2
For those interested in a future iPhone with no ports | MacRumors Forums
source link: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/for-those-interested-in-a-future-iphone-with-no-ports.2277803/
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
iPhone 12 Pro For those interested in a future iPhone with no ports
May 28, 2008
3,382
3,090
I added my 24 gig Mac photo library and it took almost 4 hours on my 12 Pro. Wired? About 15 minutes. An iPhone with no ports would be such a sad thing for those who manage large photo and/or music library locally on their laptops/desktops.
Reactions: DieselFiend1989
In current implementation, yes, but it could be possible to transfer large amounts of data wirelessly much quicker. You are assuming this is how Apple will do it.
Transferring 24GB at 200 MBits/s would take about 18 minutes. WiFi can do that and then some. So wireless transfer doesn’t always have to be so slow.
Transferring 24GB at 200 MBits/s would take about 18 minutes. WiFi can do that and then some. So wireless transfer doesn’t always have to be so slow.
Last edited: Wednesday at 8:52 AM
The Game 161
macrumors Penryn
Dec 15, 2010 24,195 13,198
I'm apple has thought of this and it will need to be faster just like wireless charging will ideally need to be faster to justify it for a lot of people.
Not to mention the fact that when I sync my iPhone or iPad with my iMac it disconnects more often then not. The only way to re-establish the connection is to plug the device into the iMac.
I hope it’s a LONG way away!
I hope it’s a LONG way away!
Reactions: ouimetnick
HPad
macrumors newbie
Sep 21, 2019
I'm not for a portless iPhone, but will say at this rate WiFi transfers have been a TON faster for me than wired transfers. I can easily get just over 800mbps over WiFi with my iPhone 12 Pro Max over WiFi6. And normal WiFi I can get upwards around 600mbps.
1rottenapple
macrumors 68040
Apr 21, 2004
3,344
1,453
I agree Current implantation it sucks butttttt. Look at iPhone to iPhone transfer. When I got a new iPhone I just place it next to the other iPhone and it transferred photos and pics in relative quick fashion All wireless. It took about 40 mins or so I did but I transferred 30 gigs of music plus picture and videos. And it’s a one time transfer so pictures should be faster.In current implementation, yes, but it could be possible to transfer large amounts of data wirelessly much quicker. You are assuming this is how Apple will do it.
Transferring 24GB at 200 MBits/s would take about 18 minutes. WiFi can do that and then some. So wireless transfer doesn’t always have to be so slow.
Nordichund
macrumors 6502
Aug 21, 2007
Security is my main issue. When it comes to safety what is more secure? A cable you can see directly connected between two or more devices or WiFi? Maybe in the future it will be safer, but right now?
Significant1
macrumors 6502a
Dec 20, 2014
A cable can contain/hide malicious hardware. WiFi is encrypted unless you are using a open hotspot with no security. Of course the router etc. Can also be compromised. I am no network or security expert.Security is my main issue. When it comes to safety what is more secure? A cable you can see directly connected between two or more devices or WiFi? Maybe in the future it will be safer, but right now?
camilasaunder89
macrumors member
Aug 12, 2020
This is all done because of the security issue. Wireless transfer are more secure as compared to the cable ones.
ouimetnick
macrumors 68030
Aug 28, 2008 2,841 3,222
Apple will just leave those kinds of customers in the dust (me included). They probably see a future where everything is wirelessly. Why sync you personal music collection when they can make money off of iTunes in the Cloud and Apple Music? Why sync old purchased movies when you have those available to redownload and they can push Apple TV+?
I feel like the days of syncing an iPhone with a computer could be coming to an end. I hope I’m wrong because I don’t use streaming music services, and I have my iTunes library in full uncompressed AIFF music files.
As far as your photo library, Apple’s answer is that those photos should be in your Photo.app Library and also stored in iCloud. Your phone should sync those photos via iCloud. It’s a great way for them to sell you a large monthly iCloud storage plan.
I hope I’m wrong.
I feel like the days of syncing an iPhone with a computer could be coming to an end. I hope I’m wrong because I don’t use streaming music services, and I have my iTunes library in full uncompressed AIFF music files.
As far as your photo library, Apple’s answer is that those photos should be in your Photo.app Library and also stored in iCloud. Your phone should sync those photos via iCloud. It’s a great way for them to sell you a large monthly iCloud storage plan.
I hope I’m wrong.
QuietGamer
macrumors member
Nov 23, 2014
Going purely wireless would be a huge inconvience for me. I connect my phone thru a 3.5 adaptor to my work truck stereo. I use Apple Maps and stream XM radio 8-12 hours per day. I like that map directions are heard through the stereo enabling me to keep my eyes on the traffic while driving. Apple needs to realize not everybody who uses their products is a desk jockey.
Recommend
About Joyk
Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK