Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Apple IT Technology

Apple Confirms the iPhone is Getting USB-C, But Isn't Happy About the Reason Why (theverge.com) 223

Apple has given its most direct confirmation yet that a USB-C-equipped iPhone will happen, now that the European Union is mandating that all phones sold in its member countries use the connector if they have a physical charger. From a report: When asked by The Wall Street Journal if the company would replace Lightning, Apple's senior vp of worldwide marketing, Greg Joswiak, answered by saying: "Obviously, we'll have to comply; we have no choice."

WSJ brought the law up during a talk with Joswiak and software VP Craig Federighi at the WSJ's Tech Live conference and followed up by asking when we can expect to see USB-C on an iPhone. Joswiak replied, "the Europeans are the ones dictating timing for European customers." Currently, the law dictates that "all mobile phones and tablets" will have to use USB-C by "autumn 2024." Joswiak refused to answer whether the company would include the connector on phones sold outside the EU. But he made it abundantly clear that Apple isn't happy about being legally coerced into making the switch. Before acknowledging that the company must comply with the law, Joswiak went into a long explanation about how Apple has historically preferred to go its own way and trust its engineers rather than be forced into adopting hardware standards by lawmakers.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Confirms the iPhone is Getting USB-C, But Isn't Happy About the Reason Why

Comments Filter:
  • Boo hoo. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MachineShedFred ( 621896 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @11:04AM (#62999621) Journal

    "But we really like our proprietary bullshit that is a burden on our users, but allows us to charge license fees!"

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      "But we really like our proprietary bullshit that is a burden on our users, but allows us to charge license fees!"

      Well It wasn't a burden in the past, simply because Apple was ahead of the curve and USB didn't really fit the bill. USB-C has changed things, but one challenge about being legally mandated is the industry is forced into a standard that might be irrelevant in 5 years.

      This will likely force Apple and other manufacturers to put more effort into wireless solutions, where they aren't yet limited in their options.

      • I'd love to see wireless charging figured out in such a way that I can trust it like I trust the plug in charger. I've tried to adopt wireless but I've woken up a few mornings with a phone that didn't charge overnight, and no reason why.
        • Re: Boo hoo. (Score:5, Informative)

          by AuMatar ( 183847 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @11:29AM (#62999727)

          I'd love to see wireless completely eliminated. In a world where we have an energy crisis and are not on 100% renewables, wasting energy by broadcasting it instead of plugging in a charger is inexcusable.

          • Re: Boo hoo. (Score:5, Insightful)

            by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @11:33AM (#62999741)

            I'd love to see wireless completely eliminated. In a world where we have an energy crisis and are not on 100% renewables, wasting energy by broadcasting it instead of plugging in a charger is inexcusable.

            And I keep saying to do away with wireless in the office because people whine they can't get a connection while the network cable is sitting within arm's reach.

            Guess when that's going to happen.

          • I also don't quite understand how plugging a cable into the wall, then plugging a wireless charger connected with a cable into the first cable, and attaching the wireless charger to my phone can be called "wireless". There's cables going from the wall socket all the way to the phone, just like I have now.
            • by crow ( 16139 )

              What do you mean by "attaching the wireless charger to my phone?" I just set my phone on the charging pad. No wires get plugged in or unplugged on a daily basis. I suppose if you have a phone that doesn't have built-in wireless charging, and you use some wireless charging dongle on it, then, yeah, there's really no point.

            • It's the moral equivalent of having a transformer coupling the power between your phone and the power source.
              The in and out windings don't touch galvanically but they are close enough for near fields to interact. It's the same on your 'wireless' charger. There's a coil on the pad coupling to a coil in the back of the phone.

              I don't consider than wireless. Less plugging is involved, but it's not wireless in the way your phone communicates with your wifi.

            • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

              You don't have to actually plug the cable into the phone.

              It sounds like a trivial thing, and it is, but it's a bit less trivial when you have to try and plug it in three times because your phone has a micro USB connector.

          • by crow ( 16139 )

            The losses from wirelessly charging phones are really minimal compared to all our other electric usage. (Now if we're talking about proposed wireless car charging options, then that's another matter.) We have a long history of using electricity for convenience, like powering the IR receiver and related electronics on the TV to pick up the "on" signal from the remote. Ultimately, most of our electric usage is for convenience. I could manually open and close my garage door, but I'm glad I have an electric

            • The losses from wirelessly charging phones are really minimal compared to all our other electric usage.

              They're small but not meaningless.

              Let's say 15Wh battery, 300 million smartphone [statista.com]. Qi is about 70% [wirelesspo...ortium.com]

              If everyone charges their phone to full every day, that's 4.5GWh, or about 1.3GWh extra if everyone used wireless. Several hours of output for a largish coal plant.

              At 385 tons/GWh [eia.gov], that's 500 tons of CO2 a day or about 180 thousand tons a year.

              Hopefully I didn't make an embarrassing mistake in units somewhere but I think it should roughly work out.

          • The USB-C port on my phone broke before I owned the phone for a year. If the phone didn't have wireless charging, it would be in a landfill right now instead of chugging along in my pocket several years later.
        • by aitikin ( 909209 )

          I'd love to see wireless charging figured out in such a way that I can trust it like I trust the plug in charger. I've tried to adopt wireless but I've woken up a few mornings with a phone that didn't charge overnight, and no reason why.

          Conversely, I have a USB-C charging phone that, depending upon which USB-C cable I grab, won't stay in properly. I often would wake the next morning with a phone that didn't charge because, despite looking like it was still plugged in, my cat, my dog, or even my sleeping self had bumped it or the nightstand it was on ever so slightly that the cable became disconnected. I got myself a better Qi charger than the one I had before and I have only had an issue after a night where I may have imbibed too much.

          I

          • Get the magnetically-attaching cable/adapter pair (approx $10 for 3 of them). The adapter plugs into your phone's socket, and stays there, firmly. Because it's always in there, that port doesn't pick up lint and other grunge. The charging cable simply attaches to the magnet. If bumped slightly, it'll reattach; if bumped strongly, or you have to get up and leave quickly, it just cleanly disconnects.
            Easy to use in no-look situations too (like in the car).

        • I like wireless charging when at work or sleeping, but sometimes i wanna use my devices while charging, and i cant easily do that when its charging wireless.
      • by sxpert ( 139117 )

        not happening. the connector is also used by USB 4 v2 which can do up to 120Gbit/s so far...
        https://www.tomshardware.com/n... [tomshardware.com]

      • Re:Boo hoo. (Score:5, Interesting)

        by VeryFluffyBunny ( 5037285 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @12:16PM (#62999959)
        The EU's standardisation law is written to include regular reviews for when/if there's a need for new protocols &/or plug & socket designs. The idea is that everyone can use one type of charger & cable for all their devices & more. This makes it easier to share, borrow, & swap stuff too. How many times do you think people forget to bring their charger &/or cable? What's wrong with a little compatibility?
    • That's a rant, not insightful.

      All recent iPhones have USB connectors. You can use a USB A to lightning cable to charge at 19 Watt with a decent charger, or you can use a USB C to lightning cable to charge at 30 Watt if you have a USB-C charger. Which isn't always there. You can use both cables with a slightly older iPhone as well that isn't capable of USB-C. And the USB-A to lightning charger works with everything in my car, the ubiquitous USB-A chargers everywhere (two in my kitchen, my socket adapter t
    • Apple joined the microusb deal between manufacturers, only to ship a converter.

      So you can only deal with apple by legislating it since they don't honor even deals they volunteer into.. They made the bed and this is the result since everyone else is using it already.

    • The weird thing is that they were so quick to start using USB-C on their computers. Youâ(TM)d think theyâ(TM)d want to standardize their connector across their product lines.

  • The reason why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @11:07AM (#62999633) Homepage Journal

    The reason why they are having to replace their connector is that they designed the entire connection standard (connector and signaling) around being anticompetitive, and they were held to account for it.

    Maybe next time, as a member of the USB Implementer's Forum, they will bring their new connector design to the USB-IF as a standard, instead of deliberately patent-encumbering it in a way that harms not only their own users, but everyone else too. If they were members of the USB-IF in good faith, this is what they would have done in the first place, and we would all be using their connector now (and without the DRM chip.)

    • Re: The reason why (Score:4, Interesting)

      by AcidFnTonic ( 791034 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @11:12AM (#62999655) Homepage

      bingo. I would have preferred if the law had a bit more teeth and simply said that any physical charger used must be royalty free open specification with no undocumented interfaces or commands.

      Then they can continue to "trust" their engineers as they see fit.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by gnasher719 ( 869701 )
      "Insightful" my ass. They designed their "anti-competitive" cables years before the other cables.
    • by e3m4n ( 947977 )
      imagine pulling up to the gas pump and having to circle around looking for the pump with the triangle shaped nozel, or long rectangle nozzle in order to fuel your car up. Sometimes standards exist to make thing easier for a consumer. I am just glad it wasnt micro-usb that won out. That structurally weak-ass plug wore out both on the cable and socket after a 3mos on everything. At least USB-C come with stronger/thicker metals. I did like the snug tension the lightening port gave to the plug, even years later
    • They also brought this upon themselves. The EU has been discussing this issue for a couple of years now, and in that time there has only ever been one phone company that hasn't embraced USB-C. If Apple had, for example, transitioned this year's iPhones to USB-C then the EU probably wouldn't be bothering with legislating.

      I also don't really see what big advantage Apple has from using lighting now. All their accessories are wireless, so the port is pretty much just used for charging and CarPlay (and even thos

      • > So what is the point of dragging their feet on this issue?

        Presumably, the fact that they have for decades been able to get away with selling $5 cables for $30, while collecting fat license payments from everyone who wants to sell a compatible cable or other accessory.

        Why would they want to abandon that cash stream if not legally forced to?

        And USB-C does let you send whatever you want, but it also established what you MUST do in order to be certified USB-C compatible. Including a lot of charging behavi

    • Truth. There is a really easy FTFY for the article summary:

      and trust its engineers rather than be forced into adopting hardware standards by lawmakers

      FTFY ...preferred to go its own way rather than adopting hardware standards by choice

    • Re:The reason why (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anubis IV ( 1279820 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @12:55PM (#63000111)

      If they were members of the USB-IF in good faith, this is what they would have done in the first place, and we would all be using their connector now (and without the DRM chip.)

      Actually, that's exactly what they did and we arguably are using their non-DRM connector (with all sorts of asterisks and caveats on that statement, of course).

      Take a look at the list of engineers who contributed to the USB-C connector spec [docdroid.net]. Of the 36 companies listed, Apple provided the fourth most (behind Intel, Japan Aviation Electronics, and Tyco Electronics, but ahead of Google, Microsoft, Dell, Samsung, Nokia, Lenovo, AMD, and the other usual players), so even though their involvement has largely flown under the radar, they already did exactly what you suggest they should have done, and they were doing it nearly a decade ago for exactly the standard we're talking about.

      And in terms of them putting their designs forward as a standard instead of keeping them proprietary, there's been a persistent rumor over the years that it was Apple who furnished the initial design for USB-C [9to5mac.com] because they wanted an interoperable standard that was better than what was available at the time. Again, take that claim with a massive heaping of salt, but there have been several things over the years that point towards Apple having a larger role in the development of the standard than anyone has publicly acknowledged so far, some of which that article talks about.

      More broadly, you're acting as if Lightning has always been harmful to everyone, but that isn't the case either. Perhaps you can't remember how it was back then, but Lightning was launched over a decade ago and initially provided Apple with a significant competitive advantage thanks to how much easier and more robust it was than micro-USB (or the hodgepodge of even worse USB flavors that were in common use at the time). Other than some folks grumbling about needing to switch from the previous 30-pin connector, user satisfaction with Lightning was incredibly high for about half a decade, which put pressure on the industry to deliver something that was as good or better, which helped drive the adoption of USB-C among manufacturers who needed an answer. That said, Lightning is limited in its charging and launched with USB 2 speeds at a time when USB 3.1 was already being defined, so Apple had to know from the get-go that it was never a long-term play.

      Unfortunately, Apple decided to milk Lightning far longer than they should have. The days when Lightning provided a competitive advantage are long-since behind them, USB-C is now an established standard in this space, and Apple's refusal to adopt it for the iPhone (and a wide variety of accessories) has been harming their end users for a few years now.

    • by fermion ( 181285 )
      Go back to the iPod. What made the iPod better than the Nomad is that the iPod could load through FireWire but was still compatible with USB. Loading music through USB was a 1:1 profess in terms of time where FireWire was more like 10:1. This connector morphed in the current lighting which lost FireWire capability as USB became no longer a joke standard

      the iPhone should be portless. It should charge and transfer data wirelessly. The USB port is probably going to require a bump. I would rather have no po

  • by tdsotf ( 316796 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @11:08AM (#62999635)

    so, you do realize they'll just remove the plug and have you charge via a wireless charging pad (that won't come with the phone and you'll pay extra for)?

    • by Comboman ( 895500 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @11:23AM (#62999695)

      None of their sheep complained when they bravely removed the headphone plug so why not?

    • and then in places with real customer rights will fine them or force them to include them.
      Now maybe an idea is that you can decline it and get an discount. As long they are clear an up front about it.

    • by e3m4n ( 947977 )
      if the AirPod Pro 2s are any indication, they will include USB-C. It charges with both wireless and with usb-c
      • The AirPod 2 Pro have Lightning, not USB-C. https://www.apple.com/airpods-... [apple.com]
        • by e3m4n ( 947977 )
          as of just a month ago the plan was usb-c https://9to5mac.com/2022/08/09... [9to5mac.com]
          • Some idiot analyst, who has been right in less than 5% of his predictions, claims such. Yeah, sure.... The reality is that right now, the AirPod Pro 2 come with Lightning, not USB-C.
            • by e3m4n ( 947977 )
              ive got the first gen, which has the magsafe charging case. Ive been told when airpods first came out they did not. But when Magsafe made its appearance in the iphone XS(?) they started rolling out charging cases with the magsafe feature to pair with it. I guess its no biggie to sell a new case. Ironically my airpod pros are the only thing I use magsafe to charge. Despite having the magsafe compatible symmetry case, my wireless charging of my iphone 12 has been less than amazing (I admit im using a non-appl
    • If they mean what they're saying about "trusting engineers" to put the best product out there, then they won't kill it completely. Wired charging is considerably faster, and the chargers are cheaper. They're more efficient all around.

      If they do go all wireless (and jack up wireless charger prices), however, we'll know the truth.

    • by DRJlaw ( 946416 )

      so, you do realize they'll just remove the plug and have you charge via a wireless charging pad (that won't come with the phone and you'll pay extra for)?

      Because that's exactly what they did with the iPad Pro (USB-C), the latest generation iPad Air (USB-C), and the latest generation base iPad (USB-C), eh?

      The technical superiority claims and threatened tantrums didn't prevent everything but the iPhone from going to USB-C. I won't worry about those arguments now either.

  • I could see the lightning connector being technically better than USB-C. Is there any data to back the comparison - eg. longevity, I've had several devices with usb-microB connectors that have failed, or functionality, I use a headphone adaptor to plug the iphone into the car, so far as I know it is just analog audio. Does usbC carry plain old audio or will I now need a "smart cable" ?
    • USB-C can carry plain old audio, it's up to your manufacturer to support it or not. Some do, some don't. An active cable with a codec in it is not very expensive any more, but I share your distaste for potentially needing one. Manufacturers often obscure which approach they are using. They can of course implement both on the same device.

    • USB-C [wikipedia.org] is capable of carrying quite a bit, some docking stations I know use it to connect the computer with the docking station, i.e. carrying the whole I/O you usually have in such a setup, from multi-monitor to multi-input.

      So the cables and the standards certainly are capable of it, whether Apple is willing to do it is another cuppa java.

    • I use a headphone adaptor to plug the iphone into the car, so far as I know it is just analog audio. Does usbC carry plain old audio or will I now need a "smart cable" ?

      You already have a "smart cable". The iPhone lightning-to-headphone adapter has an digital-to-analog converter inside. Lightning is a digital-only connector. You may be thinking of the 30-pin iPod/early-iPhone docking connector which had both analog and digital signals.

    • by lsllll ( 830002 )
      You say longevity, then you say "usb-microB" connectors that have failed. If you were comparing longevity and durability of Lightning vs. USB Micro B connector, you'd be right. But based on a cursory search, more people believe USB-C is more durable than Lightning.
    • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

      I expect it is. Lighting has the male part on the cable end. USB-C has it on the device end.* You can snap the male bit off a lightning cable, then you have to buy a new cable. If you snap the delicate bit off a USB-C port, you've got to get out the screwdrivers and reflow station. The male member is also more delicate on USB-C, although it does have the advantage that it can just be a bit of PCB rather than an actual metal doohickey. Another disadvantage is that the clearance in the USB-C port is a lot les

  • by greytree ( 7124971 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @11:17AM (#62999673)
    Well done, EU.
    Proprietary anything where it duplicates Open is a waste of our planet's resources and should be banned, Everywhere.
  • by argStyopa ( 232550 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @11:21AM (#62999681) Journal

    I agree that lawmakers - generally staggeringly ignorant about tech, and even when they're not the wheels of legislation grind far too slowly to accommodate technical advancement - shouldn't be in any position to mandate technology.

    I further agree on larger principle that basically government needs to stay out of the fucking marketplace unless someone's actually harmed. If Apple wants to put some boutique power cord on their devices that changes with every iteration and people are DUMB enough (or the hardware is that good) that they buy into it, more power to them. (intended).

    OTOH, the idea that deeply left-leaning, pro-government dilettantes of Apple are being compelled by some vastly impersonal bureaucracy to conform to the rules over which they can't just drown the legislators in lobbying $$ to make it go their way (unlike the US)?...well, I have to admit a slight tumescence.

    • I agree that lawmakers - generally staggeringly ignorant about tech

      Good news, lawmakers had nothing to do with the decision. Very few in the EU do, they offload that to the EC who sub commission it to actual field experts, who then write a recommendation which the EU then rubberstamp. It was engineers and industry who chose the standard, not lawmakers.

      Also it's reviewed every 5 years, which even in the world of USB is fast enough to keep up with the latest trends.

    • by e3m4n ( 947977 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @11:48AM (#62999823)
      I think organizations like IEEE and ISO exist for this specific reason. There is a dimensional standard to your Unleaded Petrol vs Diesel nozzle when you go fill up your tank. All cars have to comply with these standards. As proprietary as cars like to be, there are certain aspects that are regulated so that the consumer is not inconvenienced for basic interfaces like putting air in their tires, or gas in their tanks.
    • I agree that lawmakers - generally staggeringly ignorant about tech, and even when they're not the wheels of legislation grind far too slowly to accommodate technical advancement - shouldn't be in any position to mandate technology.

      I further agree on larger principle that basically government needs to stay out of the fucking marketplace unless someone's actually harmed. If Apple wants to put some boutique power cord on their devices that changes with every iteration and people are DUMB enough (or the hardware is that good) that they buy into it, more power to them. (intended).

      OTOH, the idea that deeply left-leaning, pro-government dilettantes of Apple are being compelled by some vastly impersonal bureaucracy to conform to the rules over which they can't just drown the legislators in lobbying $$ to make it go their way (unlike the US)?...well, I have to admit a slight tumescence.

      Government is a tool, not a religion. You clearly have a right-leaning political beliefs, but I find the irrational hatred of government to be puzzling. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Why not be rational and want it applied when it is effective and not when it isn't.

      Apple has been acting outside the interest of their customers and the marketplace for years. No one WANTS lightning. It's inferior in every way. It was good when it was released, but has been obsolete for a long time. Fast

      • "Apple has been acting outside the interest of their customers and the marketplace for years. "
        Then why not let them and their customers decide that? Seriously?
        Personally I think it's a little creepy-culty, but that doesn't justify lawmakers literally taking choice out of the hands of consumers FOR NO ESSENTIAL PURPOSE.

        I despise Apple, btw. I haven't owned an Apple product since I was given an ipod nano decades ago. Just in case you mistook me for some Jobs-worshipping fanboi.

        "A textbook liberal doesn't

  • Does the law include a provision that allows us to slap anyone who claims changing to USB C is a "blatant cash-grab by Apple to make us all buy new cables and accessories"? If not, I do not support it.
  • Like they aren't already calculating the sales from Lighting to USB adapters and cables they'll be selling.

  • by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @11:38AM (#62999773)

    a) Engineers aren't the reason the iPhone still had a lightning connector. After all all of their "professional devices", including multiple versions of the iPad have already switched before the law was even voted on.
    b) If Apple is so unhappy then why are they including USB-C on devices not covered by the law? The law says only devices *released* after autumn 2024 need to have USB-C, yet they've already confirmed it for the iPhone 15 which means they are voluntarily switching to USB-C an entire model earlier than required.

    Doesn't sound like an unhappy corporate citizen to me.

    • a) Engineers aren't the reason the iPhone still had a lightning connector. After all all of their "professional devices", including multiple versions of the iPad have already switched before the law was even voted on.

      On the contrary, the fact that their other (thicker) devices used USB-C actually suggests that engineering was the reason they kept lightning for the iPhone.

      b) If Apple is so unhappy then why are they including USB-C on devices not covered by the law? The law says only devices *released* after autumn 2024 need to have USB-C, yet they've already confirmed it for the iPhone 15 which means they are voluntarily switching to USB-C an entire model earlier than required.

      Doesn't sound like an unhappy corporate citizen to me.

      Well if you have to make the switch anyway then there's not a lot of point delaying it.

      If I was an Apple user I think I'd prefer them use USB-C rather than lightning for the phones. But I don't like the idea of the government mandating the connector.

  • by m0gely ( 1554053 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @11:41AM (#62999787)
    Weird how that engineering works for one of their products and not another.
  • I support the idea of having standard cables and charges for as many devices as possible, but I don't like it being mandated by law. Sony has been trying for decades to push their proprietary standards for all sorts of things but, in the end, it just ended up hurting their adoption and sales. Why is it different now?
  • The special Apple plug was always about lock-in and licensing. 99.9999% of people using a lightning cable had USB-A on the other end. So what other reason was there for this? They were luck they were early/first to market with iPods and iPhones and got away with it this long.

  • Clearly the people complaining about this don't remember The Dark Ages (the 1990s and early 2000s) when every phone manufacturer had their very own proprietary charging cable. Often the cables weren't even compatible between different models from the same manufacturer. It was purely a cash grab, they weren't afraid to charge a stiff premium for replacement chargers that you could only buy from them. Usually third-parties did manage to reverse engineer the charger and sell knock-offs, but you still needed

  • I guess the union is good for something after all.
  • God forbid they use their position to do the bare minimum to make life better for people and for the planet.

    If they truly have a superior design, why not submit it to and contribute to the USB standard? Be a morally upstanding corporate citizen and help to make things better for everybody, including having less of an impact on the environment.

    Sure, they are not obligated to, but it sure would be nice of them. If we regulated companies like Apple do so forcibly, then the world would be a slightly better plac

  • by doragasu ( 2717547 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2022 @01:58PM (#63000323)

    ... if they like it that much. Just put both connectors on the phone and let users decide.

    Of, forgot it's Apple, letting users decide is not part of their plans.

No skis take rocks like rental skis!

Working...