26 ms·

As an EU citizen, I am really happy with this decision. I am an iPhone user, but having an iPhone is not ubiquitous here, almost all of my friends/special othe

As an EU citizen, I am really happy with this decision. I am an iPhone user, but having an iPhone is not ubiquitous here, almost all of my friends/special other, use an Android phone with USB-C. Most of their laptops, Mac or not, use or allow USB-C for charging. This as been the case for a few years now, yet, if I go somewhere for more than a full day and forget my lighting cable, my phone will become a useless paperweight while every non-iPhone user is fine in the meantime because of the wide adoption of USB-C. It is also ironic how Apple markets heavily on how you can take great RAW photos or videos but somehow you have to use lightning USB2 speeds to transfer them. Lightning is barely smaller than USB-C, and clearly my iPhone thickness will not change if it switches to USB-C. As for the e-waste generated by "having to throw all of those lightning cables", how is it not e-waste that someone buying an iPhone will have yet another lightning cable that will only be used to charge it. If we want to really be more environmentally friendly, wouldn't it make more sense to have no cable at all with the devices we buy, force the sellers to clearly tell the consumers about it and offer the cable on the side only if needed? With that cable being usb-c, the consumer don't have to think about the cable type, for non-tech savvy people, that would be "the regular charging cable" and that's it. I would also add that all lightning cables won't suddenly go to the landfill in 2024. Many people will keep their iPhones/AirPods for a while after that date. Many would probably donate their old lightning cables to whoever needs them. In the meantime, we all already have an ever growing landfill in our homes called the cable drawer, and it is also an issue that needs to be addressed.

m00dy 4y ago
As a Turk living in EU, I second the comment above.
blue_light_man 4y ago
This is such a short sighted view. What just happened is, EU, a political organization enforcing the use of a technology on a company which operates on free market. It's Apples best interest to make technology that the consumers want so that they can sell more units of that. A political organization like EU has no say in this. EU citizens already make this decision for themselves by voting with money and choosing to buy/not buy an iPhone. Today is one of the dark days of EU. In short sight it's a victory. But in long sight it's a hinderence to progress by enforcing a technology on the market instead of letting the free market decide the technology.
- doikor 4y ago
  > A political organization like EU has no say in this. EU and most people living within it would disagree with this statement.
  - blue_light_man 4y ago
    - palata 4y ago
      Does it? I mean China is not exactly as free a market as the US, and I wouldn't say they are lagging horribly behind... on the contrary in many cases
    - manuelmoreale 4y ago
      What does it mean to ”lag behind” when it comes to technology at a country/continental level?
      - jonwinstanley 4y ago
        Lack of legislation
    - mburee 4y ago
      Something to do with massive brain drain after/during WW2 and the Holocaust? At least for the atom bomb and spaceflight that seemed to be the case...
      - nickpp 4y ago
        Brain drain continues today. Innovation happens in the US while EU... mandates charging connectors.
    - PeterStuer 4y ago
      No, that would be the US buying up every EU tech company that dares to become successful with free helicopter money.
hedgehog 4y ago
Lightning is a better connector for small devices and it's more durable in my experience. USB-C is way better than micro as a connector but you end up with the issue of many kinds of cables that look similar but are not interchangeable. What speed? PD support? Power only? Who knows! Maybe switching to a less durable connector or no connector is fine given that Qi support has gotten pretty good. Most of the Lightning cables I've purchased are still in circulation, I'd prefer not to replace them. If the EU really cared about solving a problem they'd ban micro, that connector is really fragile and totally superseded by type C.
- themitigating 4y ago
  They are interchangeable but may not charge as fast or transfer data as fast. So they are still useful.
  - hedgehog 4y ago
    They're not interchangeable, of the C cables I have now some will drive my monitor and some won't, and some don't even carry data. The type C connector is a big step up vs the older micro and A+B connectors, it just doesn't really make using USB simpler or easier to figure out.
- jonny_eh 4y ago
  > Lightning is a better connector for small devices it's more durable in my experience It's less durable in my experience. I can do this all day.
  - gruez 4y ago
    I don't see how USB-C can be more durable considering there's a plastic post on the female side holding the pins. That's an obvious failure point.
    - jonny_eh 4y ago
      The large hole in the lightning female port traps lint, I have to clean it out with a toothpick every couple of weeks. USB-C's gaps are too small for lint to collect.
kmlx 4y ago
> I am an iPhone user, but having an iPhone is not ubiquitous here, almost all of my friends/special other, use an Android phone with USB-C. yes, this is an interesting statement. and it's true. basically in the countries that form the European Union Android has a higher market share than iOS. in some big countries like Germany, Spain, France and Italy Android has between 60% to 70% of the market. but what's more interesting is this: in the UK, Canada, Australia and the US the iPhone has more market share (and in NZ it's very close). anecdotally, in the UK pretty much everyone in big cities have iPhones. i very rarely see an Android device. i do wonder why. it could have to do with cheaper prices for Android and a general lower penetration of technology in those countries, but i think this seems too facile.
- f1shy 4y ago
  I have a feeling the iPhone market penetration, in the named countries (Central EU vs Common Wealth) has a strong correlation with other aspects of the daily life in said markets (for example Facebook use, MSN Messanger --ok, some 10 years ago-- use of cash in daily purchase) At least that is my feeling, which of course can be completely biased. I would find really interesting a study in that.
- rozularen 4y ago
  Not only that Android is cheaper but also the mean income in countries where Android is prevalent is lower than those where iOS is, with exceptions like Germany, France (I'd need to see market share data from these exceptions)
  - sangnoir 4y ago
    iOS popularity correlates more with the use of English as a first language than mean income: Germany and France are huge "exceptions" for income. In all likelihood, iPhone popularity is cultural (i.e. popular in the Anglosphere), which has an incestuous media/advertising landscape where Apple is seen as cool/hip.
speleding 4y ago
The main problem I have with USB-C is that it is not a particularly good standard for power delivery. For one, USB-C is not "IP rated" for use in the kitchen or the bathroom, so you still need separate chargers there. Also the USB-C connector supports fast data delivery, which makes it a lot more expensive than a connector that focusses on power only. A standard that would do just power delivery <100W and works in damp environments, so it could cheap and universal, would have been so much better.
- thatfrenchguy 4y ago
  > A standard that would do just power delivery <100W and works in damp environments, so it could cheap and universal, would have been so much better. Don't you just have a RCD/GFCI on your outlet / breaker for this purpose?
  - speleding 4y ago
    The breaker box is a last line of defence if things have gone wrong. Plugs designed for use in a bathroom will not short out if they get a bit damp, etc.
- crote 4y ago
  Agree on the IP rating, that is definitely not ideal - although excusable in practice. Regarding cost: the fast data is optional. Charging-only usb-c receptables are available for $0.025 / each. To be fair, a micro-b can be found for $0.015 so it is more expensive, but it's not exactly going to bankrupt anyone.
jwr 4y ago
USB-C is just a connector. If we follow this logic, the EU should also mandate which aspects of USB-C PD are required to be supported and enforce that. Otherwise we'll end up with a slew of devices without even the required 5.1k resistors, which can't charge from PD-compliant adapters, but can be charged using a USB-A to USB-C cable. As an EU citizen, while I do agree that regulation is often required (it did wonders for our roaming charges!), I do not like this development.
- arcticbull 4y ago
  I'd argue this is actually great. It's extremely unlikely that type-C connectors would charge from anything other than the in-built charging standard (if for no other reason than physical compatibility) but all the extra pins make it extremely flexible. The Lightning pins can just be routed out of the USB-C connector in a compliant way via alt-mode.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- markus92 4y ago
  USB-PD is mandated in this directive! The EU press release specifically states any device will be able to charge at the same speed if cable/charger support it. See https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20220930IPR41928/long-awaited-common-charger-for-mobile-devices-will-be-a-reality-in-2024 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20220930IP...
- crote 4y ago
  They do mandate USB PD, actually! The law [0] reads: > In so far as they are capable of being recharged by means of wired charging at voltages higher than 5 Volts, currents higher than 3 Amperes or powers higher than 15 Watts, the categories or classes of radio equipment referred to in point 1 of this Part shall: > 3.1. incorporate the USB Power Delivery, as described in the standard EN IEC 62680-1-2:2021 “Universal serial bus interfaces for data and power - Part 1-2: Common components - USB Power Delivery specification”; > 3.2. ensure that any additional charging protocol allows for the full functionality of the USB Power Delivery referred to in point 3.1., irrespective of the charging device used. As to devices supplying less than 15 Watts: the 5.1k resistors are already mandatory in the USB-C connector spec. [0]: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2022-0338_EN.pdf https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2022-0338... , page 35
codexb 4y ago
There's nothing wise or moral about this decision. Mandating a technology standard, purely for personal preference and convenience reasons -- not for reasons related to safety, or pollution, or security -- especially for things that change as fast as phones, is one of the most short-sighted and naive things any government could do. There's a long history of Apple using proprietary connectors to achieve performance specifications above what the currently available standardized connectors could provide. Hell, in all likelihood, Apple is likely to ditch a charging connection altogether in favor of wireless charging in the near future. The EU is mandating technological stagnation. They will always be behind the market.
- arcticbull 4y ago
  Apple hasn't changed the 'fast-changing' lightning connector since 2012, and USB-A lasted from 1996 to, well, present. USB-C came out in 2014 and is likely going to outlive us both. Connectors simply don't change that fast, and I'm not sure why people think they do. I think even the EU can regulate on that kind of schedule.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - Moru 4y ago
    The only reason connectors would change fast is to sell another cable and charger every time you buy a phone.
    - jonwinstanley 4y ago
      Or to make them slimmer, lighter, improve performance or improve the user experience.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - kelnos 4y ago
mgraczyk 4y ago
Serious question, why is is it a problem to put a tiny cable in a landfill? The amount they leach is essentially zero. The EU would have done more for the environment by spending $20k cleaning up an extra few car batteries. This is so obviously pandering and protectionism and it's surprising to me people believe the "e-waste" justification. Seriously, is there an accounting of the environmental damage caused by cell phone cables (not power converters)? Everything I've seen points to the damage being substantially less globally than a single digit number of cars or batteries.
- crote 4y ago
  The problem is that it is a lot of tiny cables, and a lot of chargers with them. Additionally, it also protects the consumer by preventing companies from locking consumers into buying device-specific chargers at greatly inflated prices. It might even become common for devices to come without chargers: why have 10 chargers lying around when all your devices use the same charging connector?
  - mgraczyk 4y ago
    But no, this is not true. The iphone charger is already USB. I use them with my Android phone all the time, and iphone users charge with my pixel charger. Those already interoperate. I understand the e-waste and consumer protection argument for the charger (power converter), but why the cable?
    - crote 4y ago
      This isn't really the case in practice, though. Up until recently everyone used USB-A on the charger end, with a dozen different competing fast charge protocols. Chargers had the same connector, but they weren't fully interoperable. USB-C is slowly trying to fix this. I completely agree that the cables aren't a massive deal. But on the other hand, if you are already standardizing chargers, why not do the cables too? Personally, I see no overwhelmingly good reason not to do it.
      - 4y ago
minimaul 4y ago
> "the regular charging cable" This is the problem I have with this choice. USB-C isn't one cable. It's a big variety of poorly-labelled possible cables, complying with a ton of different standards. USB-C can be just USB2.0 capable, 3.1 Gen1, 3.1 Gen2, Thunderbolt 3 capable, etc. Some cables can carry 3A. Some 5A. When your 'universal' charging cable doesn't provide fast charging, is it because your charger doesn't provide the right voltages/wattage? Is it a broken USB-PD implementation (eg the Nintendo Switch)? is it that the cable is underspecced (and a lot of USB-C cables on the market don't actually meet the spec)? I think the intention is good but USB-C carries so much complexity that I don't think this helps consumers as much as everyone is making out.
- jacobr1 4y ago
  USB-A had a similar problem (but on a much smaller scale). There also was heterogeneity in build quality. But over time features and quality converged. I think we should expect something similar here.
  - minimaul 4y ago
    I didn't have to keep separate sets of visually identical cables for USB-A to do different things - that's already a reality with USB-C -> USB-C cables. I can tell at a glance if a USB-A cable supports USB3.0 for instance. I can't tell that for a USB-C -> USB-C cable.
- Rebelgecko 4y ago
  The new labeling requirements will hopefully help with that
Terretta 4y ago
> e-waste The irony of, e.g., Brazil, passing laws that Apple can't leave the cable and charger out of the box. Meanwhile, who with a current phone uses a cable to charge any more? Even before MagSafe the wireless is far more convenient, now with MagSafe and a zillion brands of stands that do phone + watch + AirPods all wireless, not to mention even MagSafe for cars that charge and don't drop the phone on bad roads, cables are redundant. And while they won't all do the same top speed, in general the coasters charge both Android and iPhone happily. But, speaking of docks, that's the real issue -- lightning works beautifully when docking a phone into a stereo or alarm clock or etc, USB-C not so much. Basically, on lightning if the tab breaks you get a new cheap cable, on USB-C if the tab breaks, you need a new dock.
- kelnos 4y ago
  Raises hand. I don't have an iPhone, but I find wireless charging to just be kinda annoying. The only place I use it is in my car, which has a built-in charging pad, with good mechanical design that keeps the phone from moving around (and possibly losing the wireless charging "connection"). Otherwise, everywhere else, I'm always wired when I charge, and I kinda don't care about wireless charging. > But, speaking of docks, that's the real issue -- lightning works beautifully when docking a phone into a stereo or alarm clock or etc, USB-C not so much. I mean, there are still docks out there that have the old 30-pin Apple iPod/iPhone/iPad connector (not many; I think I saw one in an old hotel last year, but that's it). If USB-C is the primary connector used, then that's what dock manufacturers will use. And, bonus, manufacturers that actually support more than one connector can eventually drop Lightning as an option, and save on costs. > Basically, on lightning if the tab breaks you get a new cheap cable, on USB-C if the tab breaks, you need a new dock. Er, what? If the tab in a dock breaks, you need to get a new dock with either connector. The Lighting connector tab is just as breakable (if not more so, as it's thinner) than a USB-C plug, and if the one in your dock breaks, you're just as out of luck.
  - Terretta 4y ago
    > Er, what? If the tab in a dock breaks, you need to get a new dock with either connector. To be clear: iPhones do not have a tab, so iPhones don't break, the lightning cable does. iPads now have a tab. Hopefully it won't break. A USB-C standing phone dock effectively has a tab on both dock (to insert into a phone's socket) and in the phone (the tab that sits inside the USB-C socket), so that's 2 tabs for one docking experience.
spookthesunset 4y ago
Going wireless charging only is probably not gonna happen anytime soon. Wireless charging is significantly less efficient than wired. The difference might not matter much if you are using power from the wall*, but if you are charging off a battery bank you want as much efficiency as you can--you don't want to waste power! *(being less efficient while charging from wall might not matter to you as an individual but consider if everybody was charging with such an inefficient means... that might add up to a lot of waste)
- CharlesW 4y ago
  > The difference might not matter much if you are using power from the wall, but if you are charging off a battery bank you want as much efficiency as you can--you don't want to waste power! Wireless power banks are already a thing, and they're great because you don't have to mess around with cables. For those of you not using iPhones, they support standard Qi charging as well as faster and more efficient MagSafe charging. I care about wireless charging efficiency as much as I care about plug-in USB charging efficiency, which is not a lot. If wireless charging is half as efficient, it's costing me a couple bucks extra per year.
  - fomine3 4y ago
    For wireless power bank, the problem isn't cost but efficiency. Half transferring efficiency compared to wired means that you need double capacity power bank to charge same amount of energy. I want small and wired. Wired is also useful because power bank can be separated so I put it on pocket or bag while I have a phone on my hand.
cm2187 4y ago
tbh it's kind of ridiculous that I need a different dongle for my ipad and my iphone. I know that Apples makes money selling dongles, but that's a crap UX.
assetlabel 4y ago
Technology is still changing fairly rapidly. Regulation is not. There will come a time when flashy new tech that everyone is drooling over will not be available in the EU due to this law.
- alpaca128 4y ago
  This whole discussion is only a thing because Apple's tech isn't changing rapidly enough for regulation, the exact opposite of your scenario. Also good luck producing a functioning smartphone that's too thin for the USB-C connector before the EU can react (the new iPhone 14 has exactly 3 times the thickness, so it'll take a while). The much more realistic reason for a new phone not being released here is the new proposal to enforce 5 years of replacement parts for all phones among other things.
dwaite 4y ago
> It is also ironic how Apple markets heavily on how you can take great RAW photos or videos but somehow you have to use lightning USB2 speeds to transfer them. Lightning is barely smaller than USB-C, and clearly my iPhone thickness will not change if it switches to USB-C. There is nothing about a USB-C cable or port that mandates SuperSpeed (err, 5GB or higher) data transfer rates. Most compliant charging cables are still Hi-Speed (480 mbps), and capped at 30W (higher requires an active component in the cable). Similarly, there is nothing about Lightning that restricts the transfer speed to Hi-Speed. There were iPad Pro models with lightning that supported a USB 3 adapter, which had (I believe) 5 Gbps transfer speed. However, the decision was made to switch the subsequent generations of Pro models to USB-C, leaving that part as a bit of a curiosity. I suspect because of the sheer volume of lightning cables out there, Apple simply doesn't want to cause confusion by creating 'tiers' of certified cables that have the same set of plugs on the ends and which thus look identical, but which have different properties. If only the USB-IF considered such things. > If we want to really be more environmentally friendly, wouldn't it make more sense to have no cable at all with the devices we buy, force the sellers to clearly tell the consumers about it and offer the cable on the side only if needed? One could hope! This should also shrink the packaging down further, having a measurable cost reduction on shipping as well as packaging waste. I go through a lot of phones, but have relatives who are on a 3-4 year upgrade cycle. Thus, I've been able to find good homes for any excess USB-C to lightning cables (and they've been ecstatic when I've given them powerful multi-port USB-C chargers as gifts as well). Hopefully we'll see countries continue to change their laws so that you don't need to bundle cables, chargers and/or headsets with purchases. France I believe finally changed their laws requiring a bundled headset, and it went into effect this year. > I would also add that all lightning cables won't suddenly go to the landfill in 2024. Many people will keep their iPhones/AirPods for a while after that date. Many would probably donate their old lightning cables to whoever needs them I'd expect the vast majority to be trashed by 2029, along with the majority of USB-A chargers. I've had support issues where family has thought their devices had bad software or failing batteries, but it turns out they had accidentally switched to some cheap, low wattage USB-A charger. I somewhat expect the wide array of differences between USB-A, USB-C power delivery support, and active vs passive cables will mean that devices may start to give troubleshooting guidance for slow charging. At this point, I would expect quite a few USB-A chargers and cabling to go to the trash.

m00dy 4y ago

As a Turk living in EU, I second the comment above.

blue_light_man 4y ago

This is such a short sighted view. What just happened is, EU, a political organization enforcing the use of a technology on a company which operates on free market. It's Apples best interest to make technology that the consumers want so that they can sell more units of that. A political organization like EU has no say in this. EU citizens already make this decision for themselves by voting with money and choosing to buy/not buy an iPhone. Today is one of the dark days of EU. In short sight it's a victory. But in long sight it's a hinderence to progress by enforcing a technology on the market instead of letting the free market decide the technology.

doikor 4y ago
> A political organization like EU has no say in this. EU and most people living within it would disagree with this statement.
- blue_light_man 4y ago
  - palata 4y ago
    Does it? I mean China is not exactly as free a market as the US, and I wouldn't say they are lagging horribly behind... on the contrary in many cases
  - manuelmoreale 4y ago
    What does it mean to ”lag behind” when it comes to technology at a country/continental level?
    - jonwinstanley 4y ago
      Lack of legislation
  - mburee 4y ago
    Something to do with massive brain drain after/during WW2 and the Holocaust? At least for the atom bomb and spaceflight that seemed to be the case...
    - nickpp 4y ago
      Brain drain continues today. Innovation happens in the US while EU... mandates charging connectors.
  - PeterStuer 4y ago
    No, that would be the US buying up every EU tech company that dares to become successful with free helicopter money.

hedgehog 4y ago

Lightning is a better connector for small devices and it's more durable in my experience. USB-C is way better than micro as a connector but you end up with the issue of many kinds of cables that look similar but are not interchangeable. What speed? PD support? Power only? Who knows! Maybe switching to a less durable connector or no connector is fine given that Qi support has gotten pretty good. Most of the Lightning cables I've purchased are still in circulation, I'd prefer not to replace them. If the EU really cared about solving a problem they'd ban micro, that connector is really fragile and totally superseded by type C.

themitigating 4y ago
They are interchangeable but may not charge as fast or transfer data as fast. So they are still useful.
- hedgehog 4y ago
  They're not interchangeable, of the C cables I have now some will drive my monitor and some won't, and some don't even carry data. The type C connector is a big step up vs the older micro and A+B connectors, it just doesn't really make using USB simpler or easier to figure out.
jonny_eh 4y ago
> Lightning is a better connector for small devices it's more durable in my experience It's less durable in my experience. I can do this all day.
- gruez 4y ago
  I don't see how USB-C can be more durable considering there's a plastic post on the female side holding the pins. That's an obvious failure point.
  - jonny_eh 4y ago
    The large hole in the lightning female port traps lint, I have to clean it out with a toothpick every couple of weeks. USB-C's gaps are too small for lint to collect.

kmlx 4y ago

> I am an iPhone user, but having an iPhone is not ubiquitous here, almost all of my friends/special other, use an Android phone with USB-C. yes, this is an interesting statement. and it's true. basically in the countries that form the European Union Android has a higher market share than iOS. in some big countries like Germany, Spain, France and Italy Android has between 60% to 70% of the market. but what's more interesting is this: in the UK, Canada, Australia and the US the iPhone has more market share (and in NZ it's very close). anecdotally, in the UK pretty much everyone in big cities have iPhones. i very rarely see an Android device. i do wonder why. it could have to do with cheaper prices for Android and a general lower penetration of technology in those countries, but i think this seems too facile.

f1shy 4y ago
I have a feeling the iPhone market penetration, in the named countries (Central EU vs Common Wealth) has a strong correlation with other aspects of the daily life in said markets (for example Facebook use, MSN Messanger --ok, some 10 years ago-- use of cash in daily purchase) At least that is my feeling, which of course can be completely biased. I would find really interesting a study in that.
rozularen 4y ago
Not only that Android is cheaper but also the mean income in countries where Android is prevalent is lower than those where iOS is, with exceptions like Germany, France (I'd need to see market share data from these exceptions)
- sangnoir 4y ago
  iOS popularity correlates more with the use of English as a first language than mean income: Germany and France are huge "exceptions" for income. In all likelihood, iPhone popularity is cultural (i.e. popular in the Anglosphere), which has an incestuous media/advertising landscape where Apple is seen as cool/hip.

speleding 4y ago

The main problem I have with USB-C is that it is not a particularly good standard for power delivery. For one, USB-C is not "IP rated" for use in the kitchen or the bathroom, so you still need separate chargers there. Also the USB-C connector supports fast data delivery, which makes it a lot more expensive than a connector that focusses on power only. A standard that would do just power delivery <100W and works in damp environments, so it could cheap and universal, would have been so much better.

thatfrenchguy 4y ago
> A standard that would do just power delivery <100W and works in damp environments, so it could cheap and universal, would have been so much better. Don't you just have a RCD/GFCI on your outlet / breaker for this purpose?
- speleding 4y ago
  The breaker box is a last line of defence if things have gone wrong. Plugs designed for use in a bathroom will not short out if they get a bit damp, etc.
crote 4y ago
Agree on the IP rating, that is definitely not ideal - although excusable in practice. Regarding cost: the fast data is optional. Charging-only usb-c receptables are available for $0.025 / each. To be fair, a micro-b can be found for $0.015 so it is more expensive, but it's not exactly going to bankrupt anyone.

jwr 4y ago

USB-C is just a connector. If we follow this logic, the EU should also mandate which aspects of USB-C PD are required to be supported and enforce that. Otherwise we'll end up with a slew of devices without even the required 5.1k resistors, which can't charge from PD-compliant adapters, but can be charged using a USB-A to USB-C cable. As an EU citizen, while I do agree that regulation is often required (it did wonders for our roaming charges!), I do not like this development.

arcticbull 4y ago
I'd argue this is actually great. It's extremely unlikely that type-C connectors would charge from anything other than the in-built charging standard (if for no other reason than physical compatibility) but all the extra pins make it extremely flexible. The Lightning pins can just be routed out of the USB-C connector in a compliant way via alt-mode.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
markus92 4y ago
USB-PD is mandated in this directive! The EU press release specifically states any device will be able to charge at the same speed if cable/charger support it. See https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20220930IPR41928/long-awaited-common-charger-for-mobile-devices-will-be-a-reality-in-2024 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20220930IP...
crote 4y ago
They do mandate USB PD, actually! The law [0] reads: > In so far as they are capable of being recharged by means of wired charging at voltages higher than 5 Volts, currents higher than 3 Amperes or powers higher than 15 Watts, the categories or classes of radio equipment referred to in point 1 of this Part shall: > 3.1. incorporate the USB Power Delivery, as described in the standard EN IEC 62680-1-2:2021 “Universal serial bus interfaces for data and power - Part 1-2: Common components - USB Power Delivery specification”; > 3.2. ensure that any additional charging protocol allows for the full functionality of the USB Power Delivery referred to in point 3.1., irrespective of the charging device used. As to devices supplying less than 15 Watts: the 5.1k resistors are already mandatory in the USB-C connector spec. [0]: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2022-0338_EN.pdf https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2022-0338... , page 35

codexb 4y ago

There's nothing wise or moral about this decision. Mandating a technology standard, purely for personal preference and convenience reasons -- not for reasons related to safety, or pollution, or security -- especially for things that change as fast as phones, is one of the most short-sighted and naive things any government could do. There's a long history of Apple using proprietary connectors to achieve performance specifications above what the currently available standardized connectors could provide. Hell, in all likelihood, Apple is likely to ditch a charging connection altogether in favor of wireless charging in the near future. The EU is mandating technological stagnation. They will always be behind the market.

arcticbull 4y ago
Apple hasn't changed the 'fast-changing' lightning connector since 2012, and USB-A lasted from 1996 to, well, present. USB-C came out in 2014 and is likely going to outlive us both. Connectors simply don't change that fast, and I'm not sure why people think they do. I think even the EU can regulate on that kind of schedule.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Moru 4y ago
  The only reason connectors would change fast is to sell another cable and charger every time you buy a phone.
  - jonwinstanley 4y ago
    Or to make them slimmer, lighter, improve performance or improve the user experience.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - kelnos 4y ago

mgraczyk 4y ago

Serious question, why is is it a problem to put a tiny cable in a landfill? The amount they leach is essentially zero. The EU would have done more for the environment by spending $20k cleaning up an extra few car batteries. This is so obviously pandering and protectionism and it's surprising to me people believe the "e-waste" justification. Seriously, is there an accounting of the environmental damage caused by cell phone cables (not power converters)? Everything I've seen points to the damage being substantially less globally than a single digit number of cars or batteries.

crote 4y ago
The problem is that it is a lot of tiny cables, and a lot of chargers with them. Additionally, it also protects the consumer by preventing companies from locking consumers into buying device-specific chargers at greatly inflated prices. It might even become common for devices to come without chargers: why have 10 chargers lying around when all your devices use the same charging connector?
- mgraczyk 4y ago
  But no, this is not true. The iphone charger is already USB. I use them with my Android phone all the time, and iphone users charge with my pixel charger. Those already interoperate. I understand the e-waste and consumer protection argument for the charger (power converter), but why the cable?
  - crote 4y ago
    This isn't really the case in practice, though. Up until recently everyone used USB-A on the charger end, with a dozen different competing fast charge protocols. Chargers had the same connector, but they weren't fully interoperable. USB-C is slowly trying to fix this. I completely agree that the cables aren't a massive deal. But on the other hand, if you are already standardizing chargers, why not do the cables too? Personally, I see no overwhelmingly good reason not to do it.
    - 4y ago

minimaul 4y ago

> "the regular charging cable" This is the problem I have with this choice. USB-C isn't one cable. It's a big variety of poorly-labelled possible cables, complying with a ton of different standards. USB-C can be just USB2.0 capable, 3.1 Gen1, 3.1 Gen2, Thunderbolt 3 capable, etc. Some cables can carry 3A. Some 5A. When your 'universal' charging cable doesn't provide fast charging, is it because your charger doesn't provide the right voltages/wattage? Is it a broken USB-PD implementation (eg the Nintendo Switch)? is it that the cable is underspecced (and a lot of USB-C cables on the market don't actually meet the spec)? I think the intention is good but USB-C carries so much complexity that I don't think this helps consumers as much as everyone is making out.

jacobr1 4y ago
USB-A had a similar problem (but on a much smaller scale). There also was heterogeneity in build quality. But over time features and quality converged. I think we should expect something similar here.
- minimaul 4y ago
  I didn't have to keep separate sets of visually identical cables for USB-A to do different things - that's already a reality with USB-C -> USB-C cables. I can tell at a glance if a USB-A cable supports USB3.0 for instance. I can't tell that for a USB-C -> USB-C cable.
Rebelgecko 4y ago
The new labeling requirements will hopefully help with that

Terretta 4y ago

> e-waste The irony of, e.g., Brazil, passing laws that Apple can't leave the cable and charger out of the box. Meanwhile, who with a current phone uses a cable to charge any more? Even before MagSafe the wireless is far more convenient, now with MagSafe and a zillion brands of stands that do phone + watch + AirPods all wireless, not to mention even MagSafe for cars that charge and don't drop the phone on bad roads, cables are redundant. And while they won't all do the same top speed, in general the coasters charge both Android and iPhone happily. But, speaking of docks, that's the real issue -- lightning works beautifully when docking a phone into a stereo or alarm clock or etc, USB-C not so much. Basically, on lightning if the tab breaks you get a new cheap cable, on USB-C if the tab breaks, you need a new dock.

kelnos 4y ago
Raises hand. I don't have an iPhone, but I find wireless charging to just be kinda annoying. The only place I use it is in my car, which has a built-in charging pad, with good mechanical design that keeps the phone from moving around (and possibly losing the wireless charging "connection"). Otherwise, everywhere else, I'm always wired when I charge, and I kinda don't care about wireless charging. > But, speaking of docks, that's the real issue -- lightning works beautifully when docking a phone into a stereo or alarm clock or etc, USB-C not so much. I mean, there are still docks out there that have the old 30-pin Apple iPod/iPhone/iPad connector (not many; I think I saw one in an old hotel last year, but that's it). If USB-C is the primary connector used, then that's what dock manufacturers will use. And, bonus, manufacturers that actually support more than one connector can eventually drop Lightning as an option, and save on costs. > Basically, on lightning if the tab breaks you get a new cheap cable, on USB-C if the tab breaks, you need a new dock. Er, what? If the tab in a dock breaks, you need to get a new dock with either connector. The Lighting connector tab is just as breakable (if not more so, as it's thinner) than a USB-C plug, and if the one in your dock breaks, you're just as out of luck.
- Terretta 4y ago
  > Er, what? If the tab in a dock breaks, you need to get a new dock with either connector. To be clear: iPhones do not have a tab, so iPhones don't break, the lightning cable does. iPads now have a tab. Hopefully it won't break. A USB-C standing phone dock effectively has a tab on both dock (to insert into a phone's socket) and in the phone (the tab that sits inside the USB-C socket), so that's 2 tabs for one docking experience.

spookthesunset 4y ago

Going wireless charging only is probably not gonna happen anytime soon. Wireless charging is significantly less efficient than wired. The difference might not matter much if you are using power from the wall*, but if you are charging off a battery bank you want as much efficiency as you can--you don't want to waste power! *(being less efficient while charging from wall might not matter to you as an individual but consider if everybody was charging with such an inefficient means... that might add up to a lot of waste)

CharlesW 4y ago
> The difference might not matter much if you are using power from the wall, but if you are charging off a battery bank you want as much efficiency as you can--you don't want to waste power! Wireless power banks are already a thing, and they're great because you don't have to mess around with cables. For those of you not using iPhones, they support standard Qi charging as well as faster and more efficient MagSafe charging. I care about wireless charging efficiency as much as I care about plug-in USB charging efficiency, which is not a lot. If wireless charging is half as efficient, it's costing me a couple bucks extra per year.
- fomine3 4y ago
  For wireless power bank, the problem isn't cost but efficiency. Half transferring efficiency compared to wired means that you need double capacity power bank to charge same amount of energy. I want small and wired. Wired is also useful because power bank can be separated so I put it on pocket or bag while I have a phone on my hand.

cm2187 4y ago

tbh it's kind of ridiculous that I need a different dongle for my ipad and my iphone. I know that Apples makes money selling dongles, but that's a crap UX.

assetlabel 4y ago

Technology is still changing fairly rapidly. Regulation is not. There will come a time when flashy new tech that everyone is drooling over will not be available in the EU due to this law.

alpaca128 4y ago
This whole discussion is only a thing because Apple's tech isn't changing rapidly enough for regulation, the exact opposite of your scenario. Also good luck producing a functioning smartphone that's too thin for the USB-C connector before the EU can react (the new iPhone 14 has exactly 3 times the thickness, so it'll take a while). The much more realistic reason for a new phone not being released here is the new proposal to enforce 5 years of replacement parts for all phones among other things.

dwaite 4y ago

> It is also ironic how Apple markets heavily on how you can take great RAW photos or videos but somehow you have to use lightning USB2 speeds to transfer them. Lightning is barely smaller than USB-C, and clearly my iPhone thickness will not change if it switches to USB-C. There is nothing about a USB-C cable or port that mandates SuperSpeed (err, 5GB or higher) data transfer rates. Most compliant charging cables are still Hi-Speed (480 mbps), and capped at 30W (higher requires an active component in the cable). Similarly, there is nothing about Lightning that restricts the transfer speed to Hi-Speed. There were iPad Pro models with lightning that supported a USB 3 adapter, which had (I believe) 5 Gbps transfer speed. However, the decision was made to switch the subsequent generations of Pro models to USB-C, leaving that part as a bit of a curiosity. I suspect because of the sheer volume of lightning cables out there, Apple simply doesn't want to cause confusion by creating 'tiers' of certified cables that have the same set of plugs on the ends and which thus look identical, but which have different properties. If only the USB-IF considered such things. > If we want to really be more environmentally friendly, wouldn't it make more sense to have no cable at all with the devices we buy, force the sellers to clearly tell the consumers about it and offer the cable on the side only if needed? One could hope! This should also shrink the packaging down further, having a measurable cost reduction on shipping as well as packaging waste. I go through a lot of phones, but have relatives who are on a 3-4 year upgrade cycle. Thus, I've been able to find good homes for any excess USB-C to lightning cables (and they've been ecstatic when I've given them powerful multi-port USB-C chargers as gifts as well). Hopefully we'll see countries continue to change their laws so that you don't need to bundle cables, chargers and/or headsets with purchases. France I believe finally changed their laws requiring a bundled headset, and it went into effect this year. > I would also add that all lightning cables won't suddenly go to the landfill in 2024. Many people will keep their iPhones/AirPods for a while after that date. Many would probably donate their old lightning cables to whoever needs them I'd expect the vast majority to be trashed by 2029, along with the majority of USB-A chargers. I've had support issues where family has thought their devices had bad software or failing batteries, but it turns out they had accidentally switched to some cheap, low wattage USB-A charger. I somewhat expect the wide array of differences between USB-A, USB-C power delivery support, and active vs passive cables will mean that devices may start to give troubleshooting guidance for slow charging. At this point, I would expect quite a few USB-A chargers and cabling to go to the trash.