4 ms·

First of all: the EU definitely had good intentions when regulating the charger mess. The amount of incompatible chargers rotting in drawers and (possibly) land

by oger 3y ago

First of all: the EU definitely had good intentions when regulating the charger mess. The amount of incompatible chargers rotting in drawers and (possibly) landfills could definitely be reduced over time by agreeing on a common physical and electrical interface. However — limiting technical progress is not a good idea and we see that with the plethor of different power modes existing within USB-C. Possibly politicians only saw the physical plug but never understood the depth behind it. And that’s where we reach the limits. What if a company (Apple) comes up with a more efficient but also more elaborate way to quick charge their equipment? How would you handle a situation where non-compliant chargers could even harm this equipment? USB-C already is way too complex for the average Shenzen cookie cutter factory to implement it correctly. How would you protect your customers from such a situation? While it may superficially look evasive I am willing to pick Apple‘s side here.

alpaca128 3y ago
> limiting technical progress is not a good idea If Apple is limited by USB-C then why do all their other current devices - where the EU never forced anything - use primarily (sometimes exclusively) USB-C?
henearkr 3y ago
What technical progress. Don't you think that 20V and 240W that are the maximum for Power Delivery are enough to fast charge a smartphone? Even laptops use it!
- f1shy 3y ago
  Of course! 640kB will be enough for everyone!
  - henearkr 3y ago
    Do you realize your parallel doesn't apply here? We're speaking about an iPhone, not a fridge nor a car.
    - f1shy 3y ago
      Power is not the only parameter…
      - henearkr 3y ago
        Fine, just speak your mind. But for charge speed, the only parameters really are voltage and maximum current. Both are plenty enough (for a smartphone battery) in the PD standard.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
- yardstick 3y ago
  It’s not universal until we can power appliances, TVs, Microwaves, Fridges, Ovens, and EV Cars with it.
  - henearkr 3y ago
    It's universal enough for all power consumption up to 240W, which includes what you need to charge a smartphone. For huge appliances, you need a different connector, larger conductors in the cables, etc... it really will never scale the whole spectrum because of physics laws. Else, everything melts and burns.
  - worewood 3y ago
    Here, you dropped this: /s
  - kstenerud 3y ago
    For which we have IEC connectors. 110/220v AC power connectors are not the problem.
- makomk 3y ago
  It's not just a question of total power - smartphones have limited space and thermal budget for internal power conversion compared to laptops, which means that the fastest charging option often moves some of the work of converting to the correct voltage to the charger. (Also, I don't think 240W USB PD has really been adopted by anyone currently, and that's a spicy amount of current given the general quality of USB C cables.)
  - hackernewds 3y ago
    what advantage does the lightning cable afford? doesn't seem that Apple has really put their foot on innovation
  - megous 3y ago
    Battery in the phone needs ~4.2V for charging. So you need conversion in the phone no matter what voltage you supply on the USB port.
    - crote 3y ago
      It depends. USB-C supports PPS, which allows the charged device to request a specific voltage, so conversion is no longer needed. The specification does mandate that the device must be able to fall back to a static voltage if the charger does not support PPS, though. But in practice a device could totally require PPS for fast charging, and only do trickle charging with a non-PPS charger.
      - megous 3y ago
        > But in practice a device could totally require PPS for fast charging, and only do trickle charging with a non-PPS charger. Not sure we have the same terms. Trickle charging is 0.02-0.05C charging to see if the charger can get the battery safely from being overdischarged to say 3V where it can start normal CC charging phase. That would probably piss off a lot of users and the EU if not even normal charging was supported by a device connected to any USB charger, because that's back to requiring a specific charger for each device, where not even basic things that all users expect work anymore with all conforming chargers.
ta1243 3y ago
If apple want that new standard that's fine, but they shouldn't be allowed to use it as a USP -- everyone else should be able to implement it, with no licensing.
kstenerud 3y ago
> limiting technical progress is not a good idea and we see that with the plethor of different power modes existing within USB-C. Who is limiting technical progress? The laws don't state that only USB-C can ever be used; they state that chargers must all be compatible. Want to improve it? Contribute to USB, or come up with an entirely new standard that everyone can agree to. > What if a company (Apple) comes up with a more efficient but also more elaborate way to quick charge their equipment? Then they contribute to the next USB standardization, same as everyone else. > How would you handle a situation where non-compliant chargers could even harm this equipment? Same way it's currently done: Through consumer protection laws. USB standards are called standards for a reason. > USB-C already is way too complex for the average Shenzen cookie cutter factory to implement it correctly. And yet people are happily using USB-C to power all kinds of devices. > How would you protect your customers from such a situation? CONSUMER PROTECTION LAWS Enough with the FUD.
- sbuk 3y ago
  > Want to improve it? Contribute to USB, or come up with an entirely new standard that everyone can agree to. They tried that with Lightning. Micro USB won because it was cheap. Apple are USB-C contributors. > Enough with the FUD. Indeed.
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    > They tried that with Lightning. Micro USB won because it was cheap. Lightning was definitely not a new standard everyone can agree to. Apple was not letting anyone else make lightning ports. > Apple are USB-C contributors. What do I even say to this. The "contribute to USB" has an implied "and use the port you contributed to". Apple failed the second half of that.
ranguna 3y ago
When this all started, I had the same argument of hindering technical progress. But then I realised that all companies have to do is support usb c, it's fair game if they want to add another plug alongside it.
odabaxok 3y ago
That's what the USB org is doing, if manufacturers decide together they need an USB-D, that will become the new standard. (9) in the EU directive: https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-10713-2022-INIT/x/pdf https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-10713-2022-...
Moldoteck 3y ago
They can include that port near usbc port, or they can propose that port to be the new usb standard, but do you need more than 240W charging and 40gbps data transfer in a phone? Or to be more precise, how many phones are using full usbc capacity?

by oger 3y ago

alpaca128 3y ago

> limiting technical progress is not a good idea If Apple is limited by USB-C then why do all their other current devices - where the EU never forced anything - use primarily (sometimes exclusively) USB-C?

henearkr 3y ago

What technical progress. Don't you think that 20V and 240W that are the maximum for Power Delivery are enough to fast charge a smartphone? Even laptops use it!

f1shy 3y ago
Of course! 640kB will be enough for everyone!
- henearkr 3y ago
  Do you realize your parallel doesn't apply here? We're speaking about an iPhone, not a fridge nor a car.
  - f1shy 3y ago
    Power is not the only parameter…
    - henearkr 3y ago
      Fine, just speak your mind. But for charge speed, the only parameters really are voltage and maximum current. Both are plenty enough (for a smartphone battery) in the PD standard.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
yardstick 3y ago
It’s not universal until we can power appliances, TVs, Microwaves, Fridges, Ovens, and EV Cars with it.
- henearkr 3y ago
  It's universal enough for all power consumption up to 240W, which includes what you need to charge a smartphone. For huge appliances, you need a different connector, larger conductors in the cables, etc... it really will never scale the whole spectrum because of physics laws. Else, everything melts and burns.
- worewood 3y ago
  Here, you dropped this: /s
- kstenerud 3y ago
  For which we have IEC connectors. 110/220v AC power connectors are not the problem.
makomk 3y ago
It's not just a question of total power - smartphones have limited space and thermal budget for internal power conversion compared to laptops, which means that the fastest charging option often moves some of the work of converting to the correct voltage to the charger. (Also, I don't think 240W USB PD has really been adopted by anyone currently, and that's a spicy amount of current given the general quality of USB C cables.)
- hackernewds 3y ago
  what advantage does the lightning cable afford? doesn't seem that Apple has really put their foot on innovation
- megous 3y ago
  Battery in the phone needs ~4.2V for charging. So you need conversion in the phone no matter what voltage you supply on the USB port.
  - crote 3y ago
    It depends. USB-C supports PPS, which allows the charged device to request a specific voltage, so conversion is no longer needed. The specification does mandate that the device must be able to fall back to a static voltage if the charger does not support PPS, though. But in practice a device could totally require PPS for fast charging, and only do trickle charging with a non-PPS charger.
    - megous 3y ago
      > But in practice a device could totally require PPS for fast charging, and only do trickle charging with a non-PPS charger. Not sure we have the same terms. Trickle charging is 0.02-0.05C charging to see if the charger can get the battery safely from being overdischarged to say 3V where it can start normal CC charging phase. That would probably piss off a lot of users and the EU if not even normal charging was supported by a device connected to any USB charger, because that's back to requiring a specific charger for each device, where not even basic things that all users expect work anymore with all conforming chargers.

ta1243 3y ago

If apple want that new standard that's fine, but they shouldn't be allowed to use it as a USP -- everyone else should be able to implement it, with no licensing.

kstenerud 3y ago

> limiting technical progress is not a good idea and we see that with the plethor of different power modes existing within USB-C. Who is limiting technical progress? The laws don't state that only USB-C can ever be used; they state that chargers must all be compatible. Want to improve it? Contribute to USB, or come up with an entirely new standard that everyone can agree to. > What if a company (Apple) comes up with a more efficient but also more elaborate way to quick charge their equipment? Then they contribute to the next USB standardization, same as everyone else. > How would you handle a situation where non-compliant chargers could even harm this equipment? Same way it's currently done: Through consumer protection laws. USB standards are called standards for a reason. > USB-C already is way too complex for the average Shenzen cookie cutter factory to implement it correctly. And yet people are happily using USB-C to power all kinds of devices. > How would you protect your customers from such a situation? CONSUMER PROTECTION LAWS Enough with the FUD.

sbuk 3y ago
> Want to improve it? Contribute to USB, or come up with an entirely new standard that everyone can agree to. They tried that with Lightning. Micro USB won because it was cheap. Apple are USB-C contributors. > Enough with the FUD. Indeed.
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  > They tried that with Lightning. Micro USB won because it was cheap. Lightning was definitely not a new standard everyone can agree to. Apple was not letting anyone else make lightning ports. > Apple are USB-C contributors. What do I even say to this. The "contribute to USB" has an implied "and use the port you contributed to". Apple failed the second half of that.

ranguna 3y ago

When this all started, I had the same argument of hindering technical progress. But then I realised that all companies have to do is support usb c, it's fair game if they want to add another plug alongside it.

odabaxok 3y ago

That's what the USB org is doing, if manufacturers decide together they need an USB-D, that will become the new standard. (9) in the EU directive: https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-10713-2022-INIT/x/pdf https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-10713-2022-...

Moldoteck 3y ago

They can include that port near usbc port, or they can propose that port to be the new usb standard, but do you need more than 240W charging and 40gbps data transfer in a phone? Or to be more precise, how many phones are using full usbc capacity?