Apple now really going overboard.

[Brenden_E]

A lot of replies here so not sure if it was mentioned. I had the same issue and fixed it by first plugging in the usb cable into the computer. And then plugging in the phone part.

Don't ask me why, but if I plug the cable into the phone and then into the usb, I also get the unrecognized error rubbish.

 

[Defib]

annoys me

 

[sajunky]

Nope, read again... I certainly never disagreed that such circuitry was in device; what I did argue against is the assumption of the cable being completely passive.

I missed it (or edited later)...
Did I really wrote it? Citation needed. I am saying, it has nothing to do with charging. But, who knows, it might control discharging, as I wrote above.

 

[sand_man]

Those experiencing poor battery life did you restore from backup or setup as a new device?

 

[sand_man]

Despite the Unkown accessory error, devices still charge.

 

[[)roi(]]

Those experiencing poor battery life did you restore from backup or setup as a new device?

Arstechnica (article I quoted previously), seems to confirm the reduce battery life issue.

Despite the Unkown accessory error, devices still charge.

Reported on a few sites is a few methods (plug in / out sequence) to get these fake cables to charge; sounds like a pain in the arse, but if you're motivated it apparently can still work.

 

[[)roi(]]

I missed it (or edited later)...
Did I really wrote it? Citation needed. I am saying, it has nothing to do with charging. But, who knows, it might control discharging, as I wrote above.

Read your replies, no issues overall; yet without quoting either MFi source documents or published patents, what it does exactly (or how it differs from the fakes) will always lend itself to debate.

 

[sajunky]

Originally Posted by sajunky:
I missed it (or edited later)...
Did I really wrote it? Citation needed. I am saying, it has nothing to do with charging. But, who knows, it might control discharging, as I wrote above.
Read your replies, no issues overall; yet without quoting either MFi source documents or published patents, what it does exactly (or how it differs from the fakes) will always lend itself to debate.

Let me explain one thing. Putting intelligent controller in this place (for charging) in addition to built-in one would violate basic electronic design principles. It would create room for loopbacks causing deadlocks. By example situation with completely flat battery when MPU is not starting yet. This is why it is not speculation, I wouldn't do that if I were an Apple interface designer. Does make it sense?
But as I said previously it fits perfectly for serving power from the phone to peripherals.

 

[[)roi(]]

Let me explain one thing. Putting intelligent controller in this place (for charging) in addition to built-in one would violate basic electronic design principles. It would create room for loopbacks causing deadlocks. By example situation with completely flat battery when MPU is not starting yet. This is why it is not speculation, I wouldn't do that if I were an Apple interface designer. Does make it sense?
But as I said previously it fits perfectly for serving power from the phone to peripherals.

Sorry but unless you are in possession of an internal Apple technical design document; then your opinion is speculation; and as much as you might protest it's certainly not going to make your hypothesis an absolute.

Ps. As I said before before not everything is black & white.

 

[sajunky]

Sorry but unless you are in possession of an internal Apple technical design document; then your opinion is speculation; and as much as you might protest it's certainly not going to make your hypothesis an absolute.

I don't really care about what I should have in my possession, as with my electronic knowledge I can eliminate some evidently wrong theories and dumb assumptions. You presented some opinionated theories, each one has failed during discussion:

1. That the third party chargers are responsive for swolen batteries in Apple phones. Obviously they are, but to the same extend as to other brands. So why Apple should be different?

2. Of course Apple is different (your answer comes straight away), as charging controller is in the lightning cable. Right, you have agreed already that it is not true.

 

[[)roi(]]

I don't really care about what I should have in my possession, as with my electronic knowledge I can eliminate some evidently wrong theories and dumb assumptions.

The "dumb assumption" stable door swings both ways... You certainly haven't provided any indisputable proof that your opinion should be sacrosanct.

You presented some opinionated theories, each one has failed during discussion:

1. That the third party chargers are responsive for swolen batteries in Apple phones. Obviously they are, but to the same extend as to other brands. So why Apple should be different?

2. Of course Apple is different (your answer comes straight away), as charging controller is in the lightning cable. Right, you have agreed already that it is not true.

Are you questioning the validity of certification process, in Apple's case that is MFi -- surely like other standards bodies they exist to protect the customer re to both ensure a reliability operation and to avoid damage to the customer's property.

As to why Apple should be different? You need only look at the inequity of past actions from governments, journalists, shareholders, and customers against Apple vs. Samsung.

For example: The US government was highly publicized to tackle Apple on GPS use, iCloud storage, Finger print scanning, ... In contrast Samsung flew completely under the radar.

Other examples are the measures around the labour workforce and supply chain; clearly Apple has been under a spotlight; whereas Samsung, LG, Sony, HP, ... escaped in most cases completely unscathed.

Meaning that because they're known to be put under a spotlight, it's probable that they have no choice but to ensure a greater degree of compliance than others.

 

[sajunky]

Are you questioning the validity of certification process,

Is this a question or statement? Word swapping suggests former... No, I don't. I don't see I gave you any reason to think that way.
Because you are asking, I must say, I do think that certification should be optional. Lets customer decide what they want. And device should be robust enough to survive some abuse. This is real word, not imaginary market.

 

[[)roi(]]

Is this a question or statement? Word swapping suggests former... No, I don't. I don't see I gave you any reason to think that way.
Because you are asking, I must say, I do think that certification should be optional. Lets customer decide what they want. And device should be robust enough to survive some abuse. This is real word, not imaginary market.

Let me try to summarize: by your statement you'd apparently rather have an unfettered environment where any solution can be sold as compatible and where use is unfettered by either certification standards and software protections;

...or to put it more bluntly, where customers can have a lucky packet chance at having either a good or crappy experience, not withstanding one with an increased chance to waste money, have an overall crappy experience and/or damage their devices; all in the aid of your warped sense of the "righteousness" in the global society.

Apparently logic again fails you; or alternatively your reasoning doesn't stretch beyond your optical impediments / blinders; fortunately for the rest of us, it's not up to you.
The majority of Apple and Samsung customers are certainly not budding techies: neither are most able to discern good from bad without something like certification and/or device restrictions; and that alone is reason enough for Apple / Samsung to want to protect them from abuse by 3rd parties. 3rd parties which btw are not restricted from signing up for Apple's MFi certification.

We all know why they don't do this; it's obviously to cut corners, much of which is at the customer's expense.

Why else would they try to confuse the customers by duplicating the cables to such a degree that it's difficult to impossible to discern one from the other. Maybe you prefer the option of being sold a lemon; I certainly don't!

 

[sajunky]

Apparently logic again fails you; or alternatively your reasoning doesn't stretch beyond your optical impediments / blinders; fortunately for the rest of us, it's not up to you.

I didn't elaborate these things so far, you asked for my opinion. I see that your question was just a preparation to issue another derogatory remarks, so I am giving up on this issue, go to hell.

Re: Discussion about lightning interface details and purpose of the control chip I do maintain my opinion presented above. Little bit quess, but opinion is based on general design principles, purpose and experience. Challenge me on this I wish you luck. You failed already twice, still have a chance.

 

[[)roi(]]

I didn't elaborate these things so far, you asked for my opinion. I see that your question was just a preparation to issue another derogatory remarks, so I am giving up on this issue, go to hell.

Re: Discussion about lightning interface details and purpose of the control chip I do maintain my opinion presented above. Little bit quess, but opinion is based on general design principles, purpose and experience. Challenge me on this I wish you luck. You failed already twice, still have a chance.

Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. — Mark Twain

I never learn

 

[sajunky]

I never learn

Affirmative.

 

[[)roi(]]

Affirmative.

lol... Fortunately one can always count on ignorance...

 

[sajunky]

lol... Fortunately one can always count on ignorance...

Unfortunately some people never grow up, other never learn. I don't remember exact definition of fools. Probably never grow up nor learn.

 

[[)roi(]]

Unfortunately some people never grow up, other never learn. I don't remember exact definition of fools. Probably never grow up nor learn.

If anything, I should certainly congratulate you on your overall grammatical furtherance; guess I was probably spot on about your tik impediment.