This is why I don't understand why so many hackers these days like to use apple products.<p>Apple is the antithesis of the hacker ideal. They're just as bad as Microsoft.<p>I mean, seriously. Have you ever been to a radioshack? Multi-charging devices are a common product. Yet apple will have none of it. It's clearly an anti-competitive measure aimed at making sure they're your only supplier.<p>Furthermore, apple's chargers suck. They deliberately have a weaker rubber sleeve around the end of laptop charger cables because it looks aesthetically nice. It's been proven that it's weaker than the conventional rubber joints on most laptop chargers, but they don't change it, because they value aesthetics over functionality.<p>Avoid if possible.<p>/me realizes he's using an ipod shuffle. oh well.
Why didn't they didn't just include a female usb port?<p>Edit: I'm skeptical about their motive. It seems they are using this as a press event to announce their KickStarter competitor ChristieStreet.
Just want to add some points to this thread as I am the inventor of POP.<p>For those who question our motives, your reasoning is fair but let me clarify some things.<p>We started Christie Street because of our our experiences with POP. We have been getting closer and closer to this decision since Apple announced Lightning and began its new rules on the adapter. While we were going back and forth and waiting to see if we could still build POP we realized that we did not have a good way of refunding to our customers. That is why on Christie Street we built a automated refund system for our inventors. So when we finally realized that POP just could not be made to what we promised, we wanted to use our platform to do the refunds as it would be easier for us to manage. Also it would allow us to test and tweak the system with real customers. We are all trying to build better companies/products and looking at a loss on POP this seemed like a good way to at least salvage something out of it while delivering a above average experience to our customers, I would call that a win-win.<p>Lots of people also seem to want POP even without Lightning and our upset that we did not poll our customers to see if a USB only version. But they are missing the point, we said in our campaign that we would support the iPhone 5 and at the time had no reason to believe that would be impossible. Why would we have thought that they would sell the new adapter any different then the old 30 pin?<p>We are not willing to compromise on the product or deliver something that was not as promised. If that brings skeptics, so be it but at the end of the day today I know that we are doing the right thing, not the easy thing but the right thing.
This would've been a better product if it just had a general-purpose retraction mechanism and let you bring your own cables. Apple may have been jerks, but they could've designed around it and made a better product instead of just throwing up their hands.
Wasn't there an EU ruling a few years ago saying that cell phones needed to start using micro-usb connectors? How is Apple getting around that, and still selling phones in the EU with proprietary plugs?
I really fail to see how opening the options to which plugs would be supported by just offering a USB Type-A adapter and providing some cables or having the user supply their own is "compromising" their product, unless it makes them too similar to products that are already on the market and have been for a while. I think this is more a failure of execution than it is Apple "killing" the project.
Not quite convinced by the argument that 'Apple killed' it. IMHO it's always dangerous to go for one plug design; given how those plugs evolved over time (Think USB, micro USB, mini USB for Android, etc.). I quickly amassed in my drawer a plethora of unusable chargers. Only the Apple port had the longest lifetime across multiple devices. I would say, the kickstarter idea could use it as an opportunity to redesign an initial flaw of - an otherwise nice charging station ?
Regardless of this particular issue, can anybody explain Apple's stance on this? Why are they forbidding Lightning connectors on products alongside other types of connectors?
I'm speculating here. But other than the ChristieStreet motives people are throwing around, it might also have been prohibitively expensive to get a 26,000Mha battery into the device at that price point.
Sucks for them, but can't they make the thing a USB hub? BYOC. Who do I need their cable? USB-A ports are more practical. If I have an Android, why would I want iPhone chargers?
It was a good idea I think, just apple being apple.<p>Daring Fireball will spin it so that Apple looks great or write a poetic post on how Lightening connectors will solve world hunger.
I found this quote from the project's letter about the situation impressive:<p>"Providing full refunds means we will have to absorb a hit for both credit card (3%) and Kickstarter fees (5%) totaling over $11,000. Today we asked Kickstarter for the 5% fee they collected based on the circumstances, however regardless of their decision YOU WILL RECEIVE 100% OF YOUR MONEY BACK."<p>I'm sure plenty of people wouldn't have had a problem if they'd passed along the various fees. After all, Kickstarters are still speculative projects that can fail even after funding. Eating whatever fees they can't get refunded is seriously going above and beyond to make things right for their backers in a difficult situation.
What does it even mean for Apple to license this connector? Do they have a patent on it? It's just a fucking plug. Or are they just refusing to let these folks use some trademark to mark their product?
Interestingly, the idapt dock I use seems to be have a lightning compatible tip.[1] Wonder how they pulled it off.<p>[1] <a href="http://www.idaptweb.com/interchangeable_tips/charger/tp/lightning/" rel="nofollow">http://www.idaptweb.com/interchangeable_tips/charger/tp/ligh...</a>
When life gives you lemons make lemonade.<p><pre><code> 1. Apple rejected the cable. To those who say "just go USB", it was
supposed to be a seamless product and that destroys aesthetics.
Image is everything in product design.
2. In parallel they were working on Christie Street, to solve the
issue of non-refunds on Kickstarter.
3. So why not turn something bad into something good? Get some press
for their new site, and also issue refunds for everyone. How else
would they issue refunds? And how does anyone lose in this situation?
</code></pre>
If anything, this seems like a great and fair way to deal with the issues at hand.
Why not just continue the project with a few other connector types, and separately make an adapter for Apple's connector (authorized or otherwise), or recommend an existing something-to-Apple-connector cable?
So I'm looking at my monoprice external battery pack. It says specifically that it works for iPod,iPhone, and iPad. Is the problem that they built in the cables into the device instead of just outputting to a usb hub with specifically defined output rates?
I applaud Jamie and the POP team for going for it -- everyone who develops on a proprietary platform like Apple's (apps, hardware, whatever) faces this risk. It's a risk you have to take if you want a shot at success.<p>Sometimes it doesn't work out.
Nothing like calling Apple a bunch of a-holes in the press to make you look super professional. Siminoff sounds like a whiny baby who got mad and flipped the risk board. At least all the backers are getting their money back.
all the way on the bottom:<p><i>Apple designs Macs, the best personal computers in the world, along with OS X, iLife, iWork and professional software. [...]</i><p>oh, irony!