4 ms·

> 1. The lawsuit started when Apple dropped the chargers coming with the phone, but had just changed the cable connection, so you would need a new charger anywa

> 1. The lawsuit started when Apple dropped the chargers coming with the phone, but had just changed the cable connection, so you would need a new charger anyway. That makes no sense, Lightning was introduced in 2012. And the older Dock Connector chargers had detachable USB cables (I don't remember Apple ever using bonded chargers), so you could have used your existing charger with a new cable. And an other commenter reports that the judge commented: > telling Apple that it could help the environment in other ways, such as giving its devices USB-C support. But Lightning predates USB-C by 2 years. There was no USB-C to switch to when Apple introduced Lightning. And I can understand and emphasise with immediately switching over from and obsoleting all the "brand new" Lighting-based docks & co. Apple has started the switch with a few ipads (and obviously all the macs), and I've been expecting the deprecation of Lightning this year or the next, as it's been a decade, which is about how long the Dock Connector existed before the introduction of Lightning (though it survived Lightning for a few years in older devices and developing countries, IIRC Apple stopped selling the last dock connector device around 2015). > 4. If Apple doesn't give the charger, or sell it really cheap, Brazillians WILL use chinese knockoffs that set themselves on fire, it is just the reality in the country where all tech is crazy expensive. But how is that Apple's responsibility? And surely they'll do that either way so they can have multiple chargers?

speeder 4y ago
If I remember correctly (I don't own an iPhone so to me this is kind all hearsay) what happened is Apple stopped shipping charges around the time chargers became USB-C, while their older ones used USB-A on the brick. So the iPhone package would come with the phone itself, and a USBC-lightning cable, but the USB-C brick wasn't included and was ludicrously expensive, and nobody had one since it was new.
- g_lined 4y ago
  The comment you're replying to makes the point that if you already had a charger, you could use the old charger and the old cable. There is no requirement to use the new cable that it came with. If you agree that people probably already had one from a few years ago, then they already had everything they needed to charge the phone. The 'new cable' did not stop anything from working that previously worked.
  - SkeuomorphicBee 4y ago
    That is where point #3 comes in, being that Iphones are/where not very popular in Brazil (due to being prohibitively expensive), it is safe to assume that a significant number of sales are going to be first time Iphone buyers, who don't have a previous lightning cable. It all comes down to: is the average buyer be reasonable expected to already have that fundamental piece at home? And in Brazilian market the answer to that is a clear no.
- masklinn 4y ago
  Ah that's fair then, that would be an issue. Though it surprises me a touch: my iphone 11 came with an A->lightning cable (I just checked). Maybe it's that more recently Apple switched the bundled cables from A to C, but didn't provide a charger brick, so people who still only had USB-A chargers were SOL? That would make a lot of sense as well, and I would understand the anger.
  - sdfsdfsdf111 4y ago
    > Apple switched the bundled cables from A to C, but didn't provide a charger brick, so people who still only had USB-A chargers were SOL Yes, this is what happened on the iPhone 13 (may have been 12).
  - ascagnel_ 4y ago
    I think that was the first phone where they didn’t include the charger; after a decade+ of including a USB-A charger, that decision was probably fine for avoiding e-waste. Switching to USB-C on the wall side of the cable the next year was very iffy, since users were much, much more likely to need the new charger or an adapter. If they were really worried about capacity (per shipping container) and reducing e-waste, they’d make the adapter available as an optional add-on at cost — making it free would likely generate more e-waste, since everyone would just go for the free charger.
  - d3nj4l 4y ago
    You could just use your old lightning cable? the port on the phone didn't change, you could use any existing lightning charger and it would work just fine. There's no requirement that you have to use the cable bundled in the box.
    - masklinn 4y ago
      > You could just use your old lightning cable? If you were switching from a Lightning iphone to a Lightning iphone, then yes. But say you were switching from an older Android phone, or a limping iphone still on dock connector?
zekrioca 4y ago
I understand you based your answer on OP's comment, but you should not assume everyone has a charger that is compatible with the newer iPhones. And the prices are totally different as well. There is a regulation in Brazil that determines newly purchased products should come with any components essential to the use of such (expensive, i.e., $1450+ in Brazil) products. In the case of iPhone, this means coming with a charger. Just like you, Apple assumed everyone in Brazil would have an Apple compliant charger sitting around, but the regulation exists exactly to avoid it. I can see them using to constraint their warranty, so when a problem happens to the phone they would have an excuse not to fix it: "oh, we see here you haven't been using a compliant charger. Warranty voided."
sfvegandude 4y ago
>But how is that Apple's responsibility? "Apple's responsibility" is determined, in countries with consumer protection laws, by that country's authority. In this case, it's Apple responsibility because Brazil says it's good for their consumers. It does stand to reason that having more high quality chargers from Apple is better than having fewer.

speeder 4y ago

If I remember correctly (I don't own an iPhone so to me this is kind all hearsay) what happened is Apple stopped shipping charges around the time chargers became USB-C, while their older ones used USB-A on the brick. So the iPhone package would come with the phone itself, and a USBC-lightning cable, but the USB-C brick wasn't included and was ludicrously expensive, and nobody had one since it was new.

g_lined 4y ago
The comment you're replying to makes the point that if you already had a charger, you could use the old charger and the old cable. There is no requirement to use the new cable that it came with. If you agree that people probably already had one from a few years ago, then they already had everything they needed to charge the phone. The 'new cable' did not stop anything from working that previously worked.
- SkeuomorphicBee 4y ago
  That is where point #3 comes in, being that Iphones are/where not very popular in Brazil (due to being prohibitively expensive), it is safe to assume that a significant number of sales are going to be first time Iphone buyers, who don't have a previous lightning cable. It all comes down to: is the average buyer be reasonable expected to already have that fundamental piece at home? And in Brazilian market the answer to that is a clear no.
masklinn 4y ago
Ah that's fair then, that would be an issue. Though it surprises me a touch: my iphone 11 came with an A->lightning cable (I just checked). Maybe it's that more recently Apple switched the bundled cables from A to C, but didn't provide a charger brick, so people who still only had USB-A chargers were SOL? That would make a lot of sense as well, and I would understand the anger.
- sdfsdfsdf111 4y ago
  > Apple switched the bundled cables from A to C, but didn't provide a charger brick, so people who still only had USB-A chargers were SOL Yes, this is what happened on the iPhone 13 (may have been 12).
- ascagnel_ 4y ago
  I think that was the first phone where they didn’t include the charger; after a decade+ of including a USB-A charger, that decision was probably fine for avoiding e-waste. Switching to USB-C on the wall side of the cable the next year was very iffy, since users were much, much more likely to need the new charger or an adapter. If they were really worried about capacity (per shipping container) and reducing e-waste, they’d make the adapter available as an optional add-on at cost — making it free would likely generate more e-waste, since everyone would just go for the free charger.
- d3nj4l 4y ago
  You could just use your old lightning cable? the port on the phone didn't change, you could use any existing lightning charger and it would work just fine. There's no requirement that you have to use the cable bundled in the box.
  - masklinn 4y ago
    > You could just use your old lightning cable? If you were switching from a Lightning iphone to a Lightning iphone, then yes. But say you were switching from an older Android phone, or a limping iphone still on dock connector?

zekrioca 4y ago

I understand you based your answer on OP's comment, but you should not assume everyone has a charger that is compatible with the newer iPhones. And the prices are totally different as well. There is a regulation in Brazil that determines newly purchased products should come with any components essential to the use of such (expensive, i.e., $1450+ in Brazil) products. In the case of iPhone, this means coming with a charger. Just like you, Apple assumed everyone in Brazil would have an Apple compliant charger sitting around, but the regulation exists exactly to avoid it. I can see them using to constraint their warranty, so when a problem happens to the phone they would have an excuse not to fix it: "oh, we see here you haven't been using a compliant charger. Warranty voided."

sfvegandude 4y ago

>But how is that Apple's responsibility? "Apple's responsibility" is determined, in countries with consumer protection laws, by that country's authority. In this case, it's Apple responsibility because Brazil says it's good for their consumers. It does stand to reason that having more high quality chargers from Apple is better than having fewer.