[dan-robertson]

The general problem with USB-C is that the connectors support multiple different protocols, cables are allowed to not be of sufficient quality for all use-cases (the worst example is probably high-bitrate cases like cables for computer monitors) including high power charging. Similarly, the devices on either end needn’t support all the potential protocols/uses. Furthermore, many USB-C devices that are sold are low quality and can damage devices that are plugged into them by failing to follow the specification (eg delivering too much power). So, if you’re a consumer and you have two devices with USB-C ports, and a cable with USB-C on both ends, connecting the two together might either work fine, work with poor performance (without telling you this), not work, or damage your device. And there isn’t really a good way to tell this will happen.

Lightning isn’t that much better though. You can get lightning to USB-C cables so you can plug into various bad devices and have other USB-C problems, though you likely won’t try to plug into a monitor for example.

There’s maybe an argument to be made about the ports too. I think it would be harder to clean dust/fluff out of a USB-C port and maybe they could be more fragile too because of the spike in the middle of the port.

It still seems to me like Apple probably also like that they have a lot more control over lightning. And they already have USB-C on iPads and computers so they clearly don’t think it is totally terrible. But there are a lot more iPhones in the world than other Apple devices and I can imagine eg Apple having to spend a load of money on customer support, etc, due to the USB-C issues, or getting blamed when things go wrong because of the cable or device on the other end.

I think it would be better if the possibility of connecting two devices with a cable implied that they would work together, but I’m not sure how that could be done without either more ports or more expensive cables/charging bricks. And I don’t know why a USB-like organisation would have more success at ensuring things follow the standards than USB currently have.

[hilbert42]

"Furthermore, many USB-C devices that are sold are low quality and can damage devices that are plugged into them by failing to follow the specification (eg delivering too much power)."

The simple solution as done elsewwhere across many technical endeavors is to mandate standards, that's why the ISO exists.

For example, if I plug a 220/240 Volt appliance into a power wall socket that's rated at either 220 or 240V then it should work properly—one doesn't expect say 400V out of said socket.

That countries mandate a given voltage ± a specified tolerance that's well defined is specifically to avoid malfunctions/equipment damage.

A manufacturer that goes against mandated standards should suffer the consequences.

If other industries have no problem with mandated standards then why should the IT/computer industry be excepted or any different?

[dan-robertson]

USB is standardised and yet here we are. It seems to me that somehow those standards aren’t sufficiently well mandated and I don’t really know how to improve the situation. Maybe there is some incentive for the people selling the low quality devices to move to higher quality devices over time (e.g. you get kicked off Amazon less) but that feels pretty weak to me (if better devices are more expensive, you won’t get any sales). Possibly figuring out how to punish Amazon for their third-party sellers selling faulty or non-compliant devices would help but it seems like something that would be pretty difficult to me.

[hilbert42]

Many standards owe their origins to some development that few used initially. Again using power as an example, that's how we arrived at the common 110/220V voltage standards we see in use around the world.

Due to common or widespread usage, a facility outgrows its origins and or its patents expire. Thus its original developer is no longer in charge—or can no longer fully manage its ongoing development, which is the current situation with USB (remember it's happened thousands of times before). Governments, though their standards bodies, then step in to protect consumers, etc. by ensuring standards are maintained (weights & measures are a classic case).

We are now seeing the first instances of this intervention process with USB. Unfortunately, the association responsible for USB has not kept up with the times (this usually happens because members cannot agree and the lowest common denominator becomes the released standard).

To make matters worse, USB got off to a bad start, it was a dog of a 'standard' from the outset, for starters it was ridiculously slow, 12mbps if I recall, which was about a fifth the speed it ought to have been given the then state of hardware performance. I recall being at the trade show when it was released and laughing at how slow this 'toy' was, we all joked about it. The trouble is that as this ill-conceived standard started from such a low base that it's never caught up, every release has always been too slow. Moreover, the mechanical aspect of the standard has always been inadequate, USB plugs and sockets are mechanically flimsy and slipshod and of inadequate design.

Unfortunately, as USB has become the widespread standard and seeing that industry has not managed its development well, it's little wonder government has stepped in. What we're now seeing here is just another instance of a well worn pattern.

Edit: just to be clear, if the standard had been managed well then Apple would not be able to offer Apple-specific enhancements as they would not comply with the specification. If the standard falls under a government authority (which is often an ISO), then adhering to the standard is mandatory. The advantage of this is that it puts all manufacturers on a level playing field. If this were the situation here then it would be unlawful for Apple to offer nonstandard USB enhancements.

[oceanplexian]

Ehh, I personally thought USB-C was a huge mistake and was glad Apple brought back MagSafe on the new MBPs. The cable is higher quality than USB-C, the charge rate is faster, it’s less likely to knock the computer off a table if someone trips on it, and so on. The whole “we must force everything to be usb-c” obsession is so weird and it’s not always the best standard for every use case.

[Gigachad]

Lightning cables are USB 2.0. I think you'll find every USB-C cable supports the USB 2 feature set.

[crote]

In theory, yes. The specification mandates that all USB-C cables must have 2.0 wires, but in practice some cheap brands have invented "charge-only" cables which lack them.