Apple Is Letting Companies Make 3.5mm To Lightning Cables Now (9to5mac.com)

Apple has updated the specs for its Made-For-iPhone accessories program, letting accessory makers put USB-C ports on licensed devices, as well as create 3.5mm to Lightning cables for the first time. 9to5Mac reports: With the new specs, companies in the MFi program can now include USB-C receptacles on their officially certified iOS and Mac accessories for charging. That allows users to charge MFi accessories with a USB-C cable and or power adapter they might already have, for example, and also draw power from the USB port on a Mac using the same cable. It also has other advantages for manufacturers. Apple's documentation for the new specs lists battery packs and speakers as products that could benefit from using a USB-C receptacle. Products are also allowed to bundle USB-C cables with the MFi accessories, but manufacturers can opt to not include a cable or adapter and reduce their costs and or price in the process. Unlike with Lightning receptacles, Apple does not allow the port to be used for passthrough charging or sync of an iOS device. Also, new for accessory makers is the ability to create a Lightning to 3.5mm stereo analog audio output plug, which would allow users to go direct from the Lightning port to a 3.5mm input on another device.

Comments

Mod parent up!

[Sour Fried Testicles]

I like the part about BeauHD being called out for what he is:

AN IDIOT.

Clarification?

[mccalli]

"Unlike with Lightning receptacles, Apple does not allow the port to be used for passthrough charging or sync of an iOS device". -What does that mean? Does it mean I can't do a Lightning to USB C cable (which yes, I'm aware already exist) under this programme?

Re:Clarification?

[TheRaven64]

It sounds as if Apple is worried that malicious devices will attempt to MITM the connections from iTunes to the device. Even if none of the certified devices do this, making iOS users expect other bits of hardware to be on the line in the nominally secure path makes it easier for uncertified devices to find their way into common use. In theory, everything is encrypted, but there may well be timing attacks that work if you can interpose some hardware.

It also sounds as if they're also worried that things won't correctly forward the power control signals or manipulate them to account for the drain of the device on the line and so the iOS device will get more or (more likely) less power than it expects. This is important with regards to the throttling that they do: peak power consumption for an unthrottled iPhone is more than the peak power output of an old battery. This isn't normally a problem on mains power, but it is if the mains power is lower than advertised.

Re:Clarification?

[burtosis]

I believe it means you cannot use data (including wired headphones) and charge through the lightning port at the same time. The dock is still the only device that can. On 8,X you can use wireless charging and wired headphones, or on flavors of 7,8,X you can use Bluetooth headphones and charge over wire. Not to mention many of the adapter cables, like the Belkin cable, have terrible reviews.

Re:Clarification?

[Bombcar]

These exist, but the amount of text around it makes me think they're unauthorized (it talks about maybe having to reboot the phone, etc).

https://smile.amazon.com/gp/pr...

Re:Clarification?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong. You are trying to find technical reasons for the decision when with Apple it's always about money. Someone did a revenue analysis and decided that with lower demand for the newer hardware, there was more money to be made this way as opposed to feature lock-in (or lock-out ;). With Apple, it's always about the revenue.

Re:Clarification?

[MachineShedFred]

You claim he's wrong, and back it up with exactly zero evidence, giving only hater conjecture.

His pass-through reasoning is probably right on - they are looking to prevent someone from creating an "iTunes cache device" that makes perfect digital copies of the all-you-can-eat iTunes subscription, so that you can turn off the subscription and still have all the music you aren't supposed to have. That explains the data pass-through restriction quite nicely.

The charging bit is more of a mystery - if it was really about variable power delivery they could have put specifications around it - your device must accept these signals from the phone about power utilization and be able to step up / down the charge being delivered accordingly, etc. After all, this is a device certification program - if the device can't do it or doesn't do it properly when tested, it's not certified.

Re:Clarification?

[MachineShedFred]

Yeah, those have been a thing since about two weeks after Slashdot wanted to break out the bitch-forks about Apple doing away with the stereo plug. Then the gripe became "I don't want to have to carry around another 0.3 ounces of wire with my huge 3 pound stereo cans that already take up half of my bag!" Or, "it's something else to lose, because I can't figure out that I can just keep it in the case with my headphones, or just plugged into the end of the headphone cable!"

It was probably stupid for Apple to ditch that connector when they did, especially without support for AptX due to their pissing match with Qualcomm; but really the grousing and griping about such a little thing was (and still is) a bit pathetic, when it's a problem on an $800 - $1000 device (iPhone) talking to a $100 - $500 device (quality headphones) that is solved more or less permanently with an accessory that costs right around 1% of the phone's price.

Re:Clarification?

[Anonymous Coward]

apples history is evidence enough.

Re: Clarification?

[Anonymous Coward]

You try to refute his arguments, yet you cannot find a technical reason that is satisfactory. Maybe you should agree that it is more likely just money.

Re: Clarification?

[Anonymous Coward]

They are looking for their thoroughly designed DRM mechanism to remain intact. The way it is being enforced at present is not severe, but the mechanism needs to remain sharpened and active for when the 'analog hole' is sinched shut in the future.

It is already a hassle to get quality 'wired' headsets at places like Walmart. One would have to be a fool to not notice the progression toward music being 'locked down' for the ordinary consumer.

Re:Clarification?

[AmiMoJo]

they are looking to prevent someone from creating an "iTunes cache device" that makes perfect digital copies of the all-you-can-eat iTunes subscription, so that you can turn off the subscription and still have all the music you aren't supposed to have

So it's the classic DRM-to-satisfy-paranoid-delusions that harms the customer. Because all that stuff is available for free on the Pirate Bay anyway, and I really can't imagine many people bothering to buy such a device and then cache the stream somewhere just to save a few bucks that their parents pay anyway.

It's the same with HDMI and BluRay and video "purchased" on iTunes. The only people the DRM screws are legitimate users, and it does basically nothing to stop piracy. Even if you could just copy a BluRay it wouldn't be worth buying the blank media to do it, just grab a rip to your flash drive and enjoy unskippable advert free viewing without an expensive BluRay player.

Re: Clarification?

[Anonymous Coward]

With my Samsung I carry a usb cable and power adapter, and a pair of headphones.
To get the same functionality with the iPhone I need a half dozen dongles, which come at a premium price, and if they break when I'm on the road can't be easily replaced at any random corner store.

Not sure why you're trying to defend Apple in this. All they're doing is trying to take over the standards with their own proprietary format, and it's not giving you anything other than a headache and a lighter wallet.

Re: Clarification?

[Anonymous Coward]

After getting Bluetooth headphones I would never go back to wired headsets. But if it's a big deal to you vote with your money, but the lack of a headphone jack really is no big deal.

Re:Clarification?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Apple's decision to remove the headphone jack had nothing to do with money and was completely customer focused. Reality check: nobody was asking for the headphone jack to be removed. They did it in an effort to sell more bluetooth headphones.

Re:Clarification?

[Anne Thwacks]

Apple users can't use Pirate bay - because reasons.

Re:Clarification?

[Hylandr]

If you're referring to software that intercepts audio for recording it's a trivial effort to cut the wires at the earpieces and patch to another device recording. Just make sure the grounding braid is disconnected at the jack to prevent the 60hz hum and you're golden.

We used to do this back in the 8 track and cassette days. Looks like I need to grab that reel to reel I saw in Good will the other day...

Re: Clarification?

[BronsCon]

After getting a good pair of studio monitors I would never go back to Bluetooth headphones.

Re: Clarification?

[Anonymous Coward]

he he "letting". I think they've already been doing this, no?

Re: Clarification?

[Anonymous Coward]

it's getting hard to find anything wired that's not earbuds or high priced over the ear noise cancelling.

Re:Clarification?

[MachineShedFred]

I agree completely that DRM is a waste of time, treats legitimate users as criminals, and just adds layers of complexity that *will* break someday causing unneeded issues. It's one of the reasons I have purchased a grand total of zero movies or TV shows from iTunes.

That being said, Apple has contractual obligations with content owners that they are distributors for to keep the DRM secure. We already saw the RIAA sue hardware manufacturers for creating "instruments of piracy" multiple times - there's no reason to think they wouldn't try the same on Apple as a co-defendant if they didn't at least make a reasonable attempt at preventing it.

DRM completely sucks, and adds no value to the purchaser whatsoever. But it's also a fact of life as long as the content owners demand it be, unless there is a rapid and unforeseen shift in the entertainment consuming public to "free" content that is unshackled by DRM.

Re:Clarification?

[TheFakeTimCook]

Wrong. You are trying to find technical reasons for the decision when with Apple it's always about money. Someone did a revenue analysis and decided that with lower demand for the newer hardware, there was more money to be made this way as opposed to feature lock-in (or lock-out ;). With Apple, it's always about the revenue.

Mods: There is NOTHING in the LEAST "Insightful" in the Parent's AC Post.

Stop piling-on, Apple Haters, or show PROOF that "With Apple, it's always about the revenue."

Re:Clarification?

[TheFakeTimCook]

apples history is evidence enough.

So is the history of ACs...

Re: Clarification?

[TheFakeTimCook]

You try to refute his arguments, yet you cannot find a technical reason that is satisfactory. Maybe you should agree that it is more likely just money.

So the AC OP's claims were based on absolutely nothing; so why should MachineShedFred have to offer any "proof" in rebuttal or "lose the argument"?

Re: Clarification?

[TheFakeTimCook]

They are looking for their thoroughly designed DRM mechanism to remain intact. The way it is being enforced at present is not severe, but the mechanism needs to remain sharpened and active for when the 'analog hole' is sinched shut in the future.

It is already a hassle to get quality 'wired' headsets at places like Walmart. One would have to be a fool to not notice the progression toward music being 'locked down' for the ordinary consumer.

Yeah, the Company that single-handedly beat-down the music content providers into REMOVING DRM more than a decade ago, somehow has a secret (or non-secret) DRM agenda when it comes to... music?

Yeahrightsure.

Re:Clarification?

[TheFakeTimCook]

Apple users can't use Pirate bay - because reasons.

And what, exactly, would those "reasons" be, Hater?

Re:Clarification?

[TheFakeTimCook]

break out the bitch-forks

LOL! Great phrase!!!

Re: Clarification?

[TheFakeTimCook]

With my Samsung I carry a usb cable and power adapter, and a pair of headphones.
To get the same functionality with the iPhone I need a half dozen dongles, which come at a premium price, and if they break when I'm on the road can't be easily replaced at any random corner store.

Not sure why you're trying to defend Apple in this. All they're doing is trying to take over the standards with their own proprietary format, and it's not giving you anything other than a headache and a lighter wallet.

Hyperbole, much, Anonymous Apple Hater?

"Half a dozen dongles".

Well, if you don't have BT or don't want to use the Lightning-based Earbuds that came FREE with your iPhone, you can use the Lightning to 3.5 mm adapter that came FREE with your iPhone. Done. If you need/want an additional Apple-branded Lightning to 3.5 mm adapter, those are available for the princely sum of $9. And while they may not be available "at the corner store", most people in the U.S. live within a short drive to a Walmart store, which not only sells Apple Lightning to 3.5 mm adapters, but actually STOCKS them IN STOREs, and for lower than list price:

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Lig...

So, blow me, Hater. Next time check your facts before you prove yourself to be not only Anonymous and a Coward; but also an IDIOT.

Re:Clarification?

[Anonymous Coward]

Irrelevant, As most of your posts are.

Re:Clarification?

[Anonymous Coward]

STOP ; JUST STOP!!

You incessant whining to leave poor apple alone will never convince anyone to do so.
apple chose its path and that has lead it to the point where it is pretty much a joke.

Your just going to have to let go and accept it.

Re: Clarification?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mindless apple worshipper.

Re: Clarification?

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Wooooooosh
2. Whooooooosh
3. Woooooooooshhhh
4. Profit?

Re:Clarification?

[TheRaven64]

If you're referring to software that intercepts audio for recording

No, I'm talking about hardware that intercepts the digital signals during sync. Not sure how you'd read what I wrote to talk about intercepting audio.

Re: Clarification?

[MachineShedFred]

and with an iPhone you would carry a usb-to-lightning cable and power adapter, and a pair of headphones that on the end of the cable you have the 0.3 ounce 3.5mm-to-lighning adapter which came in the box with the phone for the exact same functionality.

Is that 0.3 ounce free adapter going to be the proverbial straw the broke the camel's back?

The argument against proprietary connectors is a legitimate one, but your "half a dozen dongles" is you either having zero clues about which you speak, or you making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Re:Clarification?

[Hylandr]

Ultimately the end result is to record music to *listen* to it at some point.

Humans have ears, not hardware paths. We don't process digital signals, we need analog. In the end, there will be speaker coils causing air to move to create sound we can hear.

The hardware path is irrelevant. The end use is analog. Which is what really boggles the mind as why they would use USB C for audio if they don't also allow charging or other activities to bring value to the change at the same time.

Re:Clarification?

[TheRaven64]

No, the goal (for a malicious device) is to intercept the sync between iTunes and the iOS device, compromise the key exchange, and exfiltrate credentials (and possibly other sensitive information. The goal for a less malicious device is to do the same interception during a firmware update and allow jailbreaking. Nothing I have written has anything to do with audio.

Re:Clarification?

[Hylandr]

I see what you're saying. You didn't mention anything about audio, but for me that's all those devices are really any good for. Actually using them is a completely separate matter.

There's absolutely zero Apple products or software allowed in my house or on my network so it's a moot point anyways.

What about lightning to 3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a bit more useful.

Re:What about lightning to 3.5mm?

[stooo]

Buy Samsung
or others.

Re:What about lightning to 3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's also already included with every single Apple device that doesn't feature a 3.5mm jack on the device itself.

AppleKiller

[LordHighExecutioner]

Some years ago a clever inventor developed and marketed the EtherKiller. The development of new connectors and better batteries brought researchers to the development of the USB kill, a device that - among other advantages - can be operated without mains connection. This makes devices of the USB kill series ideal for testing modern equipment in an off-the-grid environment.
Now that Apple updated the specs for the Lighting connector, we can reasonably expect the prompt delivery to the market of the Applekiller, for properly testing iPhones and similar equipments released by the well known firm in Cupertino. It is worth to note that probably the developers of the iPhone had exactly this in mind, when they nicknamed the new connector as "Lightning".

Re: AppleKiller

[Anonymous Coward]

The Applekiller is just a small dose of cpommon sense. Who needs DRM embedded even in the interconnect cables?

Re:AppleKiller

[Anonymous Coward]

No doubt there was insider sharing and a crack team of cutting edge Apple kill developers have already innovated their groundbreaking company to sell the 3.5mm to Lightning connectors in a a sexy way with fun appy app music.

Uhm...

[GeekWithAKnife]

Visionary? Magical? Great innovation?

Reinventing the wheel might be great, unless of course all you need is a wheel.

3.5mm jack just works. It's cheap it does what it needs to do. No real need to change it yet.

If they really want to do something new with sound they should make their stupid music app play FLAC. Isnt that the whole point of getting sound over W1 headphones? (AKA"special blutetooth")

Seriously, for such an innovator this is rubbish.

Re: Uhm...

[Anonymous Coward]

But the W1 headphones just stream AAC; not wav or flac. So by only allowing AAC files in the app they ensure the best performance and battery life.

Re: Uhm...

[Anonymous Coward]

by only allowing AAC files in the app they ensure the best performance and battery life.

You mean, best performance for people that don't care for audio quality... which is the same public that uses regular bluetooth. But hey, a little bit more battery time! Super worth it!

Re:Uhm...

[msauve]

You misunderstand. It's not visionary, innovative products. It's visionary, innovative consumer lock-in.

Re:Uhm...

[mjwx]

Visionary? Magical? Great innovation?

Reinventing the wheel might be great, unless of course all you need is a wheel.

3.5mm jack just works. It's cheap it does what it needs to do. No real need to change it yet.

If they really want to do something new with sound they should make their stupid music app play FLAC. Isnt that the whole point of getting sound over W1 headphones? (AKA"special blutetooth")

Seriously, for such an innovator this is rubbish.

Spotted your problem. You seem to think that Apple is an innovator, not a marketer.

Re:Uhm...

[MachineShedFred]

Or they could stop the pissing match with Qualcomm and support AptX (which they already do on macOS) so that the wireless music doesn't sound like garbage unless you have their special headphones, or one of a handful of other headphone sets that supports AAC over bluetooth...

SBC encoding is god damn garbage.

Re:Uhm...

[Wrath0fb0b]

3.5mm jack just works. It's cheap it does what it needs to do. No real need to change it yet.

There is a real need, which is some people (not you, of course) would like a phone that's thinner than the 3.5mm jack + casing will allow.

Please stop conflating my need with a real need or even anyone else's need. There are many phones on the market, you can pick one that suits you best without thinking ill of anyone else's choice.

Re:Uhm...

[BronsCon]

The surface-mount implementation of the lightning jack measures more than 3.5mm thick (the cable-end version is 3.4mm thick) and requires that the case be soldered flat to the board for stability, so it can't be installed in a cut-out in the board.

Meanwhile, there exist 3.5mm headphone jacks which exploit the fact that the plug is cylindrical and only have material on two sides, making them exactly 3.5mm thick. The recommended installation for these is in a cut-out in the board, to keep them from spreading open over time. I used to have an MP3 player that used one of these jacks, but it (the device, not the jack) became obsolete a few years ago, having been made in the late 90's.

So now we have the 3.6mm-plus-board-thickness Lightning jack and the 3.5mm-and-sits-in-a-board-cutout 3.5mm jack, and you still believe you can make the phone thinner with lightning?

You interested in owning any bridges or well known skyscrapers, by chance?

Re:Uhm...

[tlhIngan]

Or they could stop the pissing match with Qualcomm and support AptX (which they already do on macOS) so that the wireless music doesn't sound like garbage unless you have their special headphones, or one of a handful of other headphone sets that supports AAC over bluetooth...

Problem. Qualcomm refuses to license AptX unless Apple uses Qualcomm's modems. And Qualcomm refuses to budge on their license fees.

And because of the various Qualcomm lawsuits, Qualcomm refuses to license, period.

I'd rather guess that Apple would probably just pass on the costs of licensing (if they could license it) to users who want it, so you can buy a $10 app to enable AptX support. (Knowing that's probably what Qualcomm will charge Apple for AptX support). And you can bet Qualcomm will probably pull Apple's macOS AptX license in short while.

Thought AAC support on Bluetooth isn't hard to find - most of the ones that support AptX support AAC as well.

Chances are, Apple will license LDAC instead, since Sony is giving it away. It's why Android 8 supports it.

Re:Uhm...

[TheFakeTimCook]

Visionary? Magical? Great innovation?

Reinventing the wheel might be great, unless of course all you need is a wheel.

3.5mm jack just works. It's cheap it does what it needs to do. No real need to change it yet.

If they really want to do something new with sound they should make their stupid music app play FLAC. Isnt that the whole point of getting sound over W1 headphones? (AKA"special blutetooth")

Seriously, for such an innovator this is rubbish.

Even though W1-equipped Apple earbuds stream over 256k AAC (which I defy any human to distinguish from lossless), it appears your ridiculous, storage-wasting wish has been granted:

https://www.theverge.com/2017/...

But seriously? FLAC (or ALAC) on a fucking PHONE used in a Mobile environment is ASININE.

Re: Uhm...

[TheFakeTimCook]

by only allowing AAC files in the app they ensure the best performance and battery life.

You mean, best performance for people that don't care for audio quality... which is the same public that uses regular bluetooth. But hey, a little bit more battery time! Super worth it!

I would give $1000 to anyone who could RELIABLY distinguish 256k bps AAC from ANY lossless audio encoding format.

Can't be done. Sorry.

Re: Uhm...

[Anonymous Coward]

However someone can quite likely hear the difference between a 256kbps AAC stream to the headphones, when the source material is AAC and the stream is being re-encoded. That's the problem here with wireless audio. It compresses audio that has already been compressed and then decompressed. That's why a lossless media format would be ideal, so you only get the encoding once.

Re:Uhm...

[Anonymous Coward]

Bzzzt - false. Qualcomm/CSR sell lots of 8670s to Apple for use in their OSX products - just not the iOS devices. Seriously, you can get AptX on your Macbook, but not your iPhone.

Re:Uhm...

[Anonymous Coward]

The Gionee eLife S5.1 is just 5.2mm thick, and has a 3.5mm jack. It's 30% thinner than an iPhone 8 - and keeps the jack. The jack thickness is NOT a driving factor in its drop from iPhones, unless you mean that Apple cannot design a phone as well as the engineers at Gionee.

Re: Uhm...

[Anonymous Coward]

No you wouldn't. You would just make more exsuses for Apple. That's all it ever is for you, excuses. Sometimes your right, most the time your just sucking tims cock.

Thank you may I have another. - you.

Typing this from my iPhone 7.

Re: Uhm...

[Anonymous Coward]

Dont bother explaining using real tech information. This apple cheerleader will not understand or not accept any answer that is not pro-apple.

Re:Uhm...

[BronsCon]

I'm not sure how this is redundant but... I might as well also add that the current iPad models, which have a headphone jack, are a full 1.2mm thinner than the current iPhone models which do not. 1.6mm if you prefer the iPhone X.

I don't buy that ditching the 3.5mm connector makes devices thinner when the ones without it are 18% (or more) thicker. Of course, you're welcome to buy whatever you want; I just want you to know that if you buy that excuse, you're getting a load of bullshit.

Re: Uhm...

[TheFakeTimCook]

Dont bother explaining using real tech information. This apple cheerleader will not understand or not accept any answer that is not pro-apple.

As a former sound engineer and a audio enthusiast (NOT an audiophile!), I very well understand the cumulative errors from chains of transcoding using lossy formats like AAC.

Perhaps that's why Apple added FLAC Support (as well as the ALAC already supported) in iOS 11.

And besides, since Apple controls the drivers for the entire audio chain and BT chain, I would be very surprised if they re-encode AAC source material, so long as it is at 256 kbps or below. Apple isn't stupid when it comes to audio.

Oh thank you, my Master!

[Anonymous Coward]

Your generosity knows no bounds!

Gratitude

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh thank you oh mighty massa Apple, we are so grateful you are so graciously allowing people to do what they should have been able to do in the first place if you hadn't turned your fucking traitorous, lock-in, incompatible with everything, mediocre cloud services back on your users in the computing market for the last 3 - 4 years as your former NeXT engineers all retired and left the company to the tender mercies of arrogant inner city kids who couldn't software or hardware engineer themselves out of a wet fucking paper bag!

Re:Gratitude

[magusxxx]

I read that with Eric Idle's voice.

Re:Gratitude

[Anonymous Coward]

So funny because its true.

Who Cares About Adapters?

[mentil]

Alternate headline: Apple creeping towards a USB-C future. This move sounds suspiciously like the lead-up to a surprise announcement that they're courageously killing Lightning and replacing it with USB-C. Long overdue, IMO. Lightning is still limited to USB 2.0 speeds, and the latest revision of Thunderbolt uses the USB-C connector. Macbooks use USB-C as well, so iDevices are the only Apple things not yet using that connector... and would have much to gain by doing so. One of the last pieces of the puzzle was digital audio over USB... which had an official protocol finalized in the past year or so. Now that 3rd party manufacturers can produce licensed iDevice compatible gadgets with USB-C ports, everything is in place. Sure they'd have to include a USB-C to 3.5mm dongle instead of the Lightning one, but switching over sooner would be pulling the band-aid off quickly. People who bought those Lightning headphones would have to get a USB-C to Lightning adapter, as well.

Re:Who Cares About Adapters?

[mccalli]

See, I had previously hoped that as well but the release of their keyboards and mice and stylus, which charge over Lightning not USB C, now makes me think otherwise. I really would prefer all-USB C though.

Re:Who Cares About Adapters?

[AmiMoJo]

The USB audio spec was first published in 1995, around 23 years ago: http://www.usb.org/developers/...

Android users have been enjoying USB digital audio since the very early days. Standard audiophile set-up is a USB DAC attached to the phone with a rubber band, and the "strapped to the back of a phone" form factor is fairly common these days.

Re:Who Cares About Adapters?

[Anonymous Coward]

That makes perfect sense, as when they change over to USB C you will need to buy a new keyboards, mouse and stylus. I don't understand why you think this means they are *not* moving to USB C.

Re:Who Cares About Adapters?

[Anonymous Coward]

Acutally, they have a lot to lose if they switch to USB-C. Nobody will need to pay for the obscene licensing fee.

Re:Who Cares About Adapters?

[DCFusor]

Fee? How about the increased power drain to meet the spec? Battery life is too short as is.

Re:Who Cares About Adapters?

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh? WTF are you talking about? Most USB connected DAC/Amps have their own batteries inside. No power drain issues at all.

The issue is that Apple would no longer sell Apple Lightning connectors and IAP2 chips (about $2 for the set) and $12 for an Apple Lightning Audio Module (LAM). Add in the requisite licensing fees, and you're looking at nearly $18 cost to make a fully-licensed Apple Lightning Audio port. Not to mention you MUST make it at an Apple-approved factory (who typically only want to do 20K+ initial order runs, meaning that smaller, startup companies are basically locked out of the entire process as the $500K+ dev costs at that factory are incredible prohibitive).

Apple right now makes a killing on 3rd party Lightning audio devices, and gets to completely control the manufacturing chain of all those 3rd party people (via its quarterly approvals for licensed factories, including terms they can offer to clients). A nice way to skim money off of people trying to make your platform more attractive!

Re:Who Cares About Adapters?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lightning in the iPad Pro is at usb 3 speeds. Lightning is also much, much closer to "it just works" than USB C/Thunderbolt 3, which is an f'd up mess of different cables and connectors that all look the same but don't all work together.

Re:Who Cares About Adapters?

[mentil]

I was referring to the publishing of Audio Device Class 3.0, which made it energy-efficient enough to be a feasible 3.5mm jack replacement. This was published in September 2016.

Two years too late

[monkeyxpress]

As an embedded developer I think USB-C is a pretty good standard (cobbled together for sure, but not overly expensive and lots of good backwards compatibility). The connector is also a nice size/shape and should serve us well for many years to come. Apple was definitely on the right track when it pushed USB-C over other connectors on its 2016 Macbook pros. But why on earth has it taken them nearly two years to allow accessory makers to use this through MFi?

Having worked for some big companies, it feels like they pushed USB-C into the MBP on ideology (and to be fair, they have pulled these shifts off before), but then lost interest in following through with developing the eco-system. Some junior engineer probably got given the job of trawling the not-inconsiderable USB-3.1 spec to come up with a policy document for MFi, and they've only just managed to get it sorted out.

They seem to be dropping the ball on a lot of stuff like this recently. Homepod was delayed. The air charging mat is not here yet. The delays on the Airpods. I know that no big company lasts forever, but surely all that work they did to infuse the organisation with 'steve jobs think' could keep the magic going a bit longer. Personally I feel that Cook has and always will act as a caretaker, wanting to make the smallest changes possible in the belief that the spirit of Jobs lives on. But the technology market moves at an immense pace. They still make great products, but without strong ideas and assertive changes of direction, the company is increasingly getting left behind.

Re:Two years too late

[PolygamousRanchKid]

But why on earth has it taken them nearly two years to allow accessory makers to use this through MFi?

Oh, that's easy:

1. (Skip)
2. (Skip)
3. Profit!

Personally I feel that Cook has and always will act as a caretaker, wanting to make the smallest changes possible in the belief that the spirit of Jobs lives on.

Oh, the spirit of Jobs really does live on:

"We can do whatever we want and annoy our users, but they will still buy our products anyway . . . because we're Apple!"

Re:Two years too late

[Anonymous Coward]

Swing and a miss. You managed to strike out with your obnoxious post and still act like an arrogant fool.

Re:Two years too late

[Anonymous Coward]

Steve Jobs think died along with Steve Jobs brain. An organisation has no soul, just people who want to get paid.

Re:Two years too late

[sootman]

> The connector is also a nice size/shape and should serve us well for many years
> to come. Apple was definitely on the right track when it pushed USB-C over other
> connectors on its 2016 Macbook pros. But why on earth has it taken them nearly
> two years to allow accessory makers to use this through MFi?

The bigger question is, why has it taken them over two years (because it hasn't happened yet) to ship USB-C cables with iPhones? You can walk into an Apple store today and buy the most expensive laptop they make, and the most expensive phone they make, and you'll still need to plunk down and extra $20 for an adapter to let you plug one into the other.

At the very least, they should have an in-store policy to give anyone a cable for free if they buy both devices at once, or give you one free when you order together online. Hell, ten years ago they had promos like "Buy an iMac, get a free printer".

Re:Two years too late

[Anonymous Coward]

The answer to that question is the same as more things apple ; GREED

Interesting!

[MoarSauce123]

I bet the 3.5 mm headphone adapters will sell like hotcakes. Isn't it weird that Apple needs to officially allow 3rd parties to fix the fundamental design flaws of the iPhones? I hope that everyone who buys such an adapter sends the bill to Apple for reimbursement. If Apple is a decent company they pay up for their moronic blunder.

Re:Interesting!

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would I need to buy an adapter? One comes included with the iPhone in addition to the includes headset which is enough for most people.

And if you need another one, it's only $9. Before you complain about this being expensive, look up what a USB-C to 3,5mm Adapter for the Pixel 2 phones costs. The ones I found on Amazon just now were around $17.

Re:Interesting!

[tsqr]

From TFA: Accessory makers in Apple’s Made-for-iPhone/iPad/iPod (MFi) licensing program now have the ability to create new types of products as the company adds specs for a Lightning to 3.5mm output cable and USB-C ports. [emphasis added]

This is not a dongle that lets you plug headphones into your phone's lightning port. This is a dongle that lets you plug your phone's lightning port into another device's input port; e.g., your car's accessory audio input.

Re:Interesting!

[fred6666]

what's the difference?
Car stereo or heatphones, both are outputs devices

Re: Interesting!

[cyber-vandal]

Are we allowed to criticise both? There was no need to remove the 3.5mm jack. It doesn't improve the product in any way. "But but the other side..." doesn't excuse Apple's poor choice.

Re:Interesting!

[BronsCon]

You can't plug a female jack into a female jack; you need another cable for the car stereo. The newly-allowed configuration would be a single cable. It's silly, yes, but that's the difference.

Re:Interesting!

[freeze128]

Unless allowing 3rd party manufacturers to make the adapters is a sign that their newest phone will have a 3.5mm jack, making the 3rd party adapters unneeded...

Re:Interesting!

[BronsCon]

I can find the Apple adapters for $17 (or even more) on Amazon, as well. Google sells one for $9, just like Apple. Amazon also sells 2-pack for $11, one with charging capabilities for $9, and a slew of others that start out pretty cheap.

Google also lets other manufacturers make Android phones, some of which have headphone jacks built right in (what a novel idea), so I have the option of foregoing the dongle, if I don't want to deal with it. If I want a current-model phone running iOS, I don't have that option.

I'm glad I prefer Android on my phone, and I hope Apple keeps the headphone jack on the iPad.

I keep hearing that Apple did away with the headphone jack to make the phone thinner but that really doesn't hold water when the 6.1mm thick iPad has a jack and the 7.3mm thick iPhone does not.

Re: Interesting!

[Anonymous Coward]

Are we allowed to criticise both? There was no need to remove the 3.5mm jack.

that connector was not designed to be waterproof, it is a third-generation hack of a connector originally meant for telephone operators, modern phones are actually made for real humans who tend to get their phones wet and dirty

Re:Interesting!

[Anonymous Coward]

And I keep looking for the dongles for my Samsung Note 8 - I can't find any 3.5mm dongles for it! Oh wait - that's because it HAS a jack in it! And it's actually THINNER than the iPhone X (the iPhone X is 8.9mm thick at the camera; the Note 8 is 8.6mm everwhere). I guess Apple engineers aren't as good as Samsung engineers...

Re: Interesting!

[cyber-vandal]

You get your expensive fragile mini computer wet and dirty!? What are you doing!?

Re:Interesting!

[BronsCon]

Indeed. I love my S8+ and its headphone jack. The extra 0.6mm of battery helps it outlast my wife's iPhone 8 Plus every single day.

Re: Interesting!

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny, Samsung and others have had no problem making a waterproof 3.5mm jack.

Re: Interesting!

[Anonymous Coward]

Samsung innovates, apple markets and steals others innovations.

Do Not Want

[Anonymous Coward]

Great. Now the market will be saturated with overpriced gold plated Monster cables getting pushed by every Best Buy sales associate.

I'll stick with the original and best, thanks.

Re:Do Not Want

[tbuddy]

I'm pretty pumped up to get USB C to Lightning cables from Anker just having bought an iPhone. I got 3 3' cables from another supplier for cheaper than what Apple charges for one, but generally I'd prefer something from a company I know isn't going to ass up my wiring and make my phone/tablet/etc no longer function. As is, the companies that make great third party stuff under MFI certification program aren't making them.

If you're in a Best Buy you probably shouldn't be on slashdot.

Lightning to 3.5mm has been available for a while

[Not-a-Neg]

I bought an MFi certified Scosche car power adapter with lightning to 3.5mm out back in April of last year. It charges the phone and provides 3.5mm audio out for connecting to the Aux jack on a car radio. Works great!

I don't want to be an Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

What if I don't want to be in the MFi program and want to build the cables anyway?

Re:I don't want to be an Apple

[MikeDataLink]

What if I don't want to be in the MFi program and want to build the cables anyway?

There's a chip in the lightning cable with an encrypted key. They iPhone will refuse to pair with that cable.

Re:I don't want to be an Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell that to all the non-MFi Lightning cables I get at Five Below that nonetheless work perfectly...

Re:Behold, FIRST POST!!! BeauHD is an IDIOT!

[DontBeAMoran]

http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/s...

Apple Control

[ScooterComputer]

I think this story should serve for non-technical buyers to provide greater awareness of the amount of CONTROL that Apple wields upon their ecosystem. Many users are completely unaware that Apple effectively sets what you can, and often CANNOT, buy to interface with your iDevice. And consumers should know... because when they can't get that accessory they want, or they blame a vendor when a device uses a USB micro-B port/cable instead of Lightning, often their ire is misplaced at the vendors when 90% of the time it is Apple that has denied them the solution they desire. And considering how many vendors "take it on the chin" and never publicly inform the buyers of this, I can only assume there is a non-disparagement clause in the MFi license as well. From the amount of abuse that some vendors take and still remain silent, Apple might be the biggest "abuser" in the relationship. Certainly Apple took advantage with their passthrough Lightning port-to-Lightning plug used in the "bandaid" iPhone battery cases; they even used the fact that their case had it as a competitive finger in the eye to their partners... all without mentioning that they themselves prohibited the vendors from using such a port/plug combination. Mophie has remained silent, still can't use the part. Oddly, tech "journalists" reported the "marketing", knocking MFi partners in reviews for not having the port rather than reporting to buyers about Apple's shenanigans. I've not read a single review yet where this control over ports/options has been exposed.

Re:Apple Control

[Anonymous Coward]

yes indeed you cannot really live your life unless you are free to download new firmware into your telephone

are you also upset because you can't upload new software into your coffeemaker and microwave oven?

Awww, that's so nice of them

[Lucas123]

Can they now reimburse me for the additional $100+ I spent on a DVI to USB Type-C adapter for my monitor, which only occasionally works right, and three USB Type-A to USB Type-C adapters for my peripherals? Yes, yes, I went ahead and bought a "magic mouse" to eliminate the need for one adapter, but I hate it and had to move back to my Logitech mouse for my sanity.

I don't know. You spend nearly $3K on a new MacBook Pro and you just assume the company might include a few adapters that probably cost Apple about $4 to manufacture... if that. Silly me.

Re:Lightning to 3.5mm has been available for a whi

[sl3xd]

There have been MFi certified adapters for quite some time now... This isn't news, it's clickbait.

Apple is slipping....

[Anonymous Coward]

Com'on Apple, you are becomming timid! What happened to your COURAGE?