FUD.

      1) An ipad will charge off ~ 1A. Slowly but surely, and during use - at least my typical light usage (and yes, ipad 3), but I don't play games and especially not at full-on-blinding brightness. Turn the screen off, and it can charge at 500mA. (Although it will say "Not charging", it actually is - just slowly.)

      2) Really this is a problem with USB, it's specifications simply don't require implementations to support > 500mA. (And some seriously shit motherboards I've seen in my day can't even pull off 500mA reliably).

      Apple has no control over how much power 3rd party adaptors are capable of providing unless they are subject to Apples licensing agreements. So if someone wants to create a USB charger Apple has no say over the level of current. Is there a limit if they want to implement a dock connect? I don't know. You say there is, but provide no proof.

      At the end of the day, do you really want some POS charger pumping 2A into your $900 ipad?

    130. Re:Dear Apple by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      you can disallow me from buying something and reselling it.

      I think you meant to write "can't". In any case, you're wrong. If, for instance, I'm the manufacturer (or rights-holder) to product X, and you're another manufacturer that wants to buy X and integrate it with their product and resell it, I absolutely can refuse to sell you my product if I don't like you for some reason.

      Of course, you could try to go around to all the retail stores in the country and buy up their stock of X, but that would be pretty stupid: you'd be getting it at full retail price (instead of a giant bulk discount), and it'd cost a fortune to send a small army of people out to buy all this stuff in person. Worse, that's not a very good way to source parts for an assembled product; you'd have a very hard time getting the quantities you need in stock in time to do manufacturing. You'd never be able to sell your product profitably doing this.

      they cant stop me from buying all of them that newegg has on hand.

      Which isn't enough for a large production run, and costs too much at retail prices. Newegg isn't going to give you 50% or 75% off just because you're buying up all their stock. When you're a manufacturer, you have to buy your parts from those manufacturers, not retail stores.

    131. Re:Dear Apple by Cwix · · Score: 1

      A) Who cares if it has one battery or two, the device itself stores 25,000 mAh.
      B) Seriously, I am still lost by your comment... What exactly did I say that made you think this mattered?

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    132. Re:Dear Apple by Cwix · · Score: 1

      LOL one liners, I LOVE oneliners.
      But still, why are you ignoring my point? You are still missing it. Actually you know what, I looked up your account history. If MS shills exists on this site, Apple ones do too, cause that's all you comment about. I do not discuss things with shills/fanbois. Not only does it drive my blood pressure up, but I have always hated having battles of wit with an unarmed people.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    133. Re:Dear Apple by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      The kickstarter funding doesn't necessarily indicate there's a market, but it's also possible that people are kickstarting this thing because they don't know that there are already much better options on the market. The shortcomings I see with the POP (and warning, I'm going to compare it extensively to the NewTrent IMP120D, because I own one and am quite happy with it):

      1) It's unnecessarily enormous. Seriously, this thing has 26 amp-hours of capacity, and has a volume of about 127 cubic inches (yes, accounting for the cylindrical shape). A NewTrent IMP120D stores 12 amp-hours, and has a volume of about 15 cubic inches. If we consider roughly comparable storage capacities and say you need two IMP120Ds, the POP is about four times bigger than it should be. The POP is also weighs about as much as three IMP120Ds.

      2) It has questionable usability. On top of the fact that the strange placement of the retractable cables makes it look like it would be difficult to access them, the USB ports, battery capacity indicator, and AC plug are all on the BOTTOM of the unit. In order to plug in a USB device, or to check how much power it has left, you have to pick the thing up and turn it over, hoping that the top does't fall off. And since you may have devices plugged into it, you may need to unplug your devices just to turn it over and look at the battery indicators.

      3) It's overpriced. The MSRP of the POP portable is $199. Two IMP120Ds would cost $154, and amazon seems to have a special where they throw in a free 5 amp-hour battery pack when you buy an IMP120D.

      The concept of the thing is itself not bad. The problem is it has a terrible execution. They could have made the thing less than half the size, put the retractable cables on the side instead of the bottom, and put the battery indicator on top, and right off the bat that would have eliminated many of the problems with their device; part of the reason the thing is so freaking enormous is because they put the thing on raised feet and have a bizarre compartment on the top.

    134. Re:Dear Apple by ByteSlicer · · Score: 1

      B) Seriously, I am still lost by your comment... What exactly did I say that made you think this mattered?

      Lol. It seems I misread your comment as saying: the device was specified at 25000 mAh, but you cannot find a battery that large anywhere.
      I missed the post at -1 in between that you were actually replying to.

    135. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Update:

      Dear Apple

      Fuck you anyway!

      Yours sincerely

      People of the Slashdot

    136. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, those AA batteries you linked are complete junk, for starters. New out of the blister I'd be really surprised if they were more than 1800mAH, maybe 2000 on a good day, and after less than 10 charge/discharge cycles you'd be lucky if they held more than 1400mAH. If you want good rechargeable AA batteries get Sanyo Eneloop XX. It's not even open for discussion, they are the best bar none, they're only 2500mAH but they'll hold the charge for months and months and deliver consistent performance, unlike those lower quality made in china batteries you linked. Sony 2500 NiMH are also a good choice, close in performance to the Sanyos.

      That said, 18650 batteries are 4.2v, rechargeable AA are 1.25v. That's the difference, it may seem 18650 are nothing to write home about but they're actually very impressive, they actually have a very high energy density.

      There's also AA sized rechargeable lithium batteries, they're called 14500, 3.7v ~900mAH.

    137. Re:Dear Apple by aquabat · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that must be it. I just have one question - if the female connector has 4 pins on both sides and the male connector has 4 pins on one side and a big honking metal shell on the other, then how do you avoid shorting out those 4 pins in the female connector with the shell of the male connector?

      Huh? I think he means the female connector will have 4 sockets on both sides, what with it being a female connector, and all. Then it doesn't matter which way you plug in the male connector, since the for pins on the male connector will always go into one of the two duplicate sets of four sockets on the female connector.

      --
      A republic cannot succeed till it contains a certain body of men imbued with the principles of justice and honour.
    138. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use an Apple device, which is the definition of a more expensive product in a market where there are many other cheaper competitors that work "well enough"

      FWIW: I would've considered the "iWhatever" to be the one that "works well enough" and the rest to be the more usable and less intrusive, better products. The hardware inside of the idevices are all sub-par at best. That's just coming from someone who's owned enough of the products to do actual comparisons of them, though. Not from some Apple fanboy, so you probably won't like my response.

      TL;DR: You paid more money for less product and sold yourself on the idea that you got more product. You were wrong.

    139. Re:Dear Apple by Cwix · · Score: 1

      Lol, oh ok. that makes a little more sense. Cheers, enjoy the end of the world. LOL

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    140. Re:Dear Apple by Elldallan · · Score: 1

      Of course but manufacturers usually try to shift costs for new "features" onto customers, I'm sure Apple will raise the price of the EU specific iPhone and tell ppl to blame the EU, sadly it will probably work, there are far too many fanboys who never question anything Apple ever says.

    141. Re:Dear Apple by Elrond,+Duke+of+URL · · Score: 1

      It may be technically better, and considering it is 16 years newer than the original 1996 USB spec, it certainly ought to be. I think this is missing the point, however. Random company X could "invent" a number of new product Y's which are technically better than an existing standard, but without some sort of backing and/or lax (or completely lacking) licensing fees and rules, nobody is going to use it.

      If I wanted to put a USB port on some device of mine, or even an entire USB host or slave system, how much will it cost me and to whom must I pay? The answer is nothing, zero. Unless I need a new USB vendor ID reserved or I want to use the official USB logo then I don't need to pay any sort of fees to anybody. *This* is the reason that you find USB ports on everything under the sun. Any company can add USB to anything they like without paying another company and without needing to get permission. The only moderating factor here is the need, for many devices, to have a unique vendor ID which prevents the landscape from being a chaotic free for all.

      Apple, meanwhile, gets to play gatekeeper on yet another area of technology related to their phones and pads. And for what gain? Look in most stores and catalogs and it already seems that they will give the okay to just about any random piece of junk that plugs into an iPhone. They don't seem particularly picky most of the time. As for why they chose to give these people the run around for their charger? Who knows... politics, knee-jerk reaction to anything possibly Android related, stupidity, or maybe even the left hand not knowing what the right had is doing. Take your pick.

      --
      Elrond, Duke of URL
      "This is the most fun I've had without being drenched in the blood of my enemies!"-Sam&Max
    142. Re:Dear Apple by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      You call me an Apple shill because I point out what the designated retail price for the POP is? Wow. Not to mention you do it after I did it in my first post, you attacked me because you didn't find it, and I called you on it. You sure are good at rationalizing away your boneheaded mistakes by blaming them on the one who is right.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    143. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While some (many in the tech community) share your complete lack of scruples, apparently Mr. Siminoff does not and did the morally acceptable thing which is to not take someone's money when he cannot deliver what he promised.

      Not quite kiddo. His original promise did not include lightning, in fact the early versions JUST had mini usb. Dude started a kickstarter competitor, used it to take the spotlight

    144. Re:Dear Apple by Vecanti · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that must be it. I just have one question - if the female connector has 4 pins on both sides and the male connector has 4 pins on one side and a big honking metal shell on the other, then how do you avoid shorting out those 4 pins in the female connector with the shell of the male connector?

      Picture the connector like a palindrome. Like RacEcaR.

      +-+ Would be 2 pins and no shorting

      or

      123454321

      No matter matter which way you plug it you have 5 pins connecting and nothing shorting.

    145. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not just a power plug. It does a little more than simply power the device. Apple does obviously want to control access to devices using Lightning; that is Apple's way. But as far as pulling their head out of their asses and using the same connector as everyone else, Apple wanted an 8-pin connector that does more than what micro-USB does. I do prefer standards, but why should one be forced into using an industry standard if one wants to something better? We wouldn't even have USB if companies didn't abandon previous industry standards, amongst them RS-232 serial and parallel ports. At first, I was hesitant about Lightning. I have just a few 30-pin connector accessories, but I quickly came to prefer Lightning for its speed and ability to detect its orientation. I just don't buy the idea that Apple is so deathly afraid of losing revenue from sales of cables that they've come up with an elaborate scheme involving engineers and designers to create a new interface solely for the purpose of maintaining lock-in. If that were the case, why does a Mac have USB 3.0 ports at all, just give it Thunderbolt and FireWire 800 and be done with it.

    146. Re:Dear Apple by Cwix · · Score: 1

      And you are really good at dodging my point. This entire time you have refused to respond to the actual point of my comment.
      EVEN if the price was 1000 dollars, the fact of the matter is it has a larger battery then the other devices of similar type. To some that would justify the price.

      Now unless you have something to say DIRECTLY to that point. I bid you good day.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    147. Re:Dear Apple by ByteSlicer · · Score: 1

      enjoy the end of the world

      I will, if I'm still around in a few billion years ;-)
      Cheers

    148. Re:Dear Apple by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      And you are really good at dodging my point. This entire time you have refused to respond to the actual point of my comment.
      EVEN if the price was 1000 dollars, the fact of the matter is it has a larger battery then the other devices of similar type. To some that would justify the price.

      Now unless you have something to say DIRECTLY to that point. I bid you good day.

      So fucking what. Slap together two of the devices given for the same price gets you larger capacity, as well as a smaller bundle. Fucking idiot. Your point seems to be that you only defend this product because you hate Apple beyond all reason.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    149. Re:Dear Apple by petervandervos · · Score: 1

      All the devices we use in our house (iPad, Samsung Note 10.1, iPhone) can use the same adaptor. They all have a cable that ends in a usb A connector. You don't need the same connector on the devices.

    150. Re:Dear Apple by Gen_Music · · Score: 1

      A MicroUSB 2.0 port is cheaper than a Lightning port, if only slightly. Remember Apple don't have to pay their own licensing fees but probably will (knowing them they can make it tax deductable).

    151. Re:Dear Apple by Gen_Music · · Score: 1

      And even then, I doubt it's more than 10% of the cost of a Lightning license.

    152. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They already comply with that stupid shortsighted law. Forcing Micro USB is like forcing people to eat at McDonald's. You always know what you're going to get, and what you'e getting is crap.

    153. Re:Dear Apple by Elldallan · · Score: 1

      Actually it was never made into a law, EU merely threatened with legislation on the subject and most major phone makers caved but enlighten me, how exactly is Apple in compliance?
      They're still using a different port from everybody else and cross platform compatibility was what the law scare was about, so no they would not have been in compliance.

    154. Re:Dear Apple by Elldallan · · Score: 1

      Yes you do, the entire point of the EU legal threat was cross platform compatibility, i.e. you should be able to take any charger from any maker and be able to plug it into any phone. You still cannot take the wall charger delivered wikth say a Galaxy SIII and charge an iPhone 5 with it, which was the aim of the threat of legislation.

    155. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's handling the funds through hisown website. Why don't you RTFA

    156. Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They include an adapter in those countries.

  2. JUS DOIN ITS JOB !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple takes another one out !!

  3. When you do things that are bad by Threni · · Score: 1
    1. Re:When you do things that are bad by mov_eax_eax · · Score: 1

      this is still true with the current stock price?

    2. Re:When you do things that are bad by zidium · · Score: 1

      At $510, it's ~70 billion away from being supplanted by Exxon Mobile (XOM). I've seen it do those moves in a single day two times in the last month.

      --
      Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
    3. Re:When you do things that are bad by erroneus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That was then. This is now. Apple is already in decline. People are annoyed at the things Apple will not allow. The iPhone 5 is not quite the wait-in-line-for-weeks thing that its predecessors were. The public knows all too well why Apple took away Google maps and that Apple was proven inadequate when it came to selecting a replacement. And the public was very quick to get their old maps back and recognize this as Apple's defeat and humiliation in this. (I know, it sounds a bit too dramatic, but ask around... if you know any iPhone users, see what they have to say about it.)

      MBAs now run Apple. They prefer to make "safe choices" unlike Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs, despite his huge ego and other faults, knew how to excite consumers. These MBAs don't. Safe choices don't excite people. Safe choices is why there are so many movie sequels and remakes instead of new [risky] creative works.

      Apple had it for a while... they don't have it now. It's gone.

    4. Re:When you do things that are bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This sort of junk has killed them before. They at first turned on their own eco system of vendors. Then told them 'go for it'. The second time they killed them it worked out *very* well for apple but that was only because of the iPod. It was very strange they had created a wonderful system of people who were quite enthusiastic to extend the apple system (on their own dime no less!). Lots of people were trying things like this guy with a simple charger. Eventually they got the hint and moved on to the Amiga and then the PC.

      Notice what the 'maker' guys are messing with. It sure is not Apple or even PCs anymore. Its Adriano, raspberry, and beagle. That is where the next round of innovation will come from. Apple will eventually realize you can not polish the brass enough to make people buy their stuff. People are cheap and Apple carries a premium (justified or not). They always had decent products. Just many times there was a comparable 'me too' out there that was cheaper and worked just as well.

      Also since that came out they have gone from 700 to 500. Their shipments are down on the year with no 'must have' in the pipeline. Notice who they are going after Samsung, Motorola, and HTC (they want to limit the me too effect this time and have the cash to back it up). They are looking to keep their walled garden at any cost possible. That will not last, patents do run out eventually and parts vendors like Samsung do remember you.

      Apple is in it for Apple. Apple even at one point turned on Adobe (you know the ones that pretty much kept them afloat). They are a cool company but quite short term suicidal.

    5. Re:When you do things that are bad by Threni · · Score: 1

      > That was then. This is now. Apple is already in decline.

      That was 4 months ago. People have started to become annoyed with Apple in the last two months? People are addicted to Apple.

      > get their old maps back and recognize this as Apple's defeat and humiliation in this.
      > (I know, it sounds a bit too dramatic, but

      Google just brought out a map product for Apple and Apple's sales have again risen far higher than usual - people were holding off buying their products until it was fixed.

      > Apple had it for a while... they don't have it now. It's gone.

      I hope you're right (I'm an Android fan boy, apparently). But I think you're wrong. For now at least the numbers don't lie.

    6. Re:When you do things that are bad by Bogtha · · Score: 5, Insightful

      [Link to "Apple Now Most Valuable Company in History"]

      That was then. This is now. Apple is already in decline.

      By what measurement?

      People are annoyed at the things Apple will not allow.

      People have been annoyed at the things Apple will not allow for years. This is nothing new.

      The iPhone 5 is not quite the wait-in-line-for-weeks thing that its predecessors were.

      Apple just had a record-breaking launch of the iPhone 5 in China last weekend. When the iPhone 5 was first launched, it sold 5 million in its first weekend. The iPhone 4S sold 4 million in its first weekend. The iPhone 4 sold 1.7 million in its first weekend.

      The public knows all too well why Apple took away Google maps

      Because their license was ending and Google's terms weren't acceptable to Apple?

      MBAs now run Apple. They prefer to make "safe choices" unlike Steve Jobs.

      Tim Cook runs Apple. He's actually been running Apple for a long time, long before Steve Jobs died. He's just implemented a major restructuring of Apple's divisions. And you've just got done complaining about the risk Apple took with Maps.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    7. Re:When you do things that are bad by DevilM · · Score: 1
    8. Re:When you do things that are bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That Slashdot article was wrong. Apple sales increase because they released the phone in China which occurred at almost the same time. Google maps release did nothing to increase sales for 5 days after it's release.

      Obviously, a release in China would have a big effect on sales.

      As for people's annoyances, I personally can't say but I do agree in the opinion that Apple is run by MBA who take less risk.

    9. Re:When you do things that are bad by Antarell · · Score: 1

      That was then. This is now. Apple is already in decline. People are annoyed at the things Apple will not allow. The iPhone 5 is not quite the wait-in-line-for-weeks thing that its predecessors were.

      Yes, this. When I purchased my iPhone 4 it was brilliant, and at the time Android really did suck balls. But the iPhone 4s/5 isn't that different really than the 4 so why upgrade? I did upgrade in the end to a Galaxy S3 and it stands out now like the iP4 when it came out.

      Apple haven't just dropped the ball, they have lost it down a drain as well.

    10. Re:When you do things that are bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The numbers indicate that apple sales are dropping. So yes, the numbers don't lie.

    11. Re:When you do things that are bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "in the US". Which by itself is extremely questionable. They also aren't willing to show china, where apple's share is significantly low.

      Article is obviously slanted.

    12. Re:When you do things that are bad by flimflammer · · Score: 2

      Clearly the US represents all iPhone purchases globally.

    13. Re:When you do things that are bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You kids declare Apple is in decline between every product launch. Doesn't it get tiring?

    14. Re:When you do things that are bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The iPhone 5 is not quite the wait-in-line-for-weeks thing that its predecessors were.

      Then it's a good thing that Steve was involved in its design, disproving your theory. Now the iPad Mini, on the other hand, was an idea that Steve shot down. But Forbes is saying that it is turning out to be very popular. Wow. I guess Steve's departure isn't the death of Apple after all.

      The public knows all too well why Apple took away Google maps and that Apple was proven inadequate when it came to selecting a replacement.

      Apple removed Google maps because Apple wrote the Google Maps app for iOS and could not come to an agreement with Google about how to move forward with it. Google did not want to let them add features like turn-by-turn directions without increasing the Google branding, which Apple did not want because it was part of their OS. As a result of this anticompetitive behavior by Google, Google Maps on iOS had stagnated, and was fully three years behind Google Maps on Android. If Apple wanted feature parity with Android, they had a choice: switch data providers or allow a highly Google-branded Maps app. They chose to switch data providers.

      Incidentally, none of the other map software authors could come to an agreement with Google, either, which is why all the Google Maps apps on the store eventually became non-functional when they exceeded a certain number of users. It's not just Apple. Google were being idiots.

      The problem was that Google had a ten year head start at cleaning up their map data. Ten years ago, Google maps was crap. Today, it is one of the most robust data providers out there. There was no possibility of Apple beating Google on day one. The best they could do was to create a maps platform that would be survivable on day one and good going forward, and letting Google (who stood to benefit from Google maps being available everywhere) create a maps app for iOS on their own.

      Apple's big mistake was not shipping Google Maps with the OS and shipping Apple Maps alongside it for a period of time so that they could work out some of the most egregious problems with their map data without alienating users in the meantime. That said, doing so would have had other ramifications. For example, their agreement presumably said that they could not ship new versions of the OS with Google Maps after the agreement ended. If the agreement ended a year later, as various rumor sites have said, that could have unacceptably tied their hands on iOS release schedules or could have forced them to release a minor update that removes Google Maps, either of which would have been very un-Apple-like. Also, there's no guarantee that users wouldn't just continue using Google Maps without giving Apple Maps a real chance, in which case the map data would still have been pretty bad a year later when they had to throw the switch. So they had to choose between pain now or later. They chose now.

      MBAs now run Apple.

      Tim Cook has been basically running Apple for many, many years, and his degree is in industrial engineering. What you're seeing is called confirmation bias.

    15. Re:When you do things that are bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If there was ever a Citation Needed, this is it.

    16. Re:When you do things that are bad by NatasRevol · · Score: 0

      Their shipments are down on the year

      Apparently math isn't your strong suit.

      http://images.apple.com/pr/pdf/q4fy12datasum.pdf

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    17. Re:When you do things that are bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How this got ranked insightful I'll never understand.

    18. Re:When you do things that are bad by TheNinjaroach · · Score: 1

      The iPhone 5 is not quite the wait-in-line-for-weeks thing that its predecessors were.

      You're right.

      My lady friend really wants an iPhone for Christmas. I told her to get the 5th gen, but she decided against it solely for the reason of compatibility. She already has an iPod, several charging cables and a dock connector in her car, and she doesn't want to replace all of them just to have the latest shiney.

      But she does still want an iPhone so she decided on a 4S. Apple can take their new connector and shove it.

      --
      I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
    19. Re:When you do things that are bad by Fnord666 · · Score: 1

      Google just brought out a map product for Apple and Apple's sales have again risen far higher than usual - people were holding off buying their products until it was fixed.

      Or as adamstew pointed out in another article, maybe there was another explanation.

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    20. Re:When you do things that are bad by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      Because their license was ending and Google's terms weren't acceptable to Apple?

      Their license wasn't ending (it still had another year on the clock) and there's been no indication that the terms would have changed if they'd kept the existing license. They couldn't agree to terms when it came to modifying the license to include turn-by-turn navigation.

      No, Apple to away Google maps because they didn't want their competitor to have an officially-endorsed presence on their platform (hence why the extra branding rights weren't acceptable). Now Google is relegated to a third-party app the same as everyone else - and I wonder if Google's mapping app would have been acceptable, if Apple's hadn't been such a joke at launch.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    21. Re:When you do things that are bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By what measurement?

      One may consider the fact that the Galaxy SIII is the most prolific smartphone at the moment to be a bad sign for Apple. For a while the Android ecosystem has been larger, but now a single model has unseated their device. I think as a software ecosystem, Apple remains a more profitable market for developers to target. However, this doesn't mean Apple is in decline, it may simply mean the market is growing faster than Apple's share of it. A lot of people would consider that failure, but I think that viewpoint is one of the things wrong in the tech industry in general.

      Because their license was ending and Google's terms weren't acceptable to Apple?

      Yes, and that represents Apple making a choice that is expressly counter to the best interests of their customer base. Instead, Apple aggressively pursued turning their users into product. This is no different than Google, but Apple jumped to the strategy well before they could even remotely offer a solid experience.

      Tim Cook runs Apple. He's actually been running Apple for a long time, long before Steve Jobs died

      While technically true, I highly doubt Steve was *completely* hands off until probably the last few months of his life. I strongly suspect Tim Cook took advice from Steve very seriously when offered. I think that the iPhone 5 and the iPad mini represent the first two products that are mostly without Steve Jobs guidance at all.

    22. Re:When you do things that are bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's blind fan boy defense like this that makes scrolling to the bottom of the page worth it.

    23. Re:When you do things that are bad by cavebison · · Score: 1

      Apple is already in decline.

      By what measurement?

      By the fact the only person in Apple's history able to drive the company forward is now gone.

    24. Re:When you do things that are bad by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      That Slashdot article was wrong. Apple sales increase because they released the phone in China which occurred at almost the same time. Google maps release did nothing to increase sales for 5 days after it's release.

      Obviously, a release in China would have a big effect on sales.

      As for people's annoyances, I personally can't say but I do agree in the opinion that Apple is run by MBA who take less risk.

      And one of the reasons why the Chinese are buying iPhones is because Apple Maps is better than Google Maps....in China at least

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  4. This again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Haven't we been through this already with third party console controllers?

  5. Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Aranykai · · Score: 1

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there going to be some sort of legislature dictating that cell phone makers use a universal charging standard by this point? Everyone else has managed micro usb, why is it so hard for apple?

    --
    If sharing a song makes you a pirate, what do I have to share to be a ninja?
    1. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by bmo · · Score: 1

      >Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there going to be some sort of legislature dictating that cell phone makers use a universal charging standard by this point?

      You're wrong and not only you are wrong, I have to question what colour the sky is in your world.

      --
      BMO

    2. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by jo_ham · · Score: 0

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there going to be some sort of legislature dictating that cell phone makers use a universal charging standard by this point? Everyone else has managed micro usb, why is it so hard for apple?

      It's not hard for Apple. They have a micro-USB adapter to comply with that requirement. The law doesn't require that the device have a micro-USB connector, just that you are able to connect it to one via some means.

    3. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Reschekle · · Score: 0

      No. There is an industry standard for phone charging that Apple voluntarily agreed to - basically saying all phones will come with a standard charging port (micro-USB). But that standard is essentially pointless because you can be compliant by making an adapter available as an option.

      Apple has a micro-USB-to-Lightning adapter that you can purchase, as an option, for like $30.

    4. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Zocalo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The EU had, and still has, a tacit agreement with equipment vendors to this end in-place, but it's not legally binding and there is no penalty for not following it. Apple signed it, along with most other mobile device equipment vendors, then reneged on their promise and released the Lightning connector anyway. Apple does not care about the environment, it does not care about standards, it does not care about FRAND licensing of its patents, and it sure as hell doesn't care about its customers. Apple cares about making as much money for its shareholders as possible. Period.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    5. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there going to be some sort of legislature dictating that cell phone makers use a universal charging standard by this point?

      You're wrong and not only you are wrong, I have to question what colour the sky is in your world.

      And I feel I should inform you that the skies of Europe are quite similar to those of the US, just with slightly less of the corporate smog.

    6. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      All wrong.

      It is not a law, it is a voluntary agreement.

      The voluntary agreement that Apple signed in on states that the charger has to be universal NOT the device. Apple's chargers ARE universal in that they employ a standard USB type A plug, and they work with any USB type A charger that ships with many electronics.

    7. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by ardiri · · Score: 2, Informative

      no law.. but - everyone except apple agree'd to a universal charger.

      http://www.eubusiness.com/topics/telecoms/mobile-charger/

      seems if you want to stick with apple; your screwed on this one. everyone should just boycott them :)

    8. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by pla · · Score: 4, Funny

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there going to be some sort of legislature dictating that cell phone makers use a universal charging standard by this point? Everyone else has managed micro usb, why is it so hard for apple?

      Apple signed a 2009 agreement with the EU intended to reduce iWaste by having all phones, and even the majority of portable devices in general, all use the same charging standard, via a microUSB connector.

      Apple "satisfied" this pledge by offering a $20 dongle (aka "yet another piece of iWaste you have to carry around and will end up in the landfill when they come out with Lightning v1.1") that converts microUSB to Lightning.

      But hey, Apple users have always had more dollars than sense, so whatever. I really shouldn't even care, since I already voted by sending my dollars to Samsung - But still - C'mon Apple, biggest in the world doesn't do it for you? You that hard up for an extra $20 from people who don't want one of your damned docks?

    9. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, they DID sign it, and now sell a $25 (USD) lightning-to-microUSB adapter (not included!) as their "compliance".

    10. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's included if you buy an iPhone in Europe.

    11. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Beorytis · · Score: 1

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there going to be some sort of legislature dictating that cell phone makers use a universal charging standard by this point? Everyone else has managed micro usb, why is it so hard for apple?

      I remember hearing about a law like that being passed... IN CHINA.

    12. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ah yes, flouting the spirit of the law. Clearly apple is doing good with their compliance again, just like when they released their statement in the UK about Samsung, right? /facepalm

      This is going to come back around and impact them for skirting this law.

    13. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by medcalf · · Score: 1, Informative

      Apple cares about making as much money for its shareholders as possible. Period.

      That is the purpose — the only purpose — of a business.

      Apple signed it, along with most other mobile device equipment vendors, then reneged on their promise and released the Lightning connector anyway.

      Wrong. The agreement does not require that the micro-USB be integrated to the device. An adapter (which Apple provides) is sufficient.

      Apple does not care about the environment,

      Wrong. Apple is a leader in making electronic devices greener, reusing and recycling them, and making its own facilities more environmentally friendly. That sounds like shilling, and it sounds like a press release, but it's nonetheless true. Not high on my list of concerns, personally, but I do hate inaccurate criticism of all kinds.

      it does not care about standards,

      It seems Apple cares about some standards, but not others. In particular, Apple cares about those standards that advance its business by making its customers' lives easier/better when using Apple devices, and not otherwise. And this makes them different from any other company how, exactly?

      it does not care about FRAND licensing of its patents,

      Based on what evidence. As far as I know, Apple patents that have been incorporated into standards have been FRAND licensed. It's just that most of Apple's patents don't get incorporated into industry standards.

      and it sure as hell doesn't care about its customers.

      Actually, I'd argue that Apple cares about its customers deeply. That they continue their astonishing sales and profit growth indicates that their customers agree. I assume you are not one of them, in which case Apple probably only cares about you if it could win you over without losing more of its current or prospective customers. Their performance since about 1998 indicates that they are pretty good judges of that.

      --
      -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
    14. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 1

      It's not the smog you worry about, it's the corporate types flying over in their private jets, dumping their shit on us that's the big problem.

    15. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      It wasn't a law, just an industry agreement. Basically it lets them state "we are in compliance with agreement number FOO" in their marketing.

    16. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or buy the phone in Europe, where the agreement has some force, and the adapter comes with the price of the phone.

      Making your whining moot.

    17. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Bradmont · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Apple cares about making as much money for its shareholders as possible. Period.

      That is the purpose — the only purpose — of a business.

      I seriously never understood this line of reasoning. Because they have a responsibility to their shareholders, corporations are somehow exempt from all moral and ethical responsibility in every other way? That's like saying, "A car's sole purpose is to drive. So it doesn't have to slow down for pedestrians in crosswalks."

    18. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by xaxa · · Score: 1

      It wasn't a law, just an industry agreement. Basically it lets them state "we are in compliance with agreement number FOO" in their marketing.

      IIRC, they were told to sort something out otherwise a law would be made. That's quite a common approach in some European countries.

    19. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      An adapter (which Apple provides) is sufficient.

      You can "keep your end of the bargain" without keeping your end of the bargain. I think most reasonable people-- including those like me who only marginally care about what kind of connector iPhones use-- would call the use of this wacky connector in an age when EVERYONE ELSE has managed to get in line with micro USB to be pretty low.

      And I was not aware that the connector was $25, but thats really nothing short of robbery.

    20. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by xaxa · · Score: 1

      Apple cares about making as much money for its shareholders as possible. Period.

      That is the purpose — the only purpose — of a business.

      I think you'd find few Europeans who'd agree with that.

    21. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Grizzley9 · · Score: 1

      The EU had, and still has, a tacit agreement with equipment vendors to this end in-place, but it's not legally binding and there is no penalty for not following it. Apple signed it, along with most other mobile device equipment vendors, then reneged on their promise and released the Lightning connector anyway. Apple does not care about the environment, it does not care about standards, it does not care about FRAND licensing of its patents, and it sure as hell doesn't care about its customers.

      They provided a free converter Lightning-USB dongle for all EU purchases.

      Apple cares about making as much money for its shareholders as possible. Period.

      They are a corporation, that is their function.

    22. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by larkost · · Score: 1

      Consider yourself corrected: in direct compliance with the EU agreement the micro USB connector is inclued with every relevent European sale for free. This is not true for non-European sales, but it is for sales inside Europe.

      And the landfill thing was mostly about the electronics in the "wall wart" which can include nasty thing since it is a transformer. They really were not that concerned about the wire going to the device.

    23. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by homsar · · Score: 1

      No it's not, or at least not with the one I got in the UK. Maybe there's some mail-in programme to get one, but I saw no details of one either in the box or anywhere online before or since.

    24. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ah yes, flouting the spirit of the law. Clearly apple is doing good with their compliance again, just like when they released their statement in the UK about Samsung, right? /facepalm

      This is going to come back around and impact them for skirting this law.

      You can't flout the spirit of a law unless there's a law. It's a voluntary agreement they entered into, to avoid the threat of a law being pushed through. Also, it's why the adapter is free, in the box when you buy an iPhone in the EU. Open the box, take out the phone. Use the lightning cable, or ANY $1 micro USB cable. Here in the States, you can buy the connector. Where Apple agreed to support Micro USB, it's free. Apple has always eschewed standard USB connections. Original iPods were Firewire based, to transfer music faster. The dock connector used many more pins to allow for additional features they couldn't bolt onto mini-USB.

      But one thing is sure, they won't be penalized for skirting the law, since there is no law.

    25. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by terec · · Score: 1

      That's a European law, and Apple is complying with it by including a USB-to-proprietary adapter in Europe (and probably jacking up the price a little too).

    26. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't understand that line of reasoning because it is wrong. Although making money is the primary purpose of a business, it is NOT the sole purpose.

    27. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      I seriously never understood this line of reasoning. Because they have a responsibility to their shareholders, corporations are somehow exempt from all moral and ethical responsibility in every other way? That's like saying, "A car's sole purpose is to drive. So it doesn't have to slow down for pedestrians in crosswalks."

      Nice hyperbole.

      Being profitable and being "moral or ethical" are not mutually exclusive. You're trying to make them mutually exclusive is why you are having trouble understanding this simple concept.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    28. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Seriously? It's a stupid power connector.

      Let's be honest... The one that is included with the phone is more than adequate for 99.9% of the consumers out there. The cable that comes with the iPhone even plugs into industry standard USB ports including the ones built into most new cars these days.

      Even if the iPhone came with a microUSB port based power cable, most (if not all) of the consumers would just use the cable that came with the phone anyway. So how does this "controversy" rise to the level where we should really give a damn?

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    29. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by firewrought · · Score: 1

      Apple cares about making as much money for its shareholders as possible. Period.

      That is the purpose â" the only purpose â" of a business.

      Oh well. In that case, let's give them a free pass on any lapses of ethical behavior or social consciousness. Heh heh... no need for them to live up to their agreements after all, eh?

      Or, you know... we could point out Apple's crassness to others (especially Apple's core market of naieve-yet-earnest hipsters who actually do care about the environment, etc.). It wouldn't be the first time a company (or Apple itself) changed its stance based on public pressure.

      Incidentally, you're wrong about profit being the sole purpose of a business. Some businesses include explicit humanitarian goals in their corporate charter. And most--while focused on the bottom line--realize that they won't be in business long term if they don't develop good relationships with their employees, customers, suppliers, regulators, and communities.

      --
      -1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
    30. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      I think you'd find few Europeans who'd agree with that.

      If you believe that is true then you really need to step outside of your social circle and meet other europeans. You'll find out that they like being entrepreneurs too. In fact their business savvy is pretty admirable.

      You may be misinterpreting the thinly veiled isolationistic commerce laws that the EU occasionally produce as the region being anti-capitalistic which is pretty far from reality.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    31. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      You forgot to mention that the EU and Chinese version of the iPhone comes with the microUSB adapter free. Only the US customers have to pay $19 for the microUSB adapter.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    32. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by xaxa · · Score: 1

      I think most Europeans would disagree with the "only" part of the statement. A purpose of a business is to make money for shareholders, but it shouldn't be the only purpose.

    33. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anarchduke · · Score: 1
      --
      who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
    34. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      I think you'll find most people on this planet would disagree with the "only" part of the statement. I didn't catch that in the original post.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    35. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple cares about making as much money for its shareholders as possible. Period.

      That is the purpose — the only purpose — of a business.

      I seriously never understood this line of reasoning. Because they have a responsibility to their shareholders, corporations are somehow exempt from all moral and ethical responsibility in every other way? That's like saying, "A car's sole purpose is to drive. So it doesn't have to slow down for pedestrians in crosswalks."

      This is correct. Cars, like Apple, have no moral basis whatsoever and will only robotically do whatever their nature tells them to do. Cars do not have to slow down for pedestrians in crosswalks. People have to make the cars slow down; after all, it's not like the CAR is going to be punished for hitting a pedestrian. Similarly, Apple isn't going to do anything that doesn't have a dollar sign and profit margin attached to it. People have to make them do that.

    36. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 Car Analogy

      Would read again.

    37. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's Apple ifag douchebags's standard defense. If MS or Google does anything remotely like that, they will be tripping over each other roasting them, while masturbating on picture of Steve Job's dead body.

    38. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by macbeth66 · · Score: 1

      Actually, you are quite correct. But only in the EU. In the US, not so.

    39. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Lisias · · Score: 1

      >Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there going to be some sort of legislature dictating that cell phone makers use a universal charging standard by this point?

      You're wrong and not only you are wrong, I have to question what colour the sky is in your world.

      As far as I know, what GP is proposing is the something like NEMA. You know, these things ARE legislated, so I don't see why in hell you think GP must be wrong. If I understand correctly, he thinks smartphones as a so important part of modern life that their charging connectors should be standardized the same way your TV's power chord is.

      I don't know if I agree with GP, but he can be right.

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    40. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Then you're an idiot.

      http://store.apple.com/uk/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone5

      What’s in the box
              iPhone 5 with iOS 6
              Apple EarPods with Remote and Mic
              Lightning to USB Cable
              USB Power Adapter

      Guess what that last thing is?

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    41. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is the purpose — the only purpose — of a business.

      This is not true as a blanket statement. There are plenty of businesses for whom maximizing profit is not their primary goal. There are also plenty of business who have no stockholders at all. Apple is just not one of these.

      In particular, Apple cares about those standards that advance its business by making its customers' lives easier/better when using Apple devices, and not otherwise.

      Actually, only the first part. Apple only cares about standards that they control and can collect royalties on, and only grudgingly adhere to any others, dumping them as soon as they can. Apple is all about as much lock-in as their customers can tolerate, not about what makes customer's lives easier or better.

      And this makes them different from any other company how, exactly?

      This is not universal behavior. Lots of companies are just like Apple in this respect, but lots aren't. Those that are are generally held in lower esteem because of it. amd lots that used to behave this way no longer do so because in the long run it harms their business.

      Actually, I'd argue that Apple cares about its customers deeply.

      This is pure opinion, of course. Here's mine: I've yet to see any indication that Apple cares about its customers at all.

      That they continue their astonishing sales and profit growth indicates that their customers agree.

      That does not follow. That there are a lot of people that buy Apple products does not indicate one way or another whether or not they feel Apple is a well-behaved company. Most of the Apple fans I know, even the die-hard ones, acknowledge that Apple is a bad actor -- but they excuse it using the same argument you've used here: everybody does it.

      Apple's success is because of excellent marketing, not because of their corporate behavior or the quality of their products.

    42. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      This is not true, as far as I'm aware, in the UK. Here, I've heard several people moan about converters not being included since the iPhone 5 release.

    43. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Bradmont · · Score: 1

      Not at all -- I think it's quite possible to be profitable and ethical. But this argument is often (as in this case) used to justify a corporation screwing over everybody whi isn't a shareholder (in this case, the environment, by producing e-waste).

    44. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not if the UK qualifies as Europe. My iPhone came with just the Lightning cable and wall charger.

    45. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Bradmont · · Score: 1

      This is what we call synecdoche -- a part referring to the whole. By speaking of the car, I mean the person driving as well as the mechanical car -- speaking of either separately in this case would be meaningless. Likewise, by speaking of a corporation, I mean the people that make up the corporation, acting as the corporation. Yes, you are technically correct in saying that a car has no moral agency, but without a moral agency (a person) it cannot drive. A corporation cannot make money without people running it. When I say "Apple are jerks," I mean, "the people running Apple are jerks." When someone says, "Apple's sole responsibility is to make money," they are really saying, "The sole responsibility of the people working for apple is to make money." This is not true. Those people have moral responsibility, including when they act on behalf of Apple.

    46. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently, this is a fallacy. See this article:

      http://www.salon.com/2012/04/04/the_shareholder_fallacy/

      It's convenient for CxOs to claim this, but it isn't actually enshrined in corporate law. More people need to know this.

    47. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Serious+Callers+Only · · Score: 1

      This is what the OP was discussing, and it's not included (best check you're right before calling others morans on the internet):

      http://store.apple.com/uk/product/MD820/lightning-to-micro-usb-adapter

      The power adapter is a power adapter with a USB socket (which fits one end of the USB cable supplied), but that doesn't help you if you are someplace else without your special iphone charging cable and wish to plug in your iphone to charge, because the iphone itself will not accept a USB connection without an adapter (which is NOT included in the original package).

      There's no technical reason they had to use a 'lightning' socket, it's simply a play to grab more cash from users upgrading peripherals, and from peripheral manufacturing license agreements. They could easily have used micro usb instead, or even better gone for wireless charging too. So they have ignored the spirit of EU agreement and pissed off a lot of their users by creating yet another locked down adapter. The sort of thing they could get off with when there were no competing devices, but now that Android is pretty much caught up, this sort of thing undermines confidence in Apple.

    48. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no technical reason they had to use a 'lightning' socket,

      Other than the technical reason than USB cannot do all the functions the lighting socket is meant to replace.

    49. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      assuming if they're not obliged to play nice that they'll play nice is being naive

    50. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by gutnor · · Score: 1

      The goal of the unique charger was for the charger part, you know the inefficient black boxes that suck power all the time and the connector to those charger. There is some flexibility for the device-side adaptator. From that point of view, that was a success.

      That's the EU, not China. There is always a lot of flexibility in whatever agreement. Anyway, micro-usb is kind of a shitty format (damn convenient for sure), you would not want all the brand on the market to be saddled with it for all eternity. (imagine if all computers needed to be plugged to the main using a parallel port, that's what micro-usb will look in a few years)

    51. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by fnj · · Score: 1

      I believe you misunderstand the discussion. The fact that the only reason for the existence of a business[*] is making money for the owners/shareholders, while it fundamentally serves as a higher priority than observing morals and ethics, does not preclude any concern at all for morals and ethics. And it most definitely does not exempt anyone from complying with laws (your car analogy).

      [*] Sole propietorships and partnerships aside.

    52. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it is not included. Bought several iPhones, none included the adapter.

    53. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Yet I don't see a case where someone is being screwed over in this case...

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    54. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>Apple cares about making as much money for its shareholders as possible. Period.
      >That is the purpose — the only purpose — of a business.

      Not really true - this is one of the most pervasive misunderstandings of all time. The purpose of a business is to faithfully carry out whatever it says it is going to do when it sells its stock to investors. This doesn't have to be "maximizing shareholder value".

    55. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      I seriously never understood this line of reasoning. Because they have a responsibility to their shareholders, corporations are somehow exempt from all moral and ethical responsibility in every other way?

      It's not quite like that. It's more like: corporations exist to make profit. Therefore, if we want them to act ethically and morally, we have to create a system (via legislation) that makes it profitable for them to act that way. Expecting them to act morally and ethically without that is a mug's game.

      It's essentially the same as the fundamental principles of capitalism: how do we get people to do stuff that's useful for other people? We compensate them, so that we're tapping into the driver of greed instead of the driver of philanthropy, as greed is a more universal and reliable drive than philanthropy.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    56. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Also, it's why the adapter is free, in the box when you buy an iPhone in the EU.

      No. The adapter isn't free in the EU and approximately no one owns one.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    57. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by amorsen · · Score: 1

      They did not provide a free converter Lightning-Micro USB for all EU purchases, or indeed for any EU purchases.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    58. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by amorsen · · Score: 1

      in direct compliance with the EU agreement the micro USB connector is inclued with every relevent European sale for free.

      This misunderstanding is extremely widespread. No micro USB connector is included in the EU (or indeed anywhere, AFAIK).

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    59. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by amorsen · · Score: 1

      You forgot to mention that the EU and Chinese version of the iPhone comes with the microUSB adapter free. Only the US customers have to pay $19 for the microUSB adapter.

      Not mentioning a lie is not called "forgetting", it is called "being truthful".

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    60. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Being profitable and being "moral or ethical" are not mutually exclusive.

      It generally isn't, but there are many circumstances where being more ethical means being less profitable than you otherwise could. And every time a company does that, someone will always come out and say that they're not obligated to be ethical because they have an imperative to be as profitable as possible (i.e. if being unethical is more profitable, they should be unethical).

    61. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by lilrobbie · · Score: 1

      So a needless $25 non-standard connector, and a tech project that was killed because Apple have rules in place basically forbidding the bundling of multiple connectors doesn't sound to you like someone being screwed over?

    62. Re:Wasnt there supposed to be some law passed... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Truth be told... after looking at all the facts... no

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
  6. Wow by bbeesley · · Score: 1

    I had presumed that Apple wanted to have tight control over the lightening connector - that is to say, they wanted to maximize their profit - but geesh!

    Way to act like Veruca Salt!

    1. Re:Wow by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I had presumed that Apple wanted to have tight control over the lightening connector - that is to say, they wanted to maximize their profit - but geesh!

      Way to act like Veruca Salt!

      In what way? Their terms for licensing the "lightening [sic] connector" are well known, and this project started before the iPhone 5 was even released. Somehow it has become a deal breaker for the project, despite the connector not being officially announced when the project began.

      Now the project owner has thrown his toys out of the pram because apparently the built in USB ports on the device will simply make it totally useless and non-viable because Apple denied them a licence for a connector that didn't exist at the start of the project.

      Apple didn't "kill a kickstarter project" - the originator of the kickstarter project killed a kickstarter project.

    2. Re:Wow by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      What's wrong about Veruca Salt, it's a nice band.

    3. Re:Wow by AmIAnAi · · Score: 1

      Thanks, now I've got 'Seether' running on endless repeat in my head ;-)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.
    4. Re:Wow by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The project also didn't know apple would be make a NEW connector for the iPhone5, so their original plan was "make an adapter that works with all current-gen devices". When Apple changed the connector, that new connector became a requirement to meet that goal, which they were unable to do.

    5. Re:Wow by asliarun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I had presumed that Apple wanted to have tight control over the lightening connector - that is to say, they wanted to maximize their profit - but geesh!

      Way to act like Veruca Salt!

      In what way? Their terms for licensing the "lightening [sic] connector" are well known, and this project started before the iPhone 5 was even released. Somehow it has become a deal breaker for the project, despite the connector not being officially announced when the project began.

      Now the project owner has thrown his toys out of the pram because apparently the built in USB ports on the device will simply make it totally useless and non-viable because Apple denied them a licence for a connector that didn't exist at the start of the project.

      Apple didn't "kill a kickstarter project" - the originator of the kickstarter project killed a kickstarter project.

      How biased do have to be to post this? You keep saying over and over again that the connector was not announced when the project was announced. So what? The connector exists today. Apple denied them a license because they do want their connector to coexist with another connector because in their special universe, only apple products exist.

      This level of arrogance is staggering. On top of it, you are not only supporting their arrogance but also trashing a bunch of guys that just wanted to make a simple combo connector. Dude that is pathetic. Apple is a company that makes some great products but are also filled with hubris, and I don't know why you can't let these two thoughts coexist in your head.

    6. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now the project owner has thrown his toys out of the pram because apparently the built in USB ports on the device will simply make it totally useless and non-viable because Apple denied them a licence for a connector that didn't exist at the start of the project.

      Apple didn't "kill a kickstarter project" - the originator of the kickstarter project killed a kickstarter project.

      Read the actual kickstarter page referenced in the summary. He promised it would work with the iphone 5 - it was a reasonable assumption given Apple's terms for licensing the connector for the iphone 4. When he found out he could not live up to his promise - i.e. he could not fulfill his kickstarter contract he had no choice but to cancel the project and start over.

      Your characterization of his decision to not unilaterally change the terms of the kickstarter contract, something that might well get him sued by the people who gave him money under the original terms, as throwing "toys out of the pram" is ridiculous. It was the only responsible choice he had.

    7. Re:Wow by jo_ham · · Score: 2

      I had presumed that Apple wanted to have tight control over the lightening connector - that is to say, they wanted to maximize their profit - but geesh!

      Way to act like Veruca Salt!

      In what way? Their terms for licensing the "lightening [sic] connector" are well known, and this project started before the iPhone 5 was even released. Somehow it has become a deal breaker for the project, despite the connector not being officially announced when the project began.

      Now the project owner has thrown his toys out of the pram because apparently the built in USB ports on the device will simply make it totally useless and non-viable because Apple denied them a licence for a connector that didn't exist at the start of the project.

      Apple didn't "kill a kickstarter project" - the originator of the kickstarter project killed a kickstarter project.

      How biased do have to be to post this? You keep saying over and over again that the connector was not announced when the project was announced. So what? The connector exists today. Apple denied them a license because they do want their connector to coexist with another connector because in their special universe, only apple products exist.

      This level of arrogance is staggering. On top of it, you are not only supporting their arrogance but also trashing a bunch of guys that just wanted to make a simple combo connector. Dude that is pathetic. Apple is a company that makes some great products but are also filled with hubris, and I don't know why you can't let these two thoughts coexist in your head.

      Right! you're getting it!

      * The connector did not exist. The project began, promising support for this non-existent connector, such that denial of use of this non-existent connector is crucial for the product to succeed.

      * The connector was announced.

      * The project promised to add it.

      * Finally, deep in development they discuss licencing with Apple, despite already promising they will include the connector.

      * Apple said no.

      * Project cancelled.

      * Project starter calls Apple "assholes" in official quote.

      Professional, guys. Really professional.

      The only arrogance here is the project owners, who promised something that they could not deliver because they designed and developed something that they did not seek the licences to use until late in the game (or they simply tried to roll the Lightning connector in late in the product cycle),

      Either way it is not Apple's fault that they released a new connector while this project was ongoing. Had they released it later on, would it still be Apple's fault they they changed the connector and now the product is obsolete (despite it having powered USB ports on it)?

      Apple did not "kill" this project - they simply didn't licence a connector design *that did not exist when the project began*.

    8. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that you Steve?

    9. Re:Wow by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Now the project owner has thrown his toys out of the pram because apparently the built in USB ports on the device will simply make it totally useless and non-viable because Apple denied them a licence for a connector that didn't exist at the start of the project.

      Apple didn't "kill a kickstarter project" - the originator of the kickstarter project killed a kickstarter project.

      Read the actual kickstarter page referenced in the summary. He promised it would work with the iphone 5 - it was a reasonable assumption given Apple's terms for licensing the connector for the iphone 4. When he found out he could not live up to his promise - i.e. he could not fulfill his kickstarter contract he had no choice but to cancel the project and start over.

      Your characterization of his decision to not unilaterally change the terms of the kickstarter contract, something that might well get him sued by the people who gave him money under the original terms, as throwing "toys out of the pram" is ridiculous. It was the only responsible choice he had.

      It has USB ports on it, so it would still work with the iPhone 5.

      His choices were a) to ship it as it was originally designed (ie, with no Lightning connector because it didn't exist at the time) and provide the promised iPhone 5 compatibility via the USB ports that were always there, or b) cancel the project and go on record calling Apple "assholes", or c) cancel the project and go back for redesign and don't burn bridges with the technology giant that you want to licence a connector from.

      He chose... poorly.

    10. Re:Wow by jareth-0205 · · Score: 1

      Separate from how this particular guy acted in this situation, don't you think we're in a ridiculous situation where you must beg and plead with Apple to incorporate a *charging connector*. This is technology that every other manufacturer have standardised on, but Apple continue to screw over everyone with their proprietary, *restricted* design.

      Why are we still in the situation that a charging connector has to be licensed, by a company that can say no for any reason? This is silly!

    11. Re:Wow by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      He guessed it would work with the iPhone 5, and guessed wrong.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    12. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it is not Apple's fault that they released a new connector while this project was ongoing.

      Nobody but Apple did that. With open standards available, only Apple thought a new proprietary connector was a good idea.

    13. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please explain to us in what universe it's considered reasonable for Apple to deny licensing their plug for a simple combo charger.

      That is to say, explain to us why it's NOT reasonable for a sane human being — one with feelings, emotions, and everything else that a sane human being should have — to call Apple assholes for that decision. Is it not reasonable for someone to get more than a bit frustrated that Apple is refusing to allow something that should, for all intents and purposes, be considered a fairly standard accessory licensing?

      Hell, even Nintendo — yes, that's right, NINTENDO, of all companies, the same Nintendo that introduced strict console licensing, the same Nintendo that gave us the 10NES chip, the same Nintendo that in the past denied games for any of a stupid variety of similarly stupid reasons, the same Nintendo that essentially INVENTED the same business techniques Apple is using now, yes, THAT Nintendo — doesn't seem to have any problems with companies selling combo plugs for charging the 3DS/DSi nowadays. I've got two right now (a solar battery with an included 3DS plug and a separate USB charging plug). And Apple WON'T allow it with THEIR unique adapter? I mean, they won't even allow this company to pay them money for it? And the makers of this device are the ones being "unprofessional"? Seriously?

      No, please, tell us more stories about how people behave in the magical wonderful iWorld. You could make a fortune publishing what the rest of the world would consider fiction novels.

    14. Re:Wow by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 1

      Jesus, do you wake up every morning and beg for your corporate masters to beat you?

      It's pretty obvious that Apples licensing agreement is "You make a connector just like this and nothing else, ever." There is no 'redesign' that can occur. Burning or not burning the bridge is simply meaningless because Apple is not going to bend.

    15. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To all of us non-sycophants, it is Apple's fault. They're the ones who released a proprietary charger for the sole reason of incompatibility. They do these things on purpose, after all the blind faithful will eat that excrement wholeheartedly even in the face of staggering wrongness, as you have exemplified today.

    16. Re:Wow by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Apple is a company that makes some great products but are also filled with hubris, and I don't know why you can't let these two thoughts coexist in your head.

      This right here basically sums up my dislike of apple products. I can acknowledge that some of them are impressive, but when fanboys come out and insist that "the iPhone is a superior phone for consultants" (despite its lack of physical keyboard or phone buttons, and its historically wonky activesync support) or that $2500 macbooks are superior to $500 laptops thus proving that Apple really is a better value-- it really just kind of makes me hate the entire culture. I see it as having deceived so many consumers into thinking that somehow that all apple products are superior in every way and it cannot be otherwise.

      I was checking out an MS store last night for lulz and to take a peek @ WinPhone (as Ive never seen one) and i overheard several customers saying "surface? thats not as good as an ipad tho is it"? Yea, thats right, lets just assume because it wasnt made by Apple that it must be inferior; who needs to actually TRY the device, just check and see if it has an "i" in its name.

    17. Re:Wow by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Not to become too embroiled with something I havent really researched....

      But if they had promised to make sure their device worked with the Galaxy Note 2 or Lumina 810, noone would have batted an eye. And if the Galaxy S3 had announced that it was going to use a new ultramini-USB, and the project promised to support this "to be released" connector, noone would have thought it strange to promise support for the connector-- because this has never been an issue. Blackberry historically has been a bit wacky about charging (requiring special utils in Linux for example), but noone ever had a problem making a Blackberry compatible charger if they really wanted to. Even laptops-- with an utter lack of standardization-- you can get third-party unsanctioned universal chargers without a problem; you just have to worry about QA.

      The idea that someone will be technically incapable of adding a charging port to a device because you cant secure licencing terms is bizarre, and I cant believe people are defending it. I get that its a reality, that Apple licenses its magsafe and all that jazz, but its bizarre.

      As a Windows / Linux / PC guy, Ive lived in a world where you can always connect device A to device B with enough support from adapters, drivers, and utilties; I can see that theres no technical reason you couldnt run USB over AC house wiring, you just need someone to want to do it bad enough. That we cant do something, not because of technical limits (like having that USB over AC run at 3.0 speeds :P ), but because of LICENSING? I think folks like me find it almost offensive. The ONLY reason to do so is to generate a "monopoly" in that little niche market to drive prices up on a connector for a device that already has absurd profit margins.

    18. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple is trying to create a better connector. If they're successful the connector's superior quality could be a differentiating feature of their products and a way to compete based on superior quality.

      Everyone else is wallowing in the "good enough" standard in the hopes that being interchangeable with everyone else's devices is more valuable than being better than everyone else's devices.

      It may be that Apple has failed on this attempt, but at least they're trying to make better products and compete on quality.

    19. Re:Wow by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Its even worse given how much people already pay for Apple devices. You would think part of the premium Apple price-tag would include being treated well; apparently it does not, and they continue to just gouge you through the product's entire lifecycle.

      Ive seen this when a MacBook's trackpad failed. Apple store wanted like $120 to replace it, which is kind of absurd given that the user paid >$1000 for the device with the faulty part to begin with. When I buy PC parts from a primo vendor like Asus or Logitech (their gaming mice), their support has always been impeccable. Logitech has generally rewarded my patronage with no-questions asked free cross-shipped replacements.

      Why cant Apple do something like that? Why do they have to always be gouging and charging extra?

    20. Re:Wow by andydread · · Score: 1

      All the garbage you posted here is totally missing the point. The point is that Apple is still REFUSING to license it to them. That is the point. Apple is still REFUSING to grant them a license. None of the crap you posted is relevant to the point at hand but I suppose thats your job eh? Winging on and on about when the project was started as oppsed to when the new connector became available is a desperate attempt to deflect the spotlight from Apple's egregious and despicable practices in the marketplace. I Won't be recommnending them or their products to anyone until they change their behaviour in the marketplace.

    21. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple did not deny them a license. Period. Everyone knows that licensing MFI products takes a really long time. These guys gave up before they got an answer back, and just ranted about it, placing all the blame on Apple.

      Yes, it sucks that Apple forces people to go through the process for any sort of accessory, but there aren't enough facts here to really know what happened. It could be that they realized that was really no market for such a thing canned the project and then blamed Apple because they were frustrated with the MFI process.

    22. Re:Wow by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Who says it has to be reasonable?

      That doesn't come into it. The simple fact is they promised something they couldn't deliver because they didn't even approach Apple about licensing until late on. They simply assumed.

      Making assumptions in business is generally a bad idea.

      Apple can have any number of unreasonable restrictions - then it's down to the 3rd party vendors if they want to play in that market. Simply assuming Apple will be reasonable is a risky proposition.

    23. Re:Wow by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      If you note, I'm not defending Apple's decision here - I personally think it's asinine - what I'm talking about is someone making business decisions and making promises that he cannot deliver based on assumptions, which is bad at the best of times but when it relates to something involving Apple it's even more absurd.

      Then when Apple turns out to be inflexible and obtuse (how unexpected) getting all pissy and calling Apple "assholes" in an official quote.

    24. Re:Wow by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      All the garbage you posted here is totally missing the point. The point is that Apple is still REFUSING to license it to them. That is the point. Apple is still REFUSING to grant them a license. None of the crap you posted is relevant to the point at hand but I suppose thats your job eh? Winging on and on about when the project was started as oppsed to when the new connector became available is a desperate attempt to deflect the spotlight from Apple's egregious and despicable practices in the marketplace. I Won't be recommnending them or their products to anyone until they change their behaviour in the marketplace.

      So?

      Apple has the right to do that. They are under no obligation to license their connector. Whether you agree with that or not isn't the point.

      They assumed Apple would say yes. Apple said no. Project starter throws hissy fit.

    25. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      provide the promised iPhone 5 compatibility via the USB ports that were always there

      That is not providing compatibility, that is providing a USB port. You'd still have to carry the special magical cable around with the charger, thus eliminating the entire purpose of that particular charger.

      cancel the project and go back for redesign and don't burn bridges with the technology giant that you want to licence a connector from.

      There's no redesign that is possible, and Apple clearly doesn't want to play ball -- so there's no bridge to burn, either. Calling Apple assholes may be unprofessional, but it is accurate overall and he'll score points for that.

    26. Re:Wow by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Apple has the right to do that. They are under no obligation to license their connector.

      Nobody is saying otherwise. We're just saying Apple is acting like an asshole, not that they don't have the right to act like an asshole.

    27. Re:Wow by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      You should not have to ask permission to create interoperability.

      --
      Good-bye
    28. Re:Wow by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      They should not have that right, and its time we strip the ability to engage in that sort of conduct.

      --
      Good-bye
    29. Re:Wow by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      As of right now, it is a base assumption that the ipad is better due to being common and well received. The RT tab is new with very little common-man buzz or any other social clues for people to work from. This is social comms 101.

      --
      Good-bye
    30. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We get that you're a slimy corporate shill already. Enough. You think Apple can do whatever the fuck they want with no consequence to acting monopolistically, and that's OK. It just makes you a complete fucktard in the eyes of the general tech community.

      But good for you for standing up for your iConvictions.

    31. Re:Wow by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      You should not have to ask permission to create interoperability.

      Why not?

      It's the choice of the owner of the spec/code/device/widget.

      In that case, can I take some GPL code and add it to my device to make it interoperate with some other thing, and make the code closed source. Oh, licences? Forget that. I don;t need to ask permission or anything like that!

    32. Re:Wow by jo_ham · · Score: 0

      We get that you're a slimy corporate shill already. Enough. You think Apple can do whatever the fuck they want with no consequence to acting monopolistically, and that's OK. It just makes you a complete fucktard in the eyes of the general tech community.

      But good for you for standing up for your iConvictions.

      What was that, kid? The adults were talking.

    33. Re:Wow by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      And it is the choice of society to allow or deny behavior when selling to the public. It is a simple matter of telling Apple, 'if you want to continue to operate in this market, provide standard based connections, provide easy licensing for anyone that asks, or lose your ability to sell to the public.' There are a billion examples of us telling companies to change how they do things for the benefit of society.

      --
      Good-bye
    34. Re:Wow by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Simply assuming Apple will be reasonable is a risky proposition.

      That does not stop the rest of us from complaining about them being unreasonable assholes.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    35. Re:Wow by amorsen · · Score: 1

      In that case, can I take some GPL code and add it to my device to make it interoperate with some other thing, and make the code closed source. Oh, licences? Forget that. I don;t need to ask permission or anything like that!

      Your straw man is ridiculous. What you CAN do, legally mandated, is reverse engineer software for the purpose of interoperability. You cannot just copy the code, but you can reverse engineer it and reimplement something with the same functionality.

      If there is only one way to code a specific task, you are even allowed to have your code match the original code exactly. See Lexmark Int'l v. Static Control Components. In that case you can precisely "take some GPL code and add it to my device to make it interoperate with some other thing, and make the code closed source."

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    36. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy blinded fanboi, Batman!

    37. Re:Wow by lilrobbie · · Score: 1

      While I respect that you aren't necessarily defending Apple... "assholes" sounds about right. By saying that "he should have known better", your basically saying that its ok for Apple to behave the way they did. Legally, sure... they can do that. Business-wise, we all know why they do it. From a customer stance though, it is utter crap, and Apple should be attacked for this.

      By blaming the kickstarter guys, you're letting Apple get off the hook. If they had said "fine"... this never would have been a problem.

    38. Re:Wow by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      While I respect that you aren't necessarily defending Apple... "assholes" sounds about right. By saying that "he should have known better", your basically saying that its ok for Apple to behave the way they did. Legally, sure... they can do that. Business-wise, we all know why they do it. From a customer stance though, it is utter crap, and Apple should be attacked for this.

      By blaming the kickstarter guys, you're letting Apple get off the hook. If they had said "fine"... this never would have been a problem.

      I'm blaming them both - Apple is shooting itself in the foot here (although as of today they have actually reversed the decision and granted them a licence), but also the project owners who pushed ahead with a business idea, raised funding, developed a prototype etc without making sure that all of their ducks were in a row first. They then pushed all the blame for the project being threatened on Apple, even calling them assholes, because they didn;t plan ahead and just made assumptions.

      Apple should never have said no (and has now said yes), but they absolutely should not have gambled on that. They should have got all of that sorted before taking money and going into prototype stage.

  7. Two words: by plaukas+pyragely · · Score: 2

    Walled garden. That is all.

    1. Re:Two words: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call it "The Outside of the Asylum".

    2. Re:Two words: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call it "The Outside of the Asylum".

      We'd have SCSI ports on our phones if it depended on this lot.

  8. I simply don't understand it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can buy all 3 of these connectors and a multi purpose USB/AC block for about 6 dollars from Amazon. It seems like a dim witted project from the get-go.

    1. Re:I simply don't understand it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the high-capacity battery? Did you figure that into your 6 dollars?

    2. Re:I simply don't understand it... by jo_ham · · Score: 2

      What about the high-capacity battery? Did you figure that into your 6 dollars?

      http://www.amazon.com/capacity-portable-External-Motorola-Blackberry/dp/B008S4QR2U/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&qid=1356098608&sr=8-13&keywords=high+capacity+battery

      Add about $15 for the battery.

    3. Re:I simply don't understand it... by sglewis100 · · Score: 1

      Way to link to something just under 1/5th the capacity and with inferior electronics that pushes out a maximum 1amp, you know, a little under half what's required to charge the iPad at regular charging speed. But yeah, it's cheaper.

    4. Re:I simply don't understand it... by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Way to link to something just under 1/5th the capacity and with inferior electronics that pushes out a maximum 1amp, you know, a little under half what's required to charge the iPad at regular charging speed. But yeah, it's cheaper.

      That's my point. There are much cheaper products that do "well enough" what this very expensive ($150) device does. It's no different to Apple vs PC (expensive vs cheaper for similar tasks) or Mercedes vs Ford, but the crucial difference is that market research has been done in the latter cases.

      In the former case, he overpromised on something he had no guarantee he could deliver, at a high price, without checking with Apple first. He assumed that Apple would say yes. A dangerous thing to assume with Apple who are not known for their easygoing nature with third party vendors.

    5. Re:I simply don't understand it... by sglewis100 · · Score: 1

      I don't see how what you linked to was well enough. It doesn't have enough juice to charge an iPad, and has a weak enough output to charge at half the speed on top of that. It also can't charge more than one device at a time, and has questionable recharge time for it's own batteries. For many uses, including mine, it's not NEARLY well enough. I travel with enough supplies to charge two iPads via wall power at full speed, and enough battery juice to charge one of them outright off battery. Two AA batteries really doesn't do much of anything for me.

  9. Fruitmentarianism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Must follow The Leader.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_The_Simpsons#Movementarians

  10. Again? by gagol · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Apple is hell-bent to keep its customers by the balls, the customers develop feelings for the entity... Stockholm syndrome anyone?

    --
    Tomorrow is another day...
    1. Re:Again? by iamhomeless · · Score: 1

      Apple is a cult, customers refuse to accept the possibility that the device is less than optimal in any way, and will attack you if you utter anything bad about the great JOBS

    2. Re:Again? by grenadeh · · Score: 1

      Stockholm syndrome has been the case with not only apple but most consumer-electronics companies for years. Especially with the entire gaming industry and companies like capcom.

    3. Re:Again? by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Millions of people lined up and camped out in droves in order to buy a product that proves that they "think different" and that they are not consumer drones like those people with that other brand of product.

      Steve Jobs could have had penguins lining up to buy ice cubes.

      --
      This space available.
    4. Re:Again? by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 1

      I don't understand how Steve Jobs kept his childhood story out of Helter Skelter

    5. Re:Again? by fermion · · Score: 1
      And this is why it is dumb to build anything for electronics that is based on any connector other than USB. USB has become the standard for charging. There was a time when one bought a charging device and it came with 50 different adaptors. The world is different now. Except for certain situations, a charging device should just have a USB port, and the consumer plugs whatever cord they need, be it a dock connector, a lighting connector, that silly thing nintendo uses, whater. That is a universal charger. Most devices come with a cord. Anything that has cords is not a universal charger, but limited charger that will be obsolete when the device changes. If this device were put out six months ago, it would immediately be obsolete for iPhone.

      It is even more dumb. You are asking me to pay for licensing for a cord that I do not even need. If I am am never going to use the dock connector, when am I paying Apple for one?

      Here is how it could have been designed. Build a USB port into each of four spindles. Allow the user to supply whatever cables they need, and allow them to install them into the spindles. if a user have four android phones, then they can use those cables. No paying for licenses you don't need.

      I suspect that this project was not going to be hugely successful in the first place, and they are simply blaming apple. If they had a working product, they would have simply provided an extra couple USB ports and shipped it.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    6. Re:Again? by TheNinjaroach · · Score: 1

      You're painting with a very wide brush there, homeless guy. Are all iPhone owners rabid Apple fans? Do all Windows users think Microsoft makes the best software?

      --
      I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
    7. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple is hell-bent to keep its customers by the balls

      For sufficiently small values of hell-bent, apparently, as Apple has already reversed its position on this. I'm not defending the original position,but for this to happen so quickly it seems more likely that this issue never got very high up the chain, and somebody was just doing what they thought was their job. It still seems dumb to have rejected it originally, but at least it's a little bit more understandable.

  11. Private Company by StealthPanda · · Score: 1

    Apple isn't a private company. It is subject to its shareholders. Though I suppose it is private in the "private vs. government" sense...
    They have always gone the route of killing off anything that I, personally, might find useful to purchase. Looks like they are keeping the streak alive.

    1. Re:Private Company by darkfeline · · Score: 1

      Nitpicking, but Apple is privately owned, and publicly held/traded: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_held_company#Privately_owned_enterprise

  12. I'm confused... by Geraden · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Since just about everything uses USB cables these days, anyhow, why is anyone bothering with designing chargers targeted towards a specific device or family of devices? Just put a USB A receptacle on there, and call it done! Let the licensing be taken care of by those who make cables.

    Oh, and one thing I'm NOT confused about is Apple's strategy....screw you, Apple. I'm sick of paying for products that you need to have an apple computer to program for... for an OS that only runs on your hardware, despite having the ability to run just about anywhere ... for products that don't have user-serviceable batteries...and for your stupid, non-compliant connectors. I bought my last apple product 5 years ago, and I haven't looked back.

    1. Re:I'm confused... by terec · · Score: 1

      Regular USB ports don't have enough power. Many USB chargers deliver extra power over regular USB connectors and cables, but regular connectors and cables cannot transmit arbitrary amounts of power safely. Also, people like to be able to dock and get power, audio, and video without having to connect extra cables. USB 3 provides pretty good answers to all of these issues (audio and video could just be transmitted via the USB protocol). Let's hope the next generations of phones and tablets offer USB 3.

    2. Re:I'm confused... by Myopic · · Score: 2

      Yes! High five, brother. I also gave up on Apple five years ago. It was a sad day because Macs are all I'd ever owned ever since my first LC III in middle school. I'm still coasting on my MacBook Pro, but I gave up on iPods (Android now), gave up on iPads (I have a Transformer), and gave up on desktop Macs (bought a Linux PC).

      What pushed me over the edge? Apple intentionally crippled their iPods to require $49.99 Apple-branded video cables whereas the previous generation of iPod accepted video cords that cost six cents (literally, not figuratively, six cents). I knew the good behavior from Apple was over, I foresaw the future, and I went to greener pastures. I sure wish I could go back to Apple and enjoy their nice shiny products but alas that would make me feel like a schmuck.

    3. Re:I'm confused... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      This is a device made by someone who thought they could make money by proposing a "universal" charging station on Kickstarter. People who know better would just go to their local retail store and look over the complete selection of USB power adapters (both wall outlet and handy battery extender versions).

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    4. Re:I'm confused... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The device had two usb ports in it, plus storage space for additional cables. Point is they promised a built in cable and took money for that, and unlike politicians when they couldn't deliver they gave the money back.

    5. Re:I'm confused... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Other than the new iPod nano and the iPad, you can replace all of the batteries in Apple products. Sure there's no battery door, but it's as easy as popping the back off with a screwdriver and swapping out the battery. I've done it in about 10 minutes on a couple of iPhones, a MBP, etc.

      Nothing I own that has batteries in it takes more than ten seconds to change and none need any tools whatever to do it.

      You mindless fanboys (shills?) amuse the hell out of me! You make excuses for a goddamned faceless corporation! WTF? It's a bad design and there's no rational argument to the contrary.

    6. Re:I'm confused... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Nothing I own that has batteries in it takes more than ten seconds to change and none need any tools whatever to do it.

      Ah, the kids are all grown up and out of the house, eh?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    7. Re:I'm confused... by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

      Other than the new iPod nano and the iPad, you can replace all of the batteries in Apple products. Sure there's no battery door, but it's as easy as popping the back off with a screwdriver and swapping out the battery. I've done it in about 10 minutes on a couple of iPhones, a MBP, etc.

      Nothing I own that has batteries in it takes more than ten seconds to change and none need any tools whatever to do it.

      You mindless fanboys (shills?) amuse the hell out of me! You make excuses for a goddamned faceless corporation! WTF? It's a bad design and there's no rational argument to the contrary.

      So, 10 minutes every 2 or 3 years vs 10 seconds.

      For that I get a machine with no battery door and a bigger battery? Worth it.

      No "excuses", simply a different design philosophy.

      You haters simply can't exist without something rage against to define yourselves. It must be exhausting.

      No it's more like when my phone runs out of battery, I can't just drop in another one and keep going. I can't have a battery in my car that I can just swap over to when I'm on the go.

      My old iPaq did this perfectly back in the day - it had a Li-Polymer and Ni-MH reserve. When the battery got low you could just eject the Li-Polymer battery and swap it with one docked in the charger. 10 seconds and you were good for another 24 hours.

      With my iPhone I have to carefully plan my app usage, and I basically expect to run out of power pretty much daily (late afternoon).

    8. Re:I'm confused... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Actually, yes, but toys and remotes are very similar and take the same kinds of batteries. The only device I've ever owned that needed a tool and took more than a few seconds is a car.

    9. Re:I'm confused... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      LOL, someone who points out that a device's "feature" or design is a poor one is a hater? You fanbois are hilarious!

    10. Re:I'm confused... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Actually, yes, but toys and remotes are very similar and take the same kinds of batteries. The only device I've ever owned that needed a tool and took more than a few seconds is a car.

      All kids toys these days have battery compartments that are locked down by a screw. Usually a phillips, sometimes a Torx. Often recessed in a shaft that requires just the right kind of jeweler's screwdriver to reach.

      A car battery is trivial by comparison. :)

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    11. Re:I'm confused... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Things change, I guess; my youngest is 25. They're probably worried the kids will choke on the batteries. But harder to change than a car battery?

    12. Re:I'm confused... by rjstanford · · Score: 1

      With my iPhone I have to carefully plan my app usage, and I basically expect to run out of power pretty much daily (late afternoon).

      Or you can simply plug in an external battery that fast-charges the internal one in a matter of minutes (during which time your phone is ever so slightly thicker). Or leave it attached, providing case-like protection, and have the option to remove the phone and have a smaller lighter device when you need it to.

      The reality is that the vast majority of people never swap batteries in their phones. Most people never even replace them once. For those who need extra capacity for an iPhone there are many nice, reasonably priced solutions available for basically the cost of an extra battery, that weigh about as much as an extra battery so are no harder to carry around.

      Optimize for the common case, handle the uncommon case gracefully. What is the problem here exactly?

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
  13. apple is a public company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    just saying

  14. what were they thinking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I cannot believe they even tried.

    Apple is not another cell phone company. It is the only cell phone company. Actually, they do not even make cell phones, they don't even make iPhones, they make THE iPhone, which is a completely different product aimed at a completely different market not to be confused with the ordinary communication devices made by other companies.

  15. I call bullshit by DevilM · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Here you have an article where no statement was included from Apple including the purported response this company got. Then the CEO goes on to call Apple assholes. Who knows what really happened.

    I for one wouldn't license my IP to someone who calls me an asshole.

    1. Re:I call bullshit by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Yeah because that new connector is so special it needs to be protected.

      There is nothing novel in their connectors.

      It's a bunch of wires and some bog standard locking mechanismas.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    2. Re:I call bullshit by djrosen · · Score: 1

      Call me whatever you want as long as you are paying me. Money heals all wounds. Sticks and stones....

    3. Re:I call bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would guess that the asshole part came after Apple said "no you cannot make stuff that works with our stuff"

      I would have though something like connectors were automatically exempt from any IP/patent issues,
      as in can't write apple on it or outright copy the design but you are free to make a connector that fits and works

    4. Re:I call bullshit by alen · · Score: 1

      unlike plain USB the nice thing about it is that you can plug it into your idevice any way. you don't have to line it up correctly like you do with USB. the pins are interchangable so if you need to say charge your iphone at night and its dark and you just want to plug it in the dark, you just plug it in any way the connector is facing. no need to turn it the right way like with the old one or USB

    5. Re:I call bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only real novelties one could have in a connector are size and ability to insert it with out a notion of upside and downside...both of which Apple changed.

    6. Re:I call bullshit by jittles · · Score: 1

      unlike plain USB the nice thing about it is that you can plug it into your idevice any way. you don't have to line it up correctly like you do with USB. the pins are interchangable so if you need to say charge your iphone at night and its dark and you just want to plug it in the dark, you just plug it in any way the connector is facing. no need to turn it the right way like with the old one or USB

      I wouldn't give up compatibility with all my existing docks just to be able to do that. If I can't plug it in in the dark, I flip it around and plug it in the second time. No big deal at all. And don't mention an adapter to me because the plug itself is not the only way they broke compatibility. I have a dock that works with anything iPhone 4 or older, but not with anything iPhone 4S or newer. That includes the new iPod models as well.

    7. Re:I call bullshit by jkrise · · Score: 1

      So fine, Apple has designed a novel powering device with a non-standard connector. But what sort of intellectual property protection mechanism is Apple using to protect others from offering the same functionality at a reduced price? Is Apple's desire to make more profits more of a priority to protect, rather than the desire of customers to obtain low cost products?

      What if Apple stops manufacturing a connector that works on old models, forcing buyers to discard their entire device and buy a new one?

      --
      If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
    8. Re:I call bullshit by NIK282000 · · Score: 1

      Really, they had to add that? Who can't figure out a USB connector in the dark? Try it one way then flip it over and try again then flip it over and try its 4th dimensional rotation and plug it in. How hard is that?

      --
      Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
    9. Re:I call bullshit by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      So fine, Apple has designed a novel powering device with a non-standard connector. But what sort of intellectual property protection mechanism is Apple using to protect others from offering the same functionality at a reduced price? Is Apple's desire to make more profits more of a priority to protect, rather than the desire of customers to obtain low cost products?

      I don't think Apple minds if people get low cost products. But Apple _does_ mind if people buy low cost products to plug into their iPhones or iPads, the cheap product doesn't work, and Apple gets the complaints. That's what the licensing is about. It seems that the project starter couldn't convince Apple that he would sell things that people won't complain about to Apple.

    10. Re:I call bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm going to go ahead and assume that you're not a CEO, then.

    11. Re:I call bullshit by Myopic · · Score: 1

      I'm truly wondering how you could possibly think there would be a statement from Apple. Seriously, are you expecting this?

      "Hi, we're Apple. Fuck these cord folks, they can eat a dick. We will never allow them to build their product because fuck 'em, that's why. PS Android can eat our buttholes."

      or

      "Hi, we're Apple. These cord folks can't license our 'property' because we are illegally conspiring against competing products. Sorry, we'll loosen up when we absolutely have to like in the glory days of 1998-1999. Remember those days? With USB and open source and all that good stuff? Yeah, man, good memories. Hey would you like to buy an iPhone in yet another size?"

    12. Re:I call bullshit by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      The only problem with your "nerd rage" is that having a common power cable to mobile phones is a very recent thing. I have a fairly recent feature phone made by Samsung that I purchased for my wife and a Nokia feature phone that I purchased for my father. The samsung phone has a flat wide power connector that won't fit any other phone, and the Nokia has a tiny coaxial connector that will only work on their phones.

      Civilization has survived so far and mobile phones have progressed without a standardized power connector. Ironically, the one manufacture of mobile phones that not only raised the state of the art of smart phones but made it a huge commercial success is the same company that you vent your nerd rage towards.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    13. Re:I call bullshit by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      What if Apple stops manufacturing a connector that works on old models, forcing buyers to discard their entire device and buy a new one?

      That's what you have consumer protection laws for. In the EU, when you buy a product it has to be free of defects for a reasonable amount of time. Not being able to buy a replacement for a broken charger for example would be a pretty big defect. Actually, it might be normal for a charger to break after some time, but not being able to buy a new one would not be normal.

    14. Re:I call bullshit by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

      Here you have an article where no statement was included from Apple including the purported response this company got. Then the CEO goes on to call Apple assholes. Who knows what really happened.

      I for one wouldn't license my IP to someone who calls me an asshole.

      Truly. This is another torches and pitchfork reaction where we learn the truth later, or Apple responds positively after getting a few things sorted out. But by then everyone's negative attitude is ingrained, waiting for the next over reaction. We're talking about a piddly project and a phone connector on a device that the haters say they will never buy anyway. This has gotten way out of control.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    15. Re:I call bullshit by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      no need to turn it the right way like with the old one or USB

      You mean like the Northern European, Southern European, American ungrounded, Swiss ungrounded, older Soviet, Italian, electric shaver and countless other power plugs in existence?

      Or any of the circularly symmetric power plugs.

      The idea of orientation independent plugs is very very very not new.

      The idea of auto sensing rotations is also very very very not new (old IDE disks used to do it to warn you if you'd put the cable in upside down).

      It's not hard to do: most (all?) hotplug devices connect the power first to prevent damage. One can choose which way to flip your multiplexer depending on the polarity of the power. It is really not hard and really not a new idea.

      So, the idea and the electronics are not new. And people have been whining about it with USB plugs for years. About the only thing Apple brings to the table that's new is that they're big enough to ba able to afford to not follow the USB spec and come out with a manufacturer specific custom plug.

      Do you believe that is worthy of a patent?

      Because to me it seems like a trivial patent in order to haev a licensing monopoly on a particular, unremarkable design of connector.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    16. Re:I call bullshit by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      Yeah because that new connector is so special it needs to be protected.

      There is nothing novel in their connectors.

      It's a bunch of wires and some bog standard locking mechanismas.

      Wrong. The pins are all programmable.

    17. Re:I call bullshit by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Most micro-usb connectors have little teeth on the wide metal side that make it easy to know the alignment in the dark. It's not ideal by any means but it does make things a bit easier.

    18. Re:I call bullshit by jittles · · Score: 1

      The only problem with your "nerd rage" is that having a common power cable to mobile phones is a very recent thing.

      I wasn't aware that I was experiencing nerd rage. I was just merely commenting on the fact that the lightning connector has no advantage in my opinion, and that Apple has done many things to break compatibility with their own accessories over the past ~2 years. I am not commenting on the power adapters of any brand but Apple's. And that has been the same since the original iPod came out (well now with USB instead of firewire only). So I'm not sure what your father's Nokia or your wife's Samsung phones have anything to do with Apple's 30-pin to lightning bolt switch that I am discussing.

    19. Re:I call bullshit by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      Well, you shouldn't be a businessman if you base your decisions on such petty nonsense.

    20. Re:I call bullshit by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Sorry. That reply was more appropriate for a different comment. I suffered two "senior moments" where the first was clicking on the wrong "reply to this" and the second being that I don't remember what I was replying to now.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    21. Re:I call bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't the Nokia also have a micro USB socket that can be used to charge it? My mum has got a new Nokia with the Nokia charger connector and a micro USB socket and her previous Nokia also had a micro USB that could be used for charging.

    22. Re:I call bullshit by jittles · · Score: 1

      No worries. :) It certainly would be nice if the EU had called Apple to task and made them add a microUSB port to their phones. I for one look forward to the day that I can borrow anyone's cable to charge my phone/tablet. Oh well, maybe some day.

    23. Re:I call bullshit by amorsen · · Score: 1

      EU consumer protection laws are generally no help if the product is older than 2 years.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    24. Re:I call bullshit by sdsucks · · Score: 1

      .. and some relationships are simply not worth the hassle.

      How much $$ can this guy be worth to Apple? Not enough to even make it worth responding to his whining.

    25. Re:I call bullshit by sdsucks · · Score: 1

      .. and some relationships are simply not worth the hassle.

      How much $$ can this guy be worth to Apple? Not enough to even make it worth responding to his whining.

      Actually, I can even back that up with an occurrence from this week. I had an salesperson nearly quit because of abuse like this from a customer causing them a lot of stress. I told the customer to take their business elsewhere. It was not a small customer, but they were not worth the hassle anymore.

      Business is best done in a mutually beneficial relationship with respect between partners. When it diminishes to the level of name calling, count me out. I'm far from that desperate. We don't need to be friends, or even like one another, but civility is necessary.

      The chances of me doing business with anyone who called me or any of my employees an asshole are near zero.

    26. Re:I call bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if Apple stops manufacturing a connector that works on old models, forcing buyers to discard their entire device and buy a new one?

      That's the whole point from the get-go.

    27. Re:I call bullshit by Volguus+Zildrohar · · Score: 1

      I'm glad I'm not the only one who experiences this. Why won't they ever plug in correctly the first time?

      --
      When confronted with one problem, some think "I'll use recursion". Now they are confronted with one problem.
    28. Re:I call bullshit by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Wrong. The pins are all programmable.

      It's people like you that are wrong with the system. Because you assume you haven't heard of something then it must be new.

      Even the cleapest PIC12F675 has 6 out of 8 pins pretty much fully reprogrammable as input, output, analog in and PWM out.

      Again, sticking polarity detection and GPIO on a plug is not new or non obvious.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    29. Re:I call bullshit by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      Wrong. The pins are all programmable.

      It's people like you that are wrong with the system. Because you assume you haven't heard of something then it must be new.

      Even the cleapest PIC12F675 has 6 out of 8 pins pretty much fully reprogrammable as input, output, analog in and PWM out.

      Again, sticking polarity detection and GPIO on a plug is not new or non obvious.

      No, it's people like YOU that are wrong with the system - calling names because you disagree. I didn't say it was new; I was responding to the OP who said "there was nothing special about the wires" to which I pointed out that there is. I didn't say it was the first to be that way.

  16. As if... by Jawnn · · Score: 1

    ...I needed yet another reason not to ever buy an Apple product. Still... Thanks, Apple, for solidifying my resolve completely.

    1. Re:As if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah! Stick it to those corporate bastards! Down with the evil mega-corp! I'll show 'em, I'm going to buy Samsung devices instead!

    2. Re:As if... by peppepz · · Score: 1

      Indeed, they let you charge over microusb without extorting from you 19 € for the privilege.

    3. Re:As if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True except for Galaxy Tab. Oops, that has a connector that looks like... well... looks like a 30 pin dock connector.

    4. Re:As if... by Myopic · · Score: 1

      I'll go back to Apple (five years 'clean') after they apologize for their actions. This is the same standard I use for Microsoft (successfully never bought a single thing from them) and the Republican party.

    5. Re:As if... by peppepz · · Score: 1

      In that case the adapter comes for free in the box, no € 19 involved.

  17. lol by grenadeh · · Score: 2

    Hey look, Apple is being Apple. How shocking.

  18. Why would they need Apple for any of this? by Kergan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I fail to see how or why this Kickstarter project could possibly need a license from Apple for any of this to work. They could build it with a bunch of USB slots and toss in a disclaimer: "cables not included." There, problem solved.

    Or am I missing something obvious?

    1. Re:Why would they need Apple for any of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or am I missing something obvious?

      Yes.

    2. Re:Why would they need Apple for any of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I fail to see why this story isn't about patent reform.

    3. Re:Why would they need Apple for any of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The whole point is not having to depend on your having a cable.
      And on the cables being retractible.

    4. Re:Why would they need Apple for any of this? by Myopic · · Score: 1

      Yes. You are missing that they weren't trying to sell a USB hub. The world already has a lot of USB hubs. So, you are missing that this is a different product than the one you described.

    5. Re:Why would they need Apple for any of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, you`re too fucking stupid to know what a universal charger is, and you missed THE ENTIRE FUCKING ARTICLE. Just kill yourself.

    6. Re:Why would they need Apple for any of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, they could do that. But folks put up money based on the other idea. It may be actual integrity. It does throw me off a bit, accustomed to the daily assaults from FB, instagram, etc.

      I think if electricity were invented today, homes would be built on different systems based on who we buy from.
      We would need adapters for our refrigerators when we move.
      Unless we made the mistake of buying the Apple fridge, I suppose.
      Then folks would argue what?
      Well Apple is in business to make money, so shut up and buy another refrigerator.
      Or is the problem you are too poor? Then you should stick with cheap windows refrigerators.

    7. Re:Why would they need Apple for any of this? by chrismcb · · Score: 1
      Part of the point of the product was to include the cables.

      Beautifully designed high capacity charger with built-in retractable cords that will power an iPad, iPhone, Android & more

    8. Re:Why would they need Apple for any of this? by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      Why? What does patent reform have to do with this?

    9. Re:Why would they need Apple for any of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The port they want to license is patented, right? Do companies have the right to request unreasonable fees or refuse the license to others?

  19. What IP is Apple using to stop this? by argoff · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Because in the USA, at least, you can't patent an interface. You can patent all sorts of other stuff, but interface patents are one of the few things you can't patent? That's why AMD and Compaq were able to waltz in and kick IBM's and Intel's ass when it came to pin-socket compatible PC's.

    1. Re:What IP is Apple using to stop this? by crabbz · · Score: 1

      I'm wondering the same thing. If they can figure out how to supply power to the port why do they need a license? The whole thing is kind of sad.

    2. Re:What IP is Apple using to stop this? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 3, Informative

      There's an authentication chip in the cables. The iPhone will refuse to charge if it can't handshake with the chip in the cable. To make a compatible cable you'd need to duplicate the chip, which is apparently hard.

    3. Re:What IP is Apple using to stop this? by Myopic · · Score: 1

      Is that actually true, or is it only true in the same way that you "can't patent obvious ideas"?

    4. Re:What IP is Apple using to stop this? by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      You can trademark a connector name, just like USB is trademarked. If you want to use the USB logo, you have to meet requirements and get a license (see usb.org for details). Apple owns the Lightning trademark on connectors. You want to call it a lightning connector? You need a license from Apple.

    5. Re:What IP is Apple using to stop this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not an authentication chip, and never has been. It's a chip used to negotiate the pin-out which the device at the other end of the connection needs to use.

    6. Re:What IP is Apple using to stop this? by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      Seriously? Do you have a citation or link or something for that? (I've never heard of this before. I'm not terribly surprised, but would like to read about it)

      If true, my already pretty bad view of Apple just got worse. :P

    7. Re:What IP is Apple using to stop this? by erice · · Score: 1

      Because in the USA, at least, you can't patent an interface. You can patent all sorts of other stuff, but interface patents are one of the few things you can't patent? That's why AMD and Compaq were able to waltz in and kick IBM's and Intel's ass when it came to pin-socket compatible PC's.

      Exactly! It's so great being able to use AMD processors in Intel motherboards!

      Oh, wait... That hasn't be true for about 15 years. 'Ever since Intel started patenting their CPU sockets.

    8. Re:What IP is Apple using to stop this? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      I got that from this article on Ars Technica which states it's an authentication chip and claims "manufacturing sources" have found it difficult to duplicate. But it doesn't say who is trying to duplicate them, I suppose to avoid them getting sued by Apple. Wikipedia also states that it's an auth chip twice and provides two different citations. Reading the citations and clicking through links, you end up here which is an article on Apple Insider that also repeats this claim.

      Now I'm looking closer at all the sources and citations that are claiming this, it's not really clear to me if the chip is indeed designed to engage in some kind of auth protocol, or if it's just that nobody actually knows what it does and so people assumed it must be for auth. It seems like it's at least responsible for pin routing, whether it does more is unclear. Given the licensing requirements and Apples love of squeezing customers for fat accessory profits, it's not an unreasonable assumption, but as far as I can tell nobody has fully reverse engineered the chip. The Chinese manufacturers aren't stupid so I'd think if the chip was doing something trivial it'd have been cloned by now, but it seems no-one knows for sure.

  20. Fishy by Bogtha · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They took money for a product they didn't know if they could build, then when it turns out they couldn't, instead of slightly modifying the design by including a female USB port, they set customers up with accounts on their Kickstarter competitor to refund them. This looks pretty much like they changed their mind about building it if favour of pivoting their business to go into crowd funding, and decided to use Apple hate to grab users and publicity.

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    1. Re:Fishy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, Apple is really easy to hate.

    2. Re:Fishy by Myopic · · Score: 1

      Yeah, totally, except for not at all.

      "it turns out they couldn't [build it]"

      No, it didn't turn out they couldn't build it, it turned out Apple wouldn't let them build it. They easily could have built it, it's a simple matter of a few wires and molded plastic. "Building it" wasn't the problem here, was it?

      A female USB port doesn't solve the problem because that isn't an integrated cord. The world already has USB hubs, so another USB hub isn't the product they were trying to build.

    3. Re:Fishy by Bogtha · · Score: 1

      No, it didn't turn out they couldn't build it, it turned out Apple wouldn't let them build it

      They couldn't build it because they need a license from Apple and Apple won't give them one. Whether you want to blame Apple or not, the fact remains that they took money for something that they couldn't build.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    4. Re:Fishy by Myopic · · Score: 1

      It depends on how you define it. My guess is that they developed a functional prototype, hence, "they built it". It was built; they built it.

      But that semantic point wasn't the important part, it was merely a tool to point out the source of the problem -- just like you said, Apple. It would seem odd to me if they folded their business plan and refunded money *without* explaining the problem. You objected to them blaming Apple, and I'm saying blaming Apple was required, because they had to explain themselves and Apple was to blame (assuming what they say is true).

    5. Re:Fishy by Bogtha · · Score: 1

      My guess is that they developed a functional prototype

      They started the project on the back of rumours, before Apple had officially announced the connector, before anybody had a chance to get their hands on a connector and tear it down, so I'm guessing they didn't have a clue how to even start.

      But that semantic point wasn't the important part, it was merely a tool to point out the source of the problem -- just like you said, Apple.

      I didn't say that Apple was the source of the problem, I said it didn't matter for the purpose of what I was saying.

      Think of it this way: I set up a Kickstarter taking people's money for an open-source release of Windows. I do this before I attempt to negotiate a license to do this with Microsoft. Now, theoretically speaking, I am able to follow through on this - I can set up servers and a website for the downloads, I've got everything I need to actually do the job - I just need a license from Microsoft, right? So when Microsoft say no, is it their fault or mine that my project fails?

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    6. Re:Fishy by Myopic · · Score: 1

      Easy. It is Microsoft's fault. So, we agree then?

  21. I Was Shut Down Too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My KS project was shut down by the Russian Gov't. All I wanted to do was duplicate an ICBM engine and put a warhead on it. But they said their warheads are patented and I couldn't have the designs.

    1. Re:I Was Shut Down Too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I get it - you're trying to be funny.

  22. Not real shocking... by rmdingler · · Score: 2

    Yeah, in a Utopian World good deeds would be rewarded, bad folks would be remorseful while heartily accepting their punishment, and there would be a benevolent god rewarding life's protagonists with eternal life. As Alan Jackson has been known to croon, "Here In The Real World", the most important predictor of future business success in an utter lack of conscience.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  23. Apple's handling of Lightning will hurt them by swb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Forget the Maps debacle, in my opinion it's the Lightning connector that will ultimately do more damage.

    And it's not the connector's technical design -- I think it works pretty slick and is a definite improvement mechanically over the 30 pin connector and superior to MicroUSB as well.

    It's the overall handling of Lightning that I think is an issue. First of all, shouldn't Lightning have been on the iPad 3 first? IMHO, the iPads are slightly less connector-centric and a release on iPad would have given accessory developers enough lead time to get products designed and through Apple's approval process in time for actual accessories and adapters to be available at iPhone 5 launch. As far as I know, there are very few Lightning accessories available right now -- some car chargers (who hasn't switched to a USB connector by now?) and maybe a Bose dock, but not much else.

    The other thing is -- why is Apple being so difficult with device approvals? One thing Apple had going for it was a kind of network effect, where one of things that made iPhone/iPad appealing was a broad range of accessories available for it. By making accessory development difficult, they hurt innovation, which means less stuff, and in theory the Lightning connector should make for innovative products because of its digital nature.

    IMHO this is really what will hurt Apple, not Maps, which will be good enough for most people as-is (it's always worked well for me), as well as get better over time.

    1. Re:Apple's handling of Lightning will hurt them by Myopic · · Score: 1

      There is no evidence or reason to believe that intentionally crippled products will cause Apple to lose their customers.

      I mean, they lost me five years ago, but I'm in a vanishingly minuscule minority. Apple hasn't exactly been hurting without me.

    2. Re:Apple's handling of Lightning will hurt them by phorm · · Score: 1

      Proprietary interface, preventing the build of compatible eco-systems? Wait, this reminds me of something...

    3. Re:Apple's handling of Lightning will hurt them by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

      Forget the Maps debacle, in my opinion it's the Lightning connector that will ultimately do more damage.

      Damage? What kind of damage? People are gladly forking over a few extra bucks for an adapter if they need one. Most Apple customers just upgrade their old toys when they buy new phones anyway. The Apple store sells a complete package for their customers, that does not require backward or sideward compatibility. And they are making a ton of money doing this. When I start hearing about Apple stores closing, then I'll believe you.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    4. Re:Apple's handling of Lightning will hurt them by swb · · Score: 1

      It does have something of a Betamax feel to it.

      I still think its possible for Apple to maintain some kind of control over the use of the interface (ie, blocking connectors that circumvent DRM, that may damage the phone or are of poor quality) but at the same time make it easier for developers to develop products that use it in generally approved ways (ie, charging cases or sound docks).

      It just kind of staggers me why they've chosen to execute the plan for this connector in a way that hinders the platform. It kind of makes me question how much of his decision-making rationale Steve Jobs actually shared with the rest of Apple's management.

      Current management kind of reminds me of young children playing a game where they pretend to be adults -- they mimic their actions, but there's no real understanding of the rationale for any of them and the actions they take are always weirdly exaggerated. Tim Cook is mimicking Steve Jobs, but without the kind of understanding Steve had.

    5. Re:Apple's handling of Lightning will hurt them by swb · · Score: 1

      It's too early for the new connector to have done visible damage, however, I think that after a period of time long time users will have second thoughts about an upgrade if the kinds of accessories they want aren't available, and accessory makers outside of a small big names may make fewer accessories or stop making them at all.

    6. Re:Apple's handling of Lightning will hurt them by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Tend to agree. The next time they buy speakers, will they spend more to buy the fancy ones with media controls that plug into the lightning adapter, or just ones with a regular headphone jack? A year ago they might have opted for the dock, thus ensuring that the next time they buy a phone they'll be more likely to get another iphone (network effect). Now their new phone isn't compatible with any of the gear they stocked up on, and the next time they buy accessories they might figure that if they're going to end up with dumb peripherals in a few years they might as well save money buying them and get more dumb ones. Then when they get a new phone there is no longer the Apple tie-in.

      It really makes sense for Apple to carefully coordinate their connectors when they make a change like this. They are throwing away a LOT of lock-in with the change.

  24. what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes! It totally makes sense!

    1. Get $140k in Kickstarter funding
    2. Give it all back, and give up on plan
    3. Profit!

    Why didn't I think of that! Getting a bunch of money and giving it back and not going forward with a business plan totally sounds like the best way to be successful! What an ingenious plot!

    1. Re:what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I were you I'd plan on investing some of that $140k in reading lessons, because the comment you are replying to said it looked like they changed their mind about building it and are pivoting their business, not that they planned to do this from the start.

  25. Why apple? by js3 · · Score: 1

    Why can't they use their technology for other phones?

    --
    did you forget to take your meds?
  26. Business is business, Taser is Taser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I for one wouldn't license my IP to someone who calls me an asshole."
    Business is business, you don't let your personal feelings get in the way.

    Apple's license for that connector means it can't be included with any other connection, not even an old Apple one. You might not believe it, but do you recall their USB connector? the one that needed a resistor, the patented one they used to prevent third party chargers working? They have lots of form here.

    Bend over Apple fanboy, Jobs is dead and Tim Cook has no new ideas, so get ready to pay ever more for those power cables. They'll even Taser you if you want buy several of them! Hey, nothing gives a cable extra cach-e than Tasering customers who dare to buy 2 of them!

    IMHO, their decision to drop the Apple connector, return the cash and seek funding for one that excludes Apple is the right way forward. Apple are really losing market share with each month and stuff like this just makes that faster. Good riddence to bad scum.

  27. Haha, yeah right. by JustAnotherIdiot · · Score: 1

    "When you do things that are bad for the customer I think it will be bad for them.”

    Oh how I wish this was true, so many companies (apple included) wouldn't be in business anymore if this was the case.

    --
    What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
  28. Ministry of Silly Walks by epine · · Score: 1

    People like to go around chanting "We're #1!"

    Soon the winner-takes-all market dynamics turns #1 into an 800lb gorilla, which does what gorillas do, until their once-proud fan base begins to feel the grip tighten to eye-popping intensity, whereupon the parade degenerates into a comic spectacle from the Ministry of Silly Walks.

    The parade veterans dress in uncool loose shorts forever after, and express a lot less enthusiasm about chanting "We're #1!" but every generation has to learn for itself, so the cycle repeats.

    I've come to realize that loyalty is a tricky business. If one puts any stock in the maxim that absolute power corrupts absolutely, it's hard not to view loyalty as sowing the seeds of destruction. I'm pretty happy in most markets if I can align myself with a viable #2, and almost ecstatic if I can align myself with a viable #3 (with any hope of midterm survival). In the early days of ATI/Nvidia I tended to buy Matrox. Matrox had fewer frames, but sharper pixels. Of course, that couldn't last.

    I used to support AMD for the same reason. But now we have AMD Opteron 3200 Series [slashcode mdash fuckup] Where did they go?. You can't even read an AMD press release with any confidence the product exists. There are limits to rooting for the underdog. I continue to prefer OpenCL even through CUDA probably has an edge in stability. Whatever happens to AMD, I hope OpenCL doesn't end up owned by Oracle.

    Chrome is now better than FF for many tasks. But I continue to use FF because the day FF dies off, Chrome will immediately begin to suck donkey balls where it suits Google. Google+ will be bundled into the browser experience in much the same way the IE was bundled into Windows. No, your honour, we can't remove Google+. It's a design pillar.

    Samsung so far seems to have relative immunity to whatever got into the Sony water supply. Phones will remain a contested space for a while yet. The Koreans as a culture seem less attracted to DRM and more attracted to price fixing.

    We'd all be a lot better off with less bandwagon effect. When I imagine the movie made about Jobs in the style of Gandhi, my version would probably begin with the line "As far back as I can remember, I've always wanted to be the band leader."

  29. What would stop Apple's current downward slide? by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, fearing Apple's destructiveness toward the world makes sense. But what you said directs attention away from the fact that Apple makes money partly by making products people want, and partly by being destructive toward those people.

    Apple's current downward slide is good for the world, because it tends to limit Apple's hostility. What will stop Apple from becoming less and less relevant? The one-time opportunities to make a well-designed music player and a more sophisticated cell phone have come and gone.

    1. Re:What would stop Apple's current downward slide? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget a more sophisticated tablet.

      And a well-designed 'ultra'book.

    2. Re:What would stop Apple's current downward slide? by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      fearing Apple's destructiveness toward the world...

      You can't even parody such over the top nonsense. Apple won't endorse this project, so they want to destroy the world. OK.

    3. Re:What would stop Apple's current downward slide? by gutnor · · Score: 1

      Have you entered an Apple Store recently ? Apple almost does not sell accessories at all, they are all provided by other brand, hell they do not even provide a dock at all for the new iPhone. So the theory that Apple want to keep all the market for themselves is a bit silly, even if they make 100% profit on there cable, that is a drop in their ocean of profit

      So who makes money on this connector: big brand like JBL, Griffin, Belkin, ... Those brands are fundamental to Apple success: when you provide a single device in each category, not having any accessories is a critical flaw. If you want to see evil, a better bet is that Apple keeps the exclusivity for the big name in exchange for a quick refresh of their lineup.

    4. Re:What would stop Apple's current downward slide? by flargleblarg · · Score: 1

      Finger slipped and I accidentally modded parent as 'Redundant' — I meant to mod it as 'Insightful'. Sorry. I wish I could undo, but /. doesn't allow that. Hopefully, by posting this reply, all my mods on this story will be un-done, and that will at least correct the mis-mod.

  30. Solution: No patents on connectors! by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    More detail: It should not be possible to get a patent on a connector!!! All connectors and other standard ways of doing things like file system organizations must be in the public domain. Otherwise there are numerous opportunities for abuse.

    1. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by butlerm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More detail: It should not be possible to get a patent on anything. Granting monopolies on ideas is economically counterproductive, morally suspect, and intellectually perverse.

    2. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      This is an interesting argument, but a case can be made against it. Connectors are not trivial inventions, especially modern high-density connectors. There's a lot of mechanical engineering expertise that goes into those things. So, do you think a new car engine should be allowed to be patented? Or a new jet engine design? How about a really clever new mousetrap design? These are the kinds of things most anti-software-patent people are usually OK with. If you're OK with those things being patented, then it's probably unreasonable to exclude connectors from patent protection. (If you're not OK with those things being patented, then you're probably against patents completely.)

    3. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by Richy_T · · Score: 2

      So sure, that would justify being able to patent "method for arranging pins in a high density" or somesuch but a simple layout and shape is not innovation at all.

    4. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or perhaps connectors are not just arranging pins in a high density with a 'simple' layout & shape.

      Or perhaps your an ignorant moron.

    5. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by fnj · · Score: 2

      Morally and ethically and by natural law, patents are EVIL. Just say it. They are nothing more than a corporatocracy/corruptocracy TOOL.

    6. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by fnj · · Score: 0

      You got it. I am against patents COMPLETELY. I think those who impose the patent system or support its imposition are evil bastards, and those who fail to decry it are tools.

    7. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      More detail: It should not be possible to get a patent on a connector!!! All connectors and other standard ways of doing things like file system organizations must be in the public domain. Otherwise there are numerous opportunities for abuse.

      Why not? As long as the device follows patent rules, why shouldn't it be patented. What makes it more special than any other portion of the device?
      Yeah it sucks. The current trend towards unifying power cords is nice. My last cell phone I purchased because I lost the proprietary power supply for the previous one. New Power supply $50, new phone $80 (with power supply). This last summer I took two cords on my vacation. One for my iPad, one for everything else.
      Standardized cables are nice for the customers, but the supplier makes less money. BUT I still fail to see why you can't patent a power cord, if it is novel.

    8. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by chrismcb · · Score: 0

      Granting monopolies on ideas is economically counterproductive, morally suspect, and intellectually perverse.

      Citation needed.
      Without patents, a significant number of products we see today would not exist. Very few people would spend research and development on something that someone else could just simply copy. Companies would spend more time and money developing products that couldn't be copied, opened, backward engineered.
      NOT giving a monopoly is economically counterproductive, morally suspect, and intellectually perverse. I say the last because a lot of people would say... oooh I have a cool idea, but it isn't worth investigating it, cause someone will just steal it from me.

    9. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The problem with this is that it can be argued that there's much less incentive to design anything complex if anyone can cheaply copy it and sell it without paying you for the privilege. It costs money to do R&D, so if you spend all that money employing engineers for man-years, and then give away the results of their work and a Chinese company copies it and sells it for less than you can afford to sell it for, you're not going to stay in business for long; because of this, it becomes unprofitable to do R&D, so it only gets done when there's no alternative.

      The present problems with the patent system are that trivial things are being patented, like rounded corners on a rectangular product, purchasing something with one click, etc. I haven't seen any convincing arguments that being able to patent, for instance, the copper-on-silicon semiconductor manufacturing process, is hindering progress. IBM spent a boatload of money developing that, and continues to develop advances like that because they get an enormous amount of money in patent fees for it.

    10. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by butlerm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ditto. That is the PR of the patent industry, which lives and breathes by placing impediments to the progress of science and the useful arts, but there isn't the slightest evidence that the social benefits out weigh the social costs, to say nothing of the of the rent seeking, soul sucking patent attorneys who profit from this perverse deprivation of moral and intellectual rights.

      There is no shortage of literature in defense of that position. The patent system, as presently constituted, is a first class train wreck. Virtually every informed observer who is not on the payroll of the patent bar, and who lacks a vested interest in some trivial non-invention, understands that fact.

    11. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mine an ignorant moron what?

      (tip: if you're going to call anyone "an ignorant moron", it is advisable to at least show a basic command of the language in which you express yourself)

      -- not a native english speaker

    12. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by blind+monkey+3 · · Score: 0

      Without patents, a significant number of products we see today would not exist. Very few people would spend research and development on something that someone else could just simply copy. Companies would spend more time and money developing products that couldn't be copied, opened, backward engineered. NOT giving a monopoly is economically counterproductive, morally suspect, and intellectually perverse. I say the last because a lot of people would say... oooh I have a cool idea, but it isn't worth investigating it, cause someone will just steal it from me.

      A citation on economically counterproductive - your citation please.

      --
      BM3
    13. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      I think they should be able to patent such things, but they should not be able to refuse to license said patent to someone who is using it for interoperability purposes, such as in this case - i.e., some sort of automatic FRAND.

    14. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Connectors are not trivial inventions, especially modern high-density connectors

      Of course they are. Once the technologies have been invented, like a certain type of pin and its manufacturing infrastructure, it's all just well-known engineering problems afterwards. Well, there is one part about it that can be considered to be inordinately difficult: finding a connector design that doesn't infringe on someone else's bullshit patent.

      There's a lot of mechanical engineering expertise that goes into those things.

      So? There's a lot of mechanical engineers.

      So, do you think a new car engine should be allowed to be patented? Or a new jet engine design?

      Those are orders of magnitude more complex. Also, a car engine isn't patented, but a jet engine design (a list of design features) is. It's odd that you get this right and wrong in the same sentence. And likewise, new characteristics of a connector might well reasonably be patentable, again like a new type of connecting pin arrangement, but that patent wouldn't cover the shape of the connector and the arrangement of pins and what signals are where, but rather it would address who must license a patent before being permitted to manufacture the connector itself.

      If you're not OK with those things being patented, then you're probably against patents completely.

      You can be against an arrangement of signals being patented, and not be against a collection of novel traits being patented. I have a waffle iron cord here of which Magsafe is a derivative. I wonder if they cited the original patent. But the point is, specific connector arrangements should never be patentable for the same reason that reverse engineering is actually protected by law even in the USA; interoperability, without which the world does not function.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      It's probably not simply the arrangement of pins that's patented, it's specific novel traits inside the connector itself (e.g. the design of the pins, which can be fairly complex springs themselves, or the design of the latching mechanism), without which the connector simply won't work reliably. What electrical signals correspond to what pins is not a patentable idea (and if there are any patents like this, they fall into the "trivial patent" category like the one-click patent, IMO).

      BTW, I didn't get anything wrong about engines. No, a whole car engine or jet engine isn't patented (I was being brief there), but novel traits inside those engines routinely are, such as the design of a compressor wheel or the design of a variable-valve-timing system.

    16. Re:Solution: No patents on connectors! by Gen_Music · · Score: 1

      The Clothing industry. Please name me 5 inventions in the last 10 years that aren't just branding. Name me 10 technologies that actually keep you warmer or cooler and have changed or revolutionized the industry the way it does in the technological industries. There are none, because companies that Apple look up to run the industry, releasing incremental updates to their product lines that are nothing more than rearrangements of their previous products to support a loyal fan following and media army.

      You think that Adidas, Gucci, Nike and Prada will ever create something that is so good that it can save a guy trapped in the Arctic Circle from pneumonia? No. You think they would ever license it if someone else did? No. Why? Because fashion is more profitable, requires less effort and can be recycled endlessly without changing anything but the colors involved. The only decisive patent/copyright in that industry is the actual logo, and look what billion dollar empires they have built with that with that.

      You think that anyone will drop the amount of billions into Pharmaceuticals as the industry now does if they couldn't block others from doing it? No-one aside the governments of the world would. They would all just sit there, waiting for products to copy, then when it comes out change it's color or bevel the edges of its bottles and call it 'innovation'.

  31. iPhone 4 = My 1st and LAST Apple Product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple does to much to force you to constantly point in their direction. The fact that Apple puts syncing downloaded apps ahead of syncing Outlook contacts, and syncing some crappy unneeded app can hang your phone and iTunes for any amount of time shows me that they are not concerned with me as a user. The iPhone 4 is my FIRST and now LAST Apple product. Period.

    I'm not even going to go down the patent road, and the fact all apple products are derived from other sources of inspiration, such as 60's Braun products, http://gizmodo.com/343641/1960s-braun-products-hold-the-secrets-to-apples-future.

  32. iPhone 4 = My FIRST and LAST Apple Product by MatthewEarley · · Score: 0

    Apple does to much to force you to constantly point in their direction. The fact that Apple puts syncing downloaded apps ahead of syncing Outlook contacts, and syncing some crappy unneeded app can hang your phone and iTunes for any amount of time shows me that they are not concerned with me as a user. The iPhone 4 is my FIRST and now LAST Apple product. Period. I'm not even going to go down the patent road, and the fact all apple products are derived from other sources of inspiration, such as 60's Braun products, http://gizmodo.com/343641/1960s-braun-products-hold-the-secrets-to-apples-future.

  33. The 3% CC processing fee should be ok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought in the case of a return, the credit card company gave the 3% back to the store.
            (In other words, reversed the WHOLE transaction.)

    Seems like this would apply here.

  34. He's a comedian! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "When you do things that are bad for the customer I think it will be bad for them."

    You've got to admit, this guy is funny. It's like he's totally unfamiliar with Apple.

  35. Starting to sound like sony by syntaxterror7 · · Score: 1

    Soon apple will have its own USB and replace the 1/4 audio with some strange ass connector .....

  36. Originality through Conformity by NothingWasAvailable · · Score: 1

    A communications professor of mine got great humor out of the various ad campaigns that tell you to "be different by joining our crowd"

    Dr Pepper
    Apple
    Every Single Four Wheel Drive car commercial

    However, that's not to say that Apple hasn't built products that are powerful, simple, and elegant. Too many consumer products are a bucket of cool features poured into a plastic case.

    Apple does an awesome job of leveraging their industrial design, their manufacturing clout, their IP (patents) and their defacto standards.

    However, the most unlikely outcome is for them to remain on top forever. In 2011, they had $108 billion in revenue. To make Wall Street happy, let's assume that they need 5% yearly revenue growth. They would need to add $5.4 billion in *NEW* revenue in 2012, then $5.7 billion in 2013, etc. In 2013, they will need to add additional revenue equal to the entire yearly revenue of the Starwood Hotel chain, Live Nation, or Pacific Life ... just to keep Wall Street happy and continue to be a "growth company."

  37. Connectors and Docks are going away anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All those ipad docks and BMWs with Apple connectors are going to look so stupid in 3 years. Wireless is the future.

    Wireless charging, bluetooth media. Most cars will do bluetooth for audio, both telephone and songs. Standards are coming for the wireless chargers, and car manufacturers are adopting them.

    I own a 5 year old Toyota with sat nav and bluetooth. To me the satnav is outdated, my phone does things better (nicer maps, more zoom levels, etc). This car doesn't have the A2DP in the bluetooth, so it will only copy address book and telephone calls. We update our phones every 1.5-5 years, but cars last longer.

    In the home, USB outlets are becoming more common. I have one, and want a couple more. But I am holding off, waiting for the charging pads to be more common.

    1. Re:Connectors and Docks are going away anyway by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      This is why DIN rocks. Unfortunately, car makers seem to be moving away from it more and more.

  38. LOL free market nonsense by Myopic · · Score: 1

    "When you do things that are bad for the customer I think it will be bad for them.”

    LOL, I can tell this guy isn't swayed by things like reality or evidence. When has fucking customers ever turned out badly for a company? Okay, yeah, every now and then it happens, but way way over 99% of products and companies at any given time are proactively going out of their way to fuck customers for nothing but the fun of it.

  39. ftfy by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

    Dear Apple,

    Fuck You!

    Yours Sincerely,

    The people who keep giving money to Apple, even after they claim to be angry.

    The public is so angry at Apple, that they will severely punish Apple by suffocating them in a torrent of money. Let this vicious brutality be a lesson to others who may be contemplating evil.

    --
    "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
  40. My Kickstarter project ran into the Apple wall too by joshamania · · Score: 3, Informative

    My partner and I came up with a device that allows you to open a garage door with a smartphone. Just a box with a relay and a Bluetooth radio. When I started looking into whether or not we could do this for iPhone I found apples "Made for iPod" program...their hardware licensing scheme.

    The first thing they asked for was our attorney's contact information.

    A quick search showed me that it was going to cost in the ballpark of $20,000 to deal with Apple's bullshit. So that didn't happen.

  41. Redesign. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why cant the company redesign the device to ship with no cables but just usb ports and for people to attach their own cables to it?

  42. Active cable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The charger needs to authenticate with the phone to achieve fast charge, so you *can* plug it into your kindle charger... but for slow charge only. This is exactly the same as their secret resistor code in chargers thing of the past, just much harder to figure out.

  43. It's a scam on his part... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Actually. Apple hasn't finished negotiations with this inventor. They sat down with him to discuss licensing options and before they could say the word "royalties" he immediately spazzed and decided to refund his contributors. There's an agenda behind this of course, he's trying to get people to pay attention to his kickstarter-clone website. Conspiracy theory: He created his infringing product on kickstarter on purpose with the ultimate goal of attracting projects to his actual goal.

    So, Apple didn't actually kill anything here. He's a drama queen with a not-so-hidden agenda. As the saying go any publicity is good publicity. We'll see if it works out for him. To be honest, if I were to start a project I'd start it on Kickstarter and not his site, because kickstarter sends you the whole funding after funding ends, whereas he selfishly keeps 2/3 of it. You get the second 1/3 after you complete a prototype to begin mass production, which might not be enough. And, then you get the remaining 1/3 after that to help with marketing or something. Now he tries to argue he's doing it for the customers to ensure projects ship, but really he's just trying to get away with holding a majority of the capital himself forever. And, if you're stupid enough to put your project on his site and he deems that you're unfit to deliver your product because say maybe your date slipped, he can indefinitely withhold a majority of your funding. It's criminal and he should go straight to hell for it. That's why I haven't mentioned his site's name in this post. Just thought you should all know.

    1. Re:It's a scam on his part... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Actually. Apple hasn't finished negotiations with this inventor. They sat down with him to discuss licensing options and before they could say the word "royalties" he immediately spazzed and decided to refund his contributors.

      Do you have a source for this?

  44. Re:My Kickstarter project ran into the Apple wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because it's so much easier to to fumble with your smartphone, launching an app, waiting for the bluetooth to connect, if it's within range, and finally being able to open the garage door (provided you did not have to remove the gloves first) than to just hit the switch strategically placed on the sun visor of your car ...

  45. My car has several already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's called USB.

    K.I.S.S.

  46. Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    | "When you do things that are bad for the customer I think it will be bad for them.”''"

    What? Whoever said that doesn't know history. Apple has been doing things that are bad for consumers their entire history. As far as Apple is concerned their motto has always been that you will do it the Apple way or you won't do it at all.

  47. Should have met Apple half-way by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    If they would have offered that any and all detected Android devices would be automatically bricked, I'm sure Apple would have allowed Lightning connectivity.

  48. Wow Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously Apple does your douchiness know any bounds?

  49. Greed and our Shit doesn't stink by justin2781 · · Score: 1

    Apple has consistently proven they don't give a crap about their customers or anyone else. Look at the FCPX debacle, they don't like to admit even to their loyal customers that their "vision" may be wrong. It's taken a year and now they are starting to put back the features that their visionary team said nobody wanted. They have all the answers, just ask anyone who pays the "Apple Tax" on every product they make. You can't even reason with them. No one hears you at that company. You can take the proprietary connector and proprietary screws and shove them up their ass. The Apple ][ was an open platform where the user could add components like memory and special function cards themselves. Then the jack-booted genius says let's make the Macintosh and let's seal it up so only authorized Apple stores can open them or do a simple thing like add ram which most any other computer user can do in minutes themselves. When you have choices the prices reflect the market, when you only have one source and it's Apple you have GREED. I was just sent a iPhone application via a developer to check out (Ok I do have an iPhone 5) Turns out it fixes a problem that was introduced with the iPhone 5. I checked it out and it fixes it perfectly and I told them that. Now they tell me that it was in review for 3 months and then rejected because it cast a light on a Apple flaw they they refuse to admit. They app was Free, but the customers with iPhone 5's will never get a chance to get the fix. If Apple can't control it then they try and kill it or suck the last dime out of them.

  50. 3rd party lightning cables by wchin · · Score: 1

    I've already purchased several 3rd party Lightning cables that work well for less than $10. I know there are some awful ones out there, but the ones I bought are pretty good. This project could have just bundled those cables, which probably cost less than $6 in bulk.

    As usual, there are a bunch of people spazzing about Apple... and perfectly willing to cozy up to a number of different megacorps that behave just as badly or oftentimes even worse. A number of these megacorps have more questionable patent practices, proprietary connectors, labor practices, environmental policies, and so forth. That's before you get to the damning emails in the Samsung trial after the illegal purging of a slew of relevant evidence. Sigh. I guess as long as you believe your favorite megacorp is better, than so be it, but you are likely just kidding yourself in an exercise in self validation for the product choice you made.

    BTW, both mini-usb and micro-usb are very failure prone and do not provide enough charging current. Apple has never been afraid to stake new ground when they see a technical or user advantage.

  51. What makes you think the shareholders benefit? by kawabago · · Score: 1

    Apple doesn't pay dividends, it just gets richer. Eventually Apple we start to shrink, if it hasn't already. Then whoever put money in will lose it all.

  52. Gizmoto Article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't tell if you think Apple or the campaign were scamming.

    However, I must agree - why doesn't Apple just use USB to charge everything?

    Why use a proprietary 30-pin (or {whatever}-pin connector? Because Apple wants to make a proprietary, patented, connector that cannot be copied to get $30 extra from every sale made. That's why.

    If you buy Apple-anything, you deserve to be screwed over. There is a price for "just working" things - between 30% and 200% more than what the competition charges.

    I hope a few people here, especially Apple LOVERS, have read the gizmodo article about slime and theft in Apple retail stores.

    If you are a pretty girl, be very afraid if you ever take your Apple product into any Apple store to be worked on. Seems those photo albumns are cloned ASAP and shared.

    I'm not saying that every other computer store doesn't do the same thing. I'm just saying that we expect more from Apple - they are "perfect" right?

  53. Plug-compatible by pierreboulez · · Score: 1

    Remember when Amdahl made computers that were "plug-compatible" with IBM mainframes? As I recall, any Amdahl component was a drop-in replacement for the equivalent IBM component.

    What the hell has happened to patent laws (or corporate patent strategies?) that you can't even build a damn power connector without running afoul of some licensing issue? I agree with the parent: no patents on connectors! How does it "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" if nobody can independently build a device to connect to yours?

    1. Re:Plug-compatible by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Amdahl was plug-compatible with IBM because Amdahl licensed IBMs patents (and vice-versa).

      Plug-compatible meant that the ISA was the same, and the IO interfaces were the same. It certainly did NOT mean that any components could be exchanged between Amdahl and IBM systems. You could roll in an Amdahl box to replace an IBM box, but what was inside the boxes was not compatible at all. The ability for this to happen was forced on IBM by anti-trust rulings, and had nothing to do with what was or was not patented.

      Also, note that anyone who wanted to make plug-compatible IO or processors had to license the patents from IBM. The anti-trust rulings meant that IBM had to license the patents, but not for free. If IBM and the OEM could not come to terms, the court would set the royalty rate.

      So, what happened with patent laws or strategies? Nothing. Things now are just like they always have been.

  54. Other Kickstarter Projects Having Lightning Issues by MrMagooAZ · · Score: 1

    This is not the only project to have licensing issues with Apple over the Lightning/30-pin connector. This project has had to change drastically over what it was initially...all to please the mighty Apple Beast. iExpander for iPhone 5 http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/108290897/iexpander-an-expansion-device-for-your-iphone-4-an

  55. New connector no buy Ipone 5. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have learned in the past how shitty apple can be. Like the power mac g5 could not boot from a usb drive. until one day I discovered it could.
    After the firewire drive I bought broke.

    Fuck them.

  56. Re:My Kickstarter project ran into the Apple wall by BradleyUffner · · Score: 1

    Because it's so much easier to to fumble with your smartphone, launching an app, waiting for the bluetooth to connect, if it's within range, and finally being able to open the garage door (provided you did not have to remove the gloves first) than to just hit the switch strategically placed on the sun visor of your car ...

    Are you telling me you never wanted to open your garage door from the outside when you were NOT in your car? I'd love you have something like that as an option. If the OP would make something like this for Android I'd buy it in a second.

  57. Re:My Kickstarter project ran into the Apple wall by BradleyUffner · · Score: 1

    My partner and I came up with a device that allows you to open a garage door with a smartphone. Just a box with a relay and a Bluetooth radio. When I started looking into whether or not we could do this for iPhone I found apples "Made for iPod" program...their hardware licensing scheme.

    The first thing they asked for was our attorney's contact information.

    A quick search showed me that it was going to cost in the ballpark of $20,000 to deal with Apple's bullshit. So that didn't happen.

    Have you considered making this for Android? I'd jump on it right away.

  58. Apple killed me by gig · · Score: 1

    I put a gun to my head and called up Apple and told them to restructure their 3rd party accessory program to my liking. When they said no, I pulled the trigger and now I am dead. Apple killed me.

    1. Re:Apple killed me by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      YOU WAS PHONE!

  59. Re:My Kickstarter project ran into the Apple wall by joshamania · · Score: 1

    Sorry, didn't want to spam, but www.hiqautomation.com. We did build one for Android and it works pretty well. And like one of you said...most our beta testers ended up using it when they were not in their car...usually out working on the lawn or something. One guy we have testing told me about the time his wife got locked out of the house but she didn't have an android phone, alas! :-)

    We're doing a release in about 2 months...ordering the parts for the first fifty units just after xmas.

  60. A few things... There is more to this story. by sdsucks · · Score: 1

    There is certainly more to this story than is being told so far. I'd like to see this company share their communications with Apple and let customers make up their own mind.

    They had at least two options available for this specific problem:
    1) Ship with 30 pin dock connector, and let users use an adaptor (which is readily available).
    2) Rather than put a bunch of proprietary connectors on it, why not just have USB ports and let users charge whatever the hell they want, via whatever cable they want? If I were buying this, I'd prefer that anyway.

    Finally, what kind of businessman says "I think they are being a bunch of assholes" about a company they are trying to negotiate with? Extremely unprofessional. If I were in Apples shoes, I would pretty much write them off for all future business - some relationships are simply not worth the problems they bring.

    This all makes me wonder if this isn't just a scapegoat for aborting the project.

    1. Re:A few things... There is more to this story. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My guess is they're saying, "Oh shit, this is going to be way more expensive to develop and produce than we thought. Let's find a way to scrap it."

      From the updated Ars article:

      "We didn't clarify if that was for chargers or a docking station—we assumed the latter—so while we saw it, it didn't seem to make sense for what we were doing that they would not allow these two things to be on the same device."

      Well there's a fucking smart business plan: "We saw that their guidelines explicitly disallowed it, but we figured that wouldn't make sense, so we went ahead with the project anyway."

      Specifically to your point, the article goes on to say:

      A product they "believe in" would include clean lines and easy-to-use cables coming from a single charging station, not adapters and ports that users need to plug things into, said Siminoff. That's exactly why Siminoff remains skeptical of Apple's apparent reversal of its decision to bar the combination of 30-pin and Lightning connectors; what about Lightning alongside other connectors?

      "If it has to be an Apple-only product, and Lightning can't be next to, say, an Android charger, then it's still not something we want to make, Siminoff said after hearing the news about Apple's updated guidelines. "I hope they become customer friendly. Maybe we will be able to do [the POP charger] after all."

      In other words - "Shit, Apple reversed their position. Now I need to find another reason to blame them." It sounds very much like he's reaching for a reason - ANY reason - to scrap this project, and Apple's rejection gave them a wonderful cover. Now that Apple's saying, "Nah, we changed our mind," they're stretching to keep it Apple's "fault" that they can't "design a product they BELIEVE in."

  61. Kickstaller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Branded USB charging devices as a project, pushing price as a market edge, when by the time you get one the other devices they are talking down will be cheaper and by then even cheaper and better devices will be out.

    Someone please create a kickstarter to get wireless charging into common commercial table tops or coasters easily.

  62. Re:My Kickstarter project ran into the Apple wall by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

    Also Bluetooth connects damn fast these days. I pretty much never turn it off, so being able to just hit an app launcher that would connect and open could be handled in about a second - which would be incredibly useful.

  63. Rule #1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Being a habitual asshole is not good for business.

  64. Why would you need a charger ... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
    ... specifically for an Apple phone. They're obliged to provide a micro-USB connector, or an adaptor to that fitting. So ... what's the problem.

    I must admit that I've not actually picked up an Apple phone for ... well, I'm not sure if I've ever picked up an Apple phone. Do they have any interesting characteristics?

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  65. We don't need that thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We already have universal mini-USB adapters, this is STANDART for any phones, Windows Phones, Android devices, Blackberries, etc (all competitors working for the better)... Then all we need is a plug into the wall.

    Only Apple devices don't use standart technologies, so that means you should not support Apple the outcast in their eco-prison.

    Apple is the only reason this thing is built in the first place, because only Apple devices don't use standart technologies.

    This is SO understandable that this thing could not be built without Apple connectors, the fact that Apple don't use standart technologies is the only reason we would need that. But the problem can be solve only if you stop buying Apple stuff.

    Same with the advent of QI technology, a standart for wireless charging - which Apple do not take part.

    So my conclusion is : If you support a fragmented world = buy Apple products. If you support a unified world = buy something else.

  66. erroneus/john b wilcox is in physical decline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you eat, is your dish a wheelbarrow, your fork a pitchfork, & spoon a shovel or what http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3345911&cid=42414637 ? Does your bed use chevy truck coil springs and struts to hold your fat ass off the floor too? Hahahaha. No wonder you said this "Oh... to eat pizza again..." by erroneus (253617) on Saturday December 22, @05:20PM (#42371769) from http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3335159&cid=42371769 you disgustingly fat hog!

  67. erroneus why're ya such a disgusting slob? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Erroneus/john b wilcox: When you eat, is your dish a wheelbarrow, your fork a pitchfork, and spoon a shovel or what http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3345911&cid=42414637 ? Does your bed use chevy truck coil springs and struts to hold your fat ass off the floor too? Hahahaha. No wonder you said this "Oh... to eat pizza again..." by erroneus (253617) on Saturday December 22, @05:20PM (#42371769) from http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3335159&cid=42371769 you disgustingly fat hog.