iPhone 5 or Next iPhone...

[Waplord]

Manny is quite right the iphone/ipod dock connector carries a lot more on the various pin outs

stolen from here

Pin

Signal

Description

1

GND

Ground (-), internally connected with Pin 2 on iPod motherboard

2

GND

Audio & Video ground (-), internally connected with Pin 1 on iPod motherboard

3

Right

Line Out - R (+) (Audio output, right channel)

4

Left

Line Out - L(+) (Audio output, left channel)

5

Right In

Line In - R (+)

6

Left In

Line In - L (+)

7

?

8

Video Out

Composite video output (only when slideshow active on iPod Photo)

or Component Video Pb

9

S-Video Chrominance output

for iPod Color, Photo only

or Component Video Y

10

S-Video Luminance output

for iPod Color, Photo only

or Component Video Pr

11

AUDIO_SW

If connected to GND the iPhone sends audio signals through pin 3-4, otherwise it uses onboard speaker.

12

Tx

ipod sending line, Serial TxD

13

Rx

ipod receiving line, Serial RxD

14

RSVD

Reserved

15

GND

Ground (-), internally connected with pin 16 on iPod motherboard

16

GND

USB GND (-), internally connected with pin 15 on iPod motherboard

17

RSVD

Reserved

18

3.3V

3.3V Power (+)

Stepped up to provide +5 VDC to USB on iPod Camera Connector. If iPod is put to sleep while Camera Connector is present, +5 VDC at this pin slowly drains back to 0 VDC.

19,20

+12V

Firewire Power 12 VDC (+)

21

Accessory Indicator/Serial enable

Different resistances indicate accessory type:

1kOhm - iPod docking station, beeps when connected

10kOhm - Takes some iPods into photo import mode

6.8 k? - Serial port mode. Pin 11-13 are TTL level. Requires MAX232 chip to convert to RS232 levels.

68kOhm - makes iPhone 3g send audio through line-out without any messages

500kOhm - related to serial communication / used to enable serial communications Used in Dension Ice Link Plus car interface

1MOhm - Belkin auto adaptor, iPod shuts down automatically when power disconnected Connecting pin 21 to ground with a 1MOhm resistor does stop the ipod when power (i.e. Firewire-12V) is cut. Looks to be that when this pin is grounded it closes a switch so that on loss of power the Ipod shuts off. Dock has the same Resistor.

22

TPA (-)

FireWire Data TPA (-)

23

5 VDC (+)

USB Power 5 VDC (+)

24

TPA (+)

FireWire Data TPA (+)

25

Data (-)

USB Data (-)

26

TPB (-)

FireWire Data TPB (-)

27

Data (+)

USB Data (+)

Pins 25 and 27 may be used in different manner. To force the iPod 5G to charge in any case, when USB Power 5 VDC (pin 23) is fed, 25 must be connected to 5V through a 10kOhm resistor, and 27 must be connected to the Ground (for example: pin 1) with a 10kOhm resistor.

iPod 5G can also be forced to charge by attaching the data + and the data - pins to the 5v via a 10k Ohm resistor ( BOTH PINS) and connecting pin 16 to the 5v (ground). (Confirmed working with iPod 5G 20GB). This provides 500mA of current for charging. For quicker charing, up to 1A, see below.

To charge an iPhone, 3G, 3GS, 4 / iPod Touch, 2nd gen, 3rd, 4th or Ipod Classic (6th Gen), usb data- (25) should be at 2.8v, usb data+(27) should be at 2.0v. This can be done with a few simple resistors: 33k to +5v (23) and 22k to gnd(16) to obtain 2v and 33k to +5v and 47k to gnd to obtain 2.8v. This is a notification to the iphone that it is connected to the external charger and may drain amps from the usb.

To charge iPod Nano pins 25 and 27 should be tied together and then connected to a 10K ohm resistor, and the other side of this resistors then needs to be connected to 5v power.

It's also possible to charge the iPod's or iPhone's battery to make use the of internal +3.3v output (18) terminal to connect the USB Data + (27) thru a 47k ohms resistor and the USB Data- (25) thru a 47k resistor to the USB Power source +5v (23). This way the USB function is still useable for normal operations and makes it easier the fit in a plug. The resistors are not to critical 2x 150k's still work.

28

TPB (+)

FireWire Data TPB (+)

29,30

GND

FireWire Ground (-)

[cheezemonkhai]

How hard is it to make a USB cable that goes to a cheap chip, which can then do DAC/ADC for analogue signals?

Ditto for the same chip being able to take digital data and convert it to a video output?

It's a doddle and they do it with the display port to HDMI for example.

No, part of the reason is that it keeps you hooked to their approved products.

[Evening Star]

Unless Apple relent on the Bluetooth issue, namely allowing the transfer of files (MP3, PDF & DOC) between phones of all brands via Bluetooth, then the Iphone can sit resolutely on the shelf where it belongs, waiting for an ISheep to buy it.

[ckyliu]

To be honest half of those things are unnecessary or other connectors can do them. 3.5" audio out, MicroUSB and HDMI Type D would cover almost all the functionality, and in a footprint that's not much bigger. Firewire data is unnecessary, hardly any machines have the port in an accessible place, may as well use a USB 3.0 instead.

Speaking of which, Firewire is another example of Apple's proprietiness, and now they're trying to use Thunderbolt instead of USB 3.0. Madness!

[g_tee]

Yeah, screw it. Nokia Lumia it is.

[cheezemonkhai]

Yeah, screw it. Nokia Lumia it is.

Actually I would over an iPhone and that's saying something bearing my feelings around previous windows phones.

[RainbowFire]

How hard is it to make a USB cable that goes to a cheap chip, which can then do DAC/ADC for analogue signals?

Why bother with that? There are standards for transferring digital audio around already. The problem Apple would have is that they're not Apple standards and thus command no revenue generation.

Where are you going to be sending the analogue audio anyway? 3.5mm headphone socket does the job nicely.

Actually thinking about it, my SGS2 car-dock connects via USB to the phone and then 3.5mm jack to the Octy. If Samsung can do it, surely Apple can copy "innovate" a similar solution.

Ditto for the same chip being able to take digital data and convert it to a video output?

Again, there are (non-Apple) standards already exist for this.

The only innovations Apple have been good at is new ways to take other people (who make better products) to court.

(Let's not innovate, let's litigate instead)

No, part of the reason is that it keeps you hooked to their approved products.

+1

With reference to the recent case against Samsung, am expecting the iPhone5 to have a revolutionary shape of a rectangle with semi-circle end corners, so they can start suing suing BBC's Playschool over "the arched window". ;)

Many years ago Douglas Adams wrote the Hitch-hikers Guide To The Galaxy. (As well as a massive Pink Floyd fan, he was a massive Apple fan too.) In one of the books, after a ship has crashed on a planet somewhere, there's a debate going on about inventing the wheel. Ford rants on about how it's the simplest thing ever to invent, but is stopped in mid-rant when he's asked "if you're so clever, you tell us what colour it should be then!" Sums Apple up quite nicely......it's all about the look.

[Chronicbint]

Not really just about the look though is it. Personally I am an android fan, however iOS in general is easier to use and works better than android.

[gadgetman]

Wasn't the connector thing supposed to being haromised across all OEMs so that everyone had the same chargers and data cables etc? IIRC it was decided that micro-USB was to be the standard.

They were and they did agree to join it.

[steve75]

HTC appear to be making some sort of announcement to spoil Apple's party..... Dunno what's being announced though. 19th September. http://www.droid-life.com/2012/09/04/htc-holding-event-on-september-19-got-any-guesses/

[gadgetman]

US only announcement it seems.

[Harry_vRS]

I love my iPhone 4, I think it is great. But, iOS lets it down somewhat. My phone is jailbroken, and I couldn't live without a jailbreak now.

For example, folders within folders, and Zephyr, which brings up app switcher with a slide in gesture from the bottom of the screen. Both are prime examples are of what can be done with better software. Apple really should take on board these ideas, because without jailbroken tweaks, iOS is **** quite frankly. They make for a much smoother experience overall.

[Chronicbint]

I love my iPhone 4, I think it is great. But, iOS lets it down somewhat. My phone is jailbroken, and I couldn't live without a jailbreak now.

For example, folders within folders, and Zephyr, which brings up app switcher with a slide in gesture from the bottom of the screen. Both are prime examples are of what can be done with better software. Apple really should take on board these ideas, because without jailbroken tweaks, iOS is **** quite frankly. They make for a much smoother experience overall.

Wonder how many of the features are patented by others though.

[wilsy7]

A6 chip FTW. This phone is gonna blow everything out of the water IMO. Can't compare a s3 to a year old 4s, Samsung has a new phone weekly to try and beat it lol saying that anytime I've tested an s3 against my 4s the 4s wins with faster loading times etc. each to their own I guess. Can't wait for the 5

[Chronicbint]

Samsung released a new Galaxy S phone every year, just like the iPhone.

Think the 5 is going to be exceptionally underwhelming.

[cheezemonkhai]

A6 chip FTW. This phone is gonna blow everything out of the water IMO. Can't compare a s3 to a year old 4s, Samsung has a new phone weekly to try and beat it lol saying that anytime I've tested an s3 against my 4s the 4s wins with faster loading times etc. each to their own I guess. Can't wait for the 5

The A6, that's just an ARM chip, like everybody else's ARM chips?

What's so super duper about the A6 beyond every other quad core ARM processor out there?

To be honest anyway, the wwhole more CPUzz is a load of cack anyway. I'd far rather have a phone that ran really well using a single or dual core 300MHz chip and 256MB of RAM.

The faster you crank the chips, the more cores you add and the more RAM you add, the more power you suck from the batteries.

The ARM CPUs are great for power, but 4 cores and 16GB will suck more than 1 core and 256MB.

At the end of the day, this reminds me of the old desktop CPU d*ck waving contest of a few years back. Look we haz more megahurtzzzz!!!!!!!1!!111

Maybe if they fixed their software so it wasn't so resource hungry and thought about how to do things more smartly, we wouldn't just be throwing more CPUz at everything until it runs at an acceptable speed.

Bearing in mind what I've done in the past with a few spare cycles left over on a CPU, there must be stacks of room for improvement, when a phone "needs" that much processing and memory. Why use 32 bits for a boolean when you can cram 32 into an int? Yes there is some shuffling, but there is plenty of things you can do without going that far to save space and cycles.

This isn't just apple, but seriously, the iSheep and aSheep seem to have been brain washed into the more CPUzzz is good regardless.

Edited 11 September, 2012 by cheezemonkhai

[wilsy7]

The difference is software and hardware designed to work togther, that's how the current dual core 4s is faster than the quad core s3

[Chronicbint]

The difference is software and hardware designed to work togther, that's how the current dual core 4s is faster than the quad core s3

Except outside the Apple fanzone, its not.

[wilsy7]

Except outside the Apple fanzone, its not.

It's the real world performance that matters

[cheezemonkhai]

The difference is software and hardware designed to work togther, that's how the current dual core 4s is faster than the quad core s3

Wow you really did go for brainwashing 101 don't you?

Embedded software always works with the hardware.

iOS is no more designed to work on a specific CPU than any other piece of software out there designed for embedded use.

Go have a nosey at a cross compiler, that does the work of moving from dev platform to target platform.

At the end of the day, if it was so designed to work together, you'd need a lot less CPU grunt and power.

Look at the Symbian smart phones or S40 feature phones. They are tightly integrated and while they have some foibles, they use very little CPU/memory and hence power for a given application.

The A6 is an ARM CPU, probably a cortex A9. ARM CPU's are used all over the phone industry. It's a standard chip TMSC IIRC.

There are only a few CPU manufacturers in the world who can make a chip and that size and apple don't have their own fab

Oh and if you want a CPU that'll kick others as you put it, look at the current generation Cortex A15. First taped out in 2011.

http://www.extremete...hips-are-unique

Yep, Apple really lead the way with their own super special sauce.

Oh and by the way, I'm typing this on a Mac, so don't come over with the you just hate mac's line

It's the real world performance that matters

In that case, where would you like the plate delivered, so that you can hand it's own ass back to apple on a plate?

It's had it's backside kicked repeatedly in so many ways.

Lets face it a late 90's/early 2000's nokia/motorolla could do most of what the iPhones can do and more and still last a fair few days off a single charge. That plus they can make calls well, hold onto their signal and not be as bleeding expensive.

Edited 11 September, 2012 by cheezemonkhai

[Chronicbint]

Sure is and in every neutral test the latest Android phones take the crown.

[JLneonhug]

This isn't just apple, but seriously, the iSheep and aSheep seem to have been brain washed into the more CPUzzz is good regardless.

I think the philosophy behind it is that more hands make little work. if it takes half the time with 4 cores rather than 2 it will use less power. The problem lies in the software developers needing to try less to make it work, this is due to the fact they need to bosh out 10 apps per week or whatever hoping 1-2 will be a hit. For software guys it seems its quantity over quality which makes their moneys.

Edit: Ofc this doesn't include the apple people as they just have researchers to steal ideas off actual people who actually develop software

Edited 11 September, 2012 by JLneonhug

[cheezemonkhai]

I think the philosophy behind it is that more hands make little work. if it takes half the time with 4 cores rather than 2 it will use less power. The problem lies in the software developers needing to try less to make it work, this is due to the fact they need to bosh out 10 apps per week or whatever hoping 1-2 will be a hit. For software guys it seems its quantity over quality which makes their moneys.

I get the more slower threads is better than a single fast one and it's true in some respects. For example you can turn them off as not needed so 4* 300MHz can be more then 1 * 1200Mhz in some cases.

The problem is, these are now slow cores in the phones.

You're not talking 4 x 300MHz or 4 * 600Mhz, you're talking 4* 1.2GHz+.

Nobody is talking about putting a pair of 2GHz CPUs in a phone, but if you need 4*1.2GHz CPU to do what the phone needs to do, you're doing something wrong in the software layer or design.

That's a lot of juice to be sucking up to do the basics of a computer. Remember what you could do with a dual PIII 350MHz and tell me why the phone needs an order of magnitude more CPU for doing roughly the same?

As for the software guys. Don't get me started. I wrote embedded software for a few years and if the phone OS developers took some cues from that world rather than the desktop/shiny world, you'd get much faster phones with much better battery life, for a lower price.

A better optimiser in the compiler wouldn't hurt either

Edited 11 September, 2012 by cheezemonkhai

[Dr Zoidberg]

Samsung released a new Galaxy S phone every year, just like the iPhone.

Think the 5 is going to be exceptionally underwhelming.

There doesn't seem to be any compelling reason to upgrade from a 4S, certainly.

Unless they surprise us there's no new hardware feature that offers a major jump in performance unlike the Retina Display or moving to dual core from a single core processor.

Everything else that's likely to appear is much more of an incremental change (or a new iOS feature that you'll be able to get anyway).

[cheezemonkhai]

By the way, have they seriously dropped the digital audio out on the new connector?

Surely they'd just drop the analogue and be done with it?

Edited 11 September, 2012 by cheezemonkhai