• Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Compared to what? Parallel? Maybe, if you don’t need the structural rigidity. Banana plugs? Definitely. USB-C? Fuck no! But it is also older than USB-C, so that’s fair.

      • Shurimal@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Banana plugs? Definitely

        Banana plugs are damn good for lab equipment.

        As a speaker connector? Fuck banana plugs. Speakon is the only way.

      • Ly1999@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Lightning is rounded and thus easier to insert. It doesn’t scratch the surface of whatever you‘re trying to plug it in to and on top of that it slightly clicks into place. Just by itself, the plug is superior yes.

        • sebi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, if the clamp-mechanism breaks, you habe to replace the connector on the device while with UsbC you only have to use a different cable.

      • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        What are you doing with your cables that “structural rigidity” is a major concern?

      • lol3droflxp@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because they co-developed it and it is the better connector if you want to do anything other than charging.

      • boonhet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Phones go in pockets. Pockets have lint. Lightning ports are way easier to clean than USB-C.

        iPads and Macbooks mostly stay in the house or get carried in a bag rather than a pocket. Way less lint, so the benefits of USB-C far outweigh the benefits of Lightning here.

        • suction@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          How much more lint do you think will an USB-C port catch than a lightning port? Answer: Insignificantly little. You’r reaching for arguments here.

          • boonhet@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I said easier to clean not that it catches less lint. I could even use a toothpick for my iPhone. Nothing thicker than a sim tool worked for my Oneplus and that had trouble getting it all out. Even most NEEDLES I had were too thick.

      • snowe@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because ports work better in some instances than others? Why don’t we just use rj45 for all our data transfer instead of USB? This has got to be one of the weirdest arguments I’ve seen around usb c v lightning.

          • snowe@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            It really isn’t. The lightning port is less than half the size of a USB C port. 6.7x1.5x6.7mm compared to 8.4x2.6x6.65mm. That’s 67.335 square millimeters vs 145.236 square millimeters. Lightning is significantly smaller.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The fact that only Apple was allowed to use it means it is a worse cable than any standardised cable