[mikeash]

Apple wins, while the rest of us get stuck carrying around a wide variety of cables for no good reason.

The argument that the free market will find a solution works when competition is allowed. It doesn't work when every company who isn't Apple is legally prohibited from adopting Apple's connector.

[seanmcdirmid]

There is quite a good reason to carry around an apple cable. The connector is just better than micro-USB. The better arguments are that Apple should share their innovations with the rest of the industry so they can all have good connectors, but why should Apple even do that?

[mikeash]

Actually, the question isn't why Apple should share their innovations, but why the rest of us should enforce Apple's desire not to share. Would Apple really have refrained from developing Lightning without the ability to control it? Are we better off granting them this power?

[seanmcdirmid]

Apple would have refrained from developing Lightning if it didn't give them a competitive advantage. I think that is obvious. Why would Apple just donate Lightning to the rest of the industry? How would we as consumers reward them for such altruism?

That I give Apple the power to develop innovative proprietary solutions is a choice I personally make and I want the freedom to make. Why should everyone be forced to buy Android? So the idealists don't feel bad about their standard but hard-to-use connectors?

[CamperBob2]

How would we as consumers reward them for such altruism?

Even Apple can't invent everything they need themselves. They would benefit from a patent-free ecosystem by being able to adopt other manufacturers' advances, just as the other manufacturers would benefit from being able to adopt Lightning.

It's impossible to prove that patents are a net win for anyone but patent lawyers.