Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
EU Businesses Iphone

EU Lawmakers Vote Overwhelmingly in Favor of Charging Cable Standard, Despite Apple's Protestations (macrumors.com) 227

Despite criticism from Apple, EU lawmakers on Thursday voted overwhelmingly in favor for new rules to establish a common charger for all mobile device makers across Europe. From a report: Members of the European Parliament voted by 582-40 for a resolution urging the European Commission, which drafts EU laws, to ensure that EU consumers are no longer obliged to buy new chargers with each new device. The resolution said voluntary agreements in the industry had significantly reduced the number of charger types, but had not resulted in one common standard. The Commission should adopt new rules by July, the lawmakers' resolution said, calling for "an urgent need for EU regulatory action to reduce electronic waste, empower consumers to make sustainable choices, and allow them to fully participate in an efficient and well-functioning internal market." The proposed charging ports for portable devices include Micro-USB, USB-C, and the Lightning connector. Thursday's resolution didn't specify what the mobile charging standard should be, but non-Apple mobile devices and increasingly laptops and tablets are charged by USB-C, so the EU is highly unlikely to choose Apple's Lightning connector.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EU Lawmakers Vote Overwhelmingly in Favor of Charging Cable Standard, Despite Apple's Protestations

Comments Filter:
  • Good law (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fred6666 ( 4718031 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @09:07AM (#59674554)

    Let's make USB-C the standard. There is no reason for lightning to exist today, especially for a single vendor. Single vendor charging cables should be the first thing to be banned. Go EU!

    • Re:Good law (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mwvdlee ( 775178 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @09:10AM (#59674566) Homepage

      What happens when USB-whatever-next-version-is-called is invented?
      I'm assuming we won't be locked into USB-C for eternity.

      • Re:Good law (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Jeremi ( 14640 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @09:14AM (#59674590) Homepage

        I suppose a vendor could theoretically offer two charging ports, the one required by the EU plus whatever their new thing is. That would require additional space inside the phone, though.

        Requiring a particular implementation seems like a shortsighted idea to me. Imagine if the government had passed this sort of law years ago, we'd all still be using PS/2 keyboards and mice today.

        • The USB-C spec allows alternate modes [wikipedia.org], where the wires in the USB-C cable are used to carry non-USB signals. It's how Thunderbolt (PCIe basically) and displayport are carried over USB-C cables. The two devices communicate that they're Thunderbolt capable, and they start using the USB-C cable to transfer data in PCIe format, instead of USB-C format.

          A USB-C cable has 6 data pins, and 2 control pins (the others are power and ground). Lightning has just 4 data pins and 2 control pins. So far I have seen
      • Re:Good law (Score:5, Insightful)

        by nomadic ( 141991 ) <nomadicworld@ g m a i l . com> on Friday January 31, 2020 @09:18AM (#59674602) Homepage

        I don't know much about the hardware itself, since I'm not an engineering geek, but USB-C seems a good size for a charger generally, and whatever the current iteration is it's currently sending a signal to my two monitors while the laptop itself is charged, so it seems to have pretty robust power/info bandwidth. So it should last a pretty decent amount of time, and I would assume whatever the next iteration is it will be able to be backward compatible.

        I mean, even if the standard changes every 15 or 20 years, that's still better than dealing with the status quo, which is mostly messed up by Apple.

      • We're already in this mess right now, see this post [slashdot.org].
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by jools33 ( 252092 )

        "What happens when USB-whatever-next-version-is-called is invented?"
        The EU has voted for one standard, the standard can however evolve and change over time, with agreement of all parties (as other standards do).

        • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

          by Pieroxy ( 222434 )

          You're not from Europe. It will take *years* before they realize in 10 years that USB-C has become a terrible choice. As much as I despise Apple's position on this, they were right. Setting the charging format by law will just halt innovation.

          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward

            Oh fuck off. A charger provides a voltage and a current. There is no innovation needed in a connector that needs to do nothing more than connect + and - terminals to charge a battery.

            The only "innovation" that's been going on has been to add proprietary shit to make a cable that should cost $2 somehow cost $20 instead.

            • by guruevi ( 827432 )

              Well, you're more than welcome then using a molex connector or a 3.5mm barrel onto your phone. Maybe we should be backwards compatible with the PDP-11 power connectors too, since it doesn't matter what your connection is.

              The rest of the world would like their connectors to not just charge, but also carry data, at increasingly high speeds.

          • USB-C isn't perfect... but it is good enough. It supports bidirectional charging, data, audio, video, heck, even PCi-e lanes with Thunderbolt support.

            The perfect is the enemy of the good in this case, and USB-C is "good enough". The ideal would have been Apple open-sourcing the Lightning connector because it is thinner, but USB-C isn't bad.

            We have come a long way. Before the EU stepped up to the plate, we had every single phone come with a different charger. Even if the physical plug fit in the hole, th

            • by Minupla ( 62455 )

              The problem with industry concensus is it only takes one (pardon) bad Apple to spoil the bunch. MOST wireless device manufactures have standardized on USB-C as they did micro-USB in the generation before. One standout company hasn't and has forced this leglislative decision. Strangely my MBP and IPad Pro both have USB-C, so it appears Apple is fine using USB-C for their higher end devices. Penny pinching on the IPhone maybe? I stuck with an android device this latest upgrade so that I could have USB-C

            • Re:Good law (Score:4, Insightful)

              by Ranbot ( 2648297 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @11:50AM (#59675288)

              USB-C isn't perfect... but it is good enough...

              I think 5 years someone was arguing to standardize chargers and said, "microUSB isn't perfect... but it is good enough." Good thing no one listened to them then. I just don't understand why anyone would listen to them now.

              If someone is so smart they can predict exactly what technology is needed now and into the future, there are far more lucrative career paths than government regulator.

              • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

                I think 5 years someone was arguing to standardize chargers and said, "microUSB isn't perfect... but it is good enough." Good thing no one listened to them then. I just don't understand why anyone would listen to them now.

                No one who ever used it for more than a few weeks would believe them. Micro-USB was a high-failure-rate disaster.

                If someone is so smart they can predict exactly what technology is needed now and into the future, there are far more lucrative career paths than government regulator.

                Although

            • Re:Good law (Score:4, Interesting)

              by smoot123 ( 1027084 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @11:54AM (#59675310)

              The perfect is the enemy of the good in this case, and USB-C is "good enough".

              Yes, but so were RS-232, USB-A/B, VGA, DVI, micro-USB, and countless other standards. They were fantastic when introduced, good enough for a long time, and now look really primitive.

              As many others have pointed out, locking USB-C into a EU standard is going to slow down the next cool thing, whatever that might be. Maybe it's wireless charging. Maybe it's USB-C with magnets instead of finger contacts. Maybe it's USB-D with 5 mm NFC instead of physical contacts. Neither of us knows and now it will be longer before we do know.

              I'm also having trouble believing this is a problem which needs government action. Two decades ago, every device had its own wall wart with a hefty transformer. A decade ago we started seeing lots of devices charge with mini- or micro-USB. We're sorta converging on USB-A switching power supplies and/or outlets so all we're really talking about is what the other end of the cable looks like. I really think we have bigger problems to solve.

      • The whole point of these laws is NOT having to change your charger every 5 years because there is a newer version of the connector.
        But I guess at some point, you just update the law if it's no longer good.

      • That is the downside that balances the upside. Having one standard is good but since its a government mandated one then it is guaranteed to fail to keep up with technology and will stick around far longer than useful. In a decade or so when USB has evolved to even faster transfer speeds, European users will not be allowed to take advantage of it because they will be stuck with devices using the old standard.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        The EU's standards body will decide which connector to use, not the politicians. They will doubtless look at the longevity of the connector before adopting it.

        USB-C should be around for a very long time. It's got enough contacts and bandwidth to support almost any application, and bandwidth can be increased without changing the connector. At least for charging it should be suitable for any portable device we are likely to see in the next decade at least, given it can supply 100W and 100Wh is the maximum siz

        • Re:Good law (Score:4, Informative)

          by guruevi ( 827432 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @12:02PM (#59675350)

          Yes, but which USB-C standard should we use. The one with HDMI or DisplayPort or Thunderbolt or MHL, 10Gbps, 40Gbps? Also note that 'proper' USB-C cables require a chip and heavy royalties to the USB-C group, Certified USB-C cables average about $30 MSRP, which is even more expensive than Apple's ($19.99) and Apple does certify other vendors to make them starting at ~$8.99.

      • by guruevi ( 827432 )

        If you legislate, yes. USB-C has been out for about 6 years now, just now they're coming around to legislating it. So expect nanoscale devices 50 years from now to just be the USB-C connector.

        Also, USB-C is probably one of the worst connections to standardize on because the mechanical connection itself has something like 15 different standards associated with it, so it is entirely possible to have each vendor pick a particular cable standard and make all competitors incompatible, even though they would mech

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      If EU makes laws like this which force Apple to use a standard instead of Apple milking everyone out of an extra $29 for a cable, what does it say about the the US? Not consumer friendly I guess?
    • Re:Good law (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rednip ( 186217 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @09:16AM (#59674594) Journal
      If they had their way 10 years ago, the USB-mini-b plug would a factor limiting quick charge today. Also, be careful which USB-C power you use, as both the Nintendo Switch and Raspberry Pi can only use ones which don't support 'power delivery'.

      This legislation may actually prevent 'the next' standard which I'd suspect would be surface mounted with magnetic alignment, likely similar to 'mag-safe'.

      • Re:Good law (Score:5, Informative)

        by zennyboy ( 1002544 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @09:30AM (#59674666)
        They've tried explaining it, but people are not listening - it's not the port *on the phone*, it's the port *on the charger*, and the *charger's* specifications.
        So all *chargers* must have a standard port, and a *cable* must go from that to whatever the phone manufacturer has on their phone.
        • Re:Good law (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @09:45AM (#59674718)

          They've tried explaining it, but people are not listening - it's not the port *on the phone*, it's the port *on the charger*, and the *charger's* specifications. So all *chargers* must have a standard port, and a *cable* must go from that to whatever the phone manufacturer has on their phone.

          They haven't sufficiently explained why they feel compelled to intrude into a part of manufacturing that doesn't need intrusion.

          I can plug my Android devices into my Apple Charger, and vice versa. I can plug either into my charging/connection ports in my car. My charging cables came with my devices.

          Pretty amazing that the EU has so few problems that they feel the need to impose political solutions to non problems.

          What's next? Trying to force the world to use their 50 Hz mains electricity and wall outlets?

          • Re:Good law (Score:5, Insightful)

            by zennyboy ( 1002544 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @09:55AM (#59674752)

            They've tried explaining it, but people are not listening - it's not the port *on the phone*, it's the port *on the charger*, and the *charger's* specifications. So all *chargers* must have a standard port, and a *cable* must go from that to whatever the phone manufacturer has on their phone.

            They haven't sufficiently explained why they feel compelled to intrude into a part of manufacturing that doesn't need intrusion.

            I can plug my Android devices into my Apple Charger, and vice versa. I can plug either into my charging/connection ports in my car. My charging cables came with my devices.

            Pretty amazing that the EU has so few problems that they feel the need to impose political solutions to non problems.

            What's next? Trying to force the world to use their 50 Hz mains electricity and wall outlets?

            Why do you think that is (hint: EU ruling a decade ago)...

            • They've tried explaining it, but people are not listening - it's not the port *on the phone*, it's the port *on the charger*, and the *charger's* specifications. So all *chargers* must have a standard port, and a *cable* must go from that to whatever the phone manufacturer has on their phone.

              They haven't sufficiently explained why they feel compelled to intrude into a part of manufacturing that doesn't need intrusion.

              I can plug my Android devices into my Apple Charger, and vice versa. I can plug either into my charging/connection ports in my car. My charging cables came with my devices.

              Pretty amazing that the EU has so few problems that they feel the need to impose political solutions to non problems.

              What's next? Trying to force the world to use their 50 Hz mains electricity and wall outlets?

              Why do you think that is (hint: EU ruling a decade ago)...

              Then why do they have to do it again? Or do you like taking your technology orders from politicians?

              • Re:Good law (Score:5, Insightful)

                by zennyboy ( 1002544 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @10:38AM (#59674920)

                They've tried explaining it, but people are not listening - it's not the port *on the phone*, it's the port *on the charger*, and the *charger's* specifications. So all *chargers* must have a standard port, and a *cable* must go from that to whatever the phone manufacturer has on their phone.

                They haven't sufficiently explained why they feel compelled to intrude into a part of manufacturing that doesn't need intrusion.

                I can plug my Android devices into my Apple Charger, and vice versa. I can plug either into my charging/connection ports in my car. My charging cables came with my devices.

                Pretty amazing that the EU has so few problems that they feel the need to impose political solutions to non problems.

                What's next? Trying to force the world to use their 50 Hz mains electricity and wall outlets?

                Why do you think that is (hint: EU ruling a decade ago)...

                Then why do they have to do it again? Or do you like taking your technology orders from politicians?

                I certainly prefer it to what we had before (each device coming with a completely different charger - remember those 'drawer of chargers' we used to have?).
                I trust our government a whole lot more than I trust random companies to have our best interests at heart. EU / US difference I suppose.

          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by fgouget ( 925644 )

            They haven't sufficiently explained why they feel compelled to intrude into a part of manufacturing that doesn't need intrusion.

            It does need intrusion. That every phone, tablet and laptop is shipped with its own charger is a disgrace. In fact they should make it illegal to include a charger with electronic devices. That would put a stop to the lie that the charger is included "free". Of course they charger for it! Once that lie is dead customers will welcome being able to reduce cost by using a charger they already own. And this would drastically reduce electronic waste.

            They should generalize this rule to every electronic device t

        • Tell me, Einstein, How are phone manufacturers supposed to stay in business if they sell *mismatched* female ports on their phones?
          • Tell me, Einstein, How are phone manufacturers supposed to stay in business if they sell *mismatched* female ports on their phones?

            ...I don't know how to reply to that. You have a standard on one end of a cable and whatever they want on the other.

        • by e3m4n ( 947977 )

          technically all the charges have been USB-A for quite a while. At most I wouldnt be surprised if apple were to ship with a USB-C to lightening adapter and call it a day.

          My concern is how will this impact Raspberry Pi since even a 2.0amp charger was insufficient to power its microUSB port on the pi3. I just got the pi4 and even though its usb-c, again, there is a special charger for it in order to meet the power demands.

          What about laptops?

          All I read are articles talking about the law, but not the letter of t

          • I had a little Google and came up with https://ec.europa.eu/growth/se... [europa.eu]
            Which links to a PDF at the end containing the study.
            Which is too long for me to read - this is Slashdot after all.
            Also, they haven't brought in the directive yet - they've voted that we need one. Check the one from (2005?) to see what they'll probably come up with. It'll be a honed version of that, probably.
        • If that's true (and I'm not suggesting it isn't; I haven't looked into it enough to know), then why is this even a point of discussion and why is Lightning being mentioned in the first place? All of Apple's mobile chargers already use either USB-A or USB-C, depending on the device. It's clear the world is migrating towards USB-C for its chargers, and Apple has been moving along with that trend. It's only their cables and devices that use Lightning, not their chargers.

          • It's about the specifications about the charger, its power output etc (so you can use the charger that you once got with your now dead phone to charge your new laptop, maybe new monitors etc).

            Overall it's about trying to make things as universal as possible, so once the original device is old, maybe broken, stolen, lost etc the charger can still be used instead of thrown away.

            I support it as it seems like a no-brainer to me. Electricity is electricity.
      • This regulation effort has been going on for 10 years (link [nytimes.com].
        And has since then been (gasp) adapted. So we have been enjoying more standardization and no backslashes.

        Oh no! Lawmakers sometimes get it right! That's terrible news! What will become of us!

        Fun fact: experts recon Apple will soon take to wireless charging only. Good luck charging your phone on the go. But I'm sure it will not hurt their sales and will go the way of the wireless heaphones: lot's of noise but also lots of sales.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Your logic is faulty. If they had decided to do this 10 years ago the result would have been the same - ask the EU standards body to select a suitable connector. Given the limitations of USB Mini and after consultation with the USB-IC and manufacturers they would probably have decided a new EuroUSB socket was needed and adopted an industry design for it.

      • by fgouget ( 925644 )

        If they had their way 10 years ago, the USB-mini-b plug would a factor limiting quick charge today. Also, be careful which USB-C power you use, as both the Nintendo Switch and Raspberry Pi can only use ones which don't support 'power delivery'.

        So if they had their ways 10 years ago this Nitendo / Raspberry mess could have been avoided.

        This legislation may actually prevent 'the next' standard which I'd suspect would be surface mounted with magnetic alignment, likely similar to 'mag-safe'.

        The solution to all your concerns is to only mandate a specific technology for a limited period of time. This ensures interoperability and once a standard is established provides a strong disincentive for manufacturers to switch to a new standard that does not provide substantial benefits.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      Let's make USB-C the standard, and then manufacturers can let you guess whether you're using USB-C 2.0, USB-C 3.0, USB-C 3.1 Gen1, USB-C 3.1 Gen2, Thunderbolt passive, or Thunderbolt active (there may be more that I've missed), all of which have the same connector and so look identical and yet all of which are incompatible, or at least if you've got the wrong cable you end up with the lowest common denominator, often USB 2.0. Oh yeah, and there will be a bazillion shitty Chinese cables, all of which lie ab

      • Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @09:47AM (#59674722)
        Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • No, the law is quite clear, they have to use a common charging socket

          They do. All of those incompatible cables use a USB-C socket. It's the cable, and the device that sits at either end, that's the problem, not the socket. It's already so bad that manufacturers of USB-C/TB docks have long lists of which devices will and won't work with their docks, and which aspects of the device will and won't work.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        This is for charging. If you plug your device in to any of those it won't fail, it will charge at the maximum available speed.

        There is no problem here.

        • No, it won't "just charge at the maximum available speed". Unlike previous cables where the host could just keep a 5v potential across two pins while providing no-more-than 500mA, these cables literally have chips in them to handle signaling and negotiation with the host device with regards to capabilities, i.e. speed and power and whatever else. USB power delivery (USB-PD) literally has a table of different voltage and current profiles:

          https://electronics.stackexcha... [stackexchange.com]

      • by fgouget ( 925644 )

        Looks like the EU guys will have to go back and pass a second law soon after the first one fails to solve the problem.

        It's kind of sad seeing you claim the law needs to be changed when it does not even exist yet. What has been voted is a resolution to prepare a law for next July [cnn.com] which is when it will be reviewed and put into place if it gathers enough votes.

    • by Pieroxy ( 222434 )

      As far as connectors are concerned, Lightning makes a lot more sense than USB-C. More durable. No small plastic parts.

      • Lightning is backwards. In any connector, that are hard contacts and spring-loaded contacts. The spring-loaded contacts are the ones that inevitably break or get jammed up. Micro USB puts the spring-loaded contacts on the male side of the connector - the cable side. Lightning reverses that. So WHEN you have a connector failure, it will almost always be the spring-loaded side, and with micro USB you end up tossing the $3 cable. With an iPhone? You now have to replace (for $99+) the Lightning connector
    • Now, I'm just a humble small-town folksy lawyer who says things like "I'm just a humble small town lawyer", but...couldn't people just buy phones that support USB-C if that's what they want? Eventually, your phone, with a non-USB-C charger, would be at a disadvantage in the market if it was important enough to people.

      I'm all for laws that solve externalities that the market can't, like pollution, but this is just sill bureaucracy in action.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      I agree. This has been far too long delayed already. There is absolutely no reason to delay this any further. And Apple will just have to learn to live with having to pley nice with some others now.

  • by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @09:11AM (#59674570)
    Apple weaseled out of supporting USB micro and it'll weasel its way out this. That's providing the directive gives it any chance to. E.g. the directive should make it mandatory that the device contain the charging port so Apple can't drop cables for wireless charging or crap out some dongle that they know no one will use like they've done in the past.
    • Apple weaseled out of supporting USB micro and it'll weasel its way out this. That's providing the directive gives it any chance to. E.g. the directive should make it mandatory that the device contain the charging port so Apple can't drop cables for wireless charging or crap out some dongle that they know no one will use like they've done in the past.

      Why would you care what connector is on a phone that you never plan on buying? One ring to rule them all outlook?

      • by DrXym ( 126579 )
        Because the purpose of the directive is to eliminate waste by standardizing chargers so they do not become obsolete such as when one manufacturer produces their own proprietary charger technology or arbitrarily switches to another. Apple should not be exempt from this and they should not be permitted to sabotage the purpose of the directives, e.g. by DRM'ing their chargers or otherwise locking people into their peripherals for that purpose.

        And I would prefer to see such directives go MUCH further, mandati

        • Because the purpose of the directive is to eliminate waste by standardizing chargers so they do not become obsolete such as when one manufacturer produces their own proprietary charger technology or arbitrarily switches to another.

          This is another way of saying that the technology must be frozen and locked in place. So I take it that you believe that we are at the pinnicle of technology, and that nothing further is required. Charger technology is now cast in stone, never to be altered.

          Okay, well I do not think so. Apple should not be exempt from this and they should not be permitted to sabotage the purpose of the directives, e.g. by DRM'ing their chargers or otherwise locking people into their peripherals for that purpose.

          So wh

        • Because the purpose of the directive is to eliminate waste by standardizing chargers so they do not become obsolete such as when one manufacturer produces their own proprietary charger technology or arbitrarily switches to another. Apple should not be exempt from this and they should not be permitted to sabotage the purpose of the directives

          I can use 10-year-old Apple chargers (which pre-dates Lightning) and 5-year-old Apple cables to charge new iPads and iPhones.

          Apple isn't the source of those obsolete chargers and cables over the last decade.

    • by Zocalo ( 252965 )
      This is Apple we're talking about, so absolutely this - the only other company I know that loves going down the proprietary road as much is Sony, and even they're now mostly onboard with standards when it comes to inter-device connectivity. Given half a chance, Apple's courageous response to this will almost certainly be to remove the charging port altogether and say owners of their phones and tablets can use whatever cable standard the EU cares to dictate with their IQ wireless charging pad(s). Apple's o
      • This is Apple we're talking about, so absolutely this - the only other company I know that loves going down the proprietary road as much is Sony, and even they're now mostly onboard with standards when it comes to inter-device connectivity. Given half a chance, Apple's courageous response to this will almost certainly be to remove the charging port altogether and say owners of their phones and tablets can use whatever cable standard the EU cares to dictate with their IQ wireless charging pad(s).

        If there is one thing I have learned, it is that humans need to get their science and technology education from politicians.

        But seriously - what is it that causes you to fly into a rage about a company you obviously hate - witness your "courageous" comments - using a cable designed for their equipment, that you will never buy?

        The Apple connectors work, work well, and in general are less a problem than the connectors on my Android devices.

        Which to me is the main point the EU, in their righteous zealo

        • by DrXym ( 126579 )
          USB-C cables work absolutely fine and they're becoming the defacto standard across most other phones and other other small devices.
  • Now a days all the charging is done via USB-C port. So the charger is the same. Except Apple, Garmin watches and others introduce proprietary cables to their devices.
    • > Except Apple, Garmin watches and others

      Oh, seriously? I was considering a Garmin watch. Thanks for the warning - screw that - I have too many cables to manage already.

  • Having the same connector on all devices is not a bad idea but it needs a bit more flexibility.
    Rather than mandating a specific standard, they could have specified that industry has to come up with a specific common standard by whatever date (by a simple majority vote :) ), and any devices sold after that date (or some date following) must adhere to that standard, or are prohibited from being sold.

    Then mandate the same procedure for the future releases (but limit vote on the new standard to once every N num

  • MacBooks and iPad Pros already charge with USB-C. The iPhone is the only phone left that doesn't charge with USB-C. The only reason to keep Lighting around is so Apple can make charging cables more expensive. If Apple complies with this, it will be interesting to see whether they decide to comply worldwide. It would be dumb if they made iPhones in Europe that charge with USB-C, and kept the Lightning connector in the rest of the world.
    • by hey! ( 33014 )

      One of Steve Jobs' marketing -- I guess from Apple's standpoint you'd call them "innovations" -- was this: never try to give the customer everything you can.

      This is helpful in multiple ways. Fewer features means less cost and easier design for example. But one o the big ones is that if you leave something out, you can add it to the next generation device.

      The original iPod Touch lacked something that pretty much everyone who had one quickly realized they wanted: a built-in speaker. You had to use earbuds

      • ... only keep *removing* features.

        And I'm not a feature creep fan either.
        It's about removing brain-dead simple, obvious, reliable, well-working solution. Like a removable battery, headphone jack, file manager, (and a real keyboard for starters!), etc.

  • The new iPhone could have US model and a EU model... the US model will have a lightning port that can be used for charging.

    The EU model will not have any user-accessible connectors at all.

    The only official way to charge your EU model phone will be to find a public Apple charging kiosk and insert $0.25 to pay the machine to have charge imparted into your device as a service.

  • Courage campaign. Irony. Apple market share should be large enough to claim a standard. Apple products have some of the longest lifeâ(TM)s with long iOS upgrade support, resale values. Going with only one such as USB C does sets an ominous precedent. Cheap weak cables wearing out is a bigger concern for me. Not the connection type. Likewise for the device repair ability. Oh well EU overlords desire to focus on a pretty minor issue targeting Apple charging connection type vs cheap burner phones with ver
  • Be a good worldly citizen Apple, and play nicely with the non-iDevices. Sorry about the DRM chips in your lightning cables.
  • by PPH ( 736903 ) on Friday January 31, 2020 @11:27AM (#59675168)

    ... can just mandate that a BS 1363 [rs-online.com] be integrated into all phones sold there.

  • There have been rumors that Apple wants to go 100% wireless. I wonder if this will force EU Apple phones to be manufactured with a USB-C port.

  • I won't buy a damn $15 drill, when it comes with a battery pack that forces me to buy $150 battery packs from now on.

    And printer cartriges!

    Cause monpoly ruins the market, whether you achieve it normally or via lock-in. Which is why monopoly is a crime.

The opossum is a very sophisticated animal. It doesn't even get up until 5 or 6 PM.

Working...