More expensive, more complicated, patent encumbered, and difficult/expensive to licence.

As much as I would like a reversible USB cable I'd prefer micro-USB which is just universal at this point (and cheap) to an expensive cable supported by one manufacturer.

Plus Apple Lightning is not really smaller than a micro-USB.

I didn't mean that the whole world should just adopt Apple's cable; instead, a new one could be developed, that is actually useful (i.e. as useful as Apple's cable).

I understand. I also agree. I'd love to see a new micro-USB replacement which is reversible.

In that case expect to see a multitude of world-wide, multi-year lawsuits about how Apple owns this idea and how its patented and yadda yadda yadda.

In this current US-led lawyerocracy, it's better to play it safe and just not poke the dragon with a stick.

USB is a ubiquitous standard by now. Sure it could have been a better standard, but at least now we have a standard (sans Apple). That is definitely a change for the better.

> I'd love to see a new micro-USB replacement which is reversible.

And does not feel so fiddly I still fear breaking them.

I don't see why they don't make the usb ports reversible.

If they made USB ports reversible they wouldn't be USB anymore, and not just in shape either, the technology required to make them reversible also requires devices both upstream (e.g. computers, power bricks) and downstream (phones, tablets, etc) to "understand" that the port could be communicating in either of two modes (reverse and non-reverse, and to flip the data channels accordingly).

The technology exists. Just would require starting again from scratch.

You can make reversible connectors without intelligence (adaptiveness). Just use 2x the number of contacts, in a mirrored layout.

Requires more physical space for the same number of contacts, but USB doesn't require that many contacts to begin with.

This is how the older Fitbit accomplished the task and it works just fine.

> I wonder, however, if it could transmit the same amount of energy

The Thunderbolt cable is specced for 10W, which is more than existing USB standards (1.5A @5V for USB3 "Battery Charging Specification", previously 500~900mA @5V, leading many — including Apple — to perform proprietary power negotiation to allow sending >~10W to their devices).

But it is much less than the more recent USB Power Delivery spec (which I guess is the subject of the article), which allows up to 5A @20V

I do like their new connector, however I'm concerned about what it is in the connection that wears.

In MicroUSB the springs providing force/friction to keep the connector in the device are in the cable. That means as it wears out, you should only have to replace the cable.

Where does Apple's wear? After the 10,000/25,000/50,000 insertions, do I just need to buy a new phone?

> After the 10,000/25,000/50,000 insertions, do I just need to buy a new phone?

I don't know about the new connector's durability, but if it breaks, just put in a new one.

I had to replace the dock connector in my iphone 4 and it cost me $30 and an hour of time.

Ifixit shows you how to do it for a 5: http://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iPhone+5+Lightning+Connector+Rep...

So... If you use it too much just open the phone up, void your warranty, and fix it yourself?

Versus (at least in theory) the design of microusb in which the solution is simply "buy a new $2 cable"?