Interesting point. Got me thinking about how the iPod was not the first MP3 player, and how the iPhone was not the first smartphone. I believe the philosophy was "don't be the first; be the first to get it right."
It's a little disappointing that they haven't been so magical lately.
More likely than using any sort of standard port would be Apple inventing yet another new proprietary port.
False. USB 1.
Apple rarely goes proprietary with their ports. The original 30-pin iPod port. Lightning. ADB in the mists of time.
All of which were I believe better than what was available.
They are better, but we also have a situation where the only port on an Apple device is proprietary with the latest iPhone.
If we put the iPhone 6S model aside (because the -S models generally do not adopt a significant change in features), the only model released since USB-C is the iPhone 7.
Given the short lifecycle of phones, adopting lightning rather than postponing until USB-C has given several generations of phones with a superior connection.
Should the iPhone 7 have adopted USB-C instead of lightning? Perhaps, but USB-C support isn't exactly widespread (and it might in fact be Apple which ends up pushing USB-C support to the point of widespread adoption).
Is the lightning connection superior to USB-C?
Well, it's size is smaller: 6.7mm x 1.5mm (vs 8.4mm x 2.6mm for USB-C); a 42% reduction in height, and a 20% reduction in width.
For devices like mobile phones, I can see how the size of connector can be more important than bandwidth or compatibility. I'd like lightning to be a standard, but it's definitely an improvement over micro-USB, and in terms of size, it's better than USB-C.
Of course, the one huge flaw is that now their phones and laptops use different connectors.
But don't dare buy a low-cost adapter from eBay or be damned for 10 generation.
So yeah it's a closed environment but is it so far worst than the jungle outside?
Among the problems is you can have a cable that can't support a particular alternate modes, or can't support adequate power. The USB-IF hasn't defined a set of standard icons (not that there's much room for them -- they'd be microscopic).
Also the MacBook Retina has USB 3.1 v1 so supports just ordinary USB 3.0 & HDMI. The MacBook Pro supports several more alternate modes.
At least to Apple's credit, AFAICT all four USB ports are identical. Even that isn't required by the spec.
The two right-hand ports deliver Thunderbolt 3 functionality, but have reduced PCI Express bandwidth [1]
I can't find any official document which clearly states the speed of the reduced-functionality ports, but Apple also state this:
All late-2016 MacBook Pro models deliver USB 3.1 Gen 2 (10 Gbps) performance on all Thunderbolt 3 ports [1]
Perhaps in the scope of large scale manufacturing, having multiple (redundant) connector styles is a low hanging fruit for cost reduction.
But it seems that there would be increased user confusion and technical support required. Very strange.
> "they prioritized standardizing the connector but not the rest of the details"
Apple might have taken advantage of it, but it's the USB-IF who decided to make the standard rather more variable.
USB 3.1 in general is a mess. The spec allows for Alternate Modes, where the port is hardwired on the Motherboard to be able to be switched to deliver DisplayPort, HDMI, MHL, Thunderbolt, and damn near anything else you can figure out how to mux over the port's pins and cheaply demux on the other end of the cable. The best part is no one will actually list what Alternate Modes their laptop or motherboard supports. So if I want a laptop that supports, DisplayPort Alternate Mode with dual monitors, I'm opening support tickets with manufacturers asking "Does your USB-C port run this?"
Apple and Intel simply followed along what with what was already a mess.