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

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Iphone Apple

Brazilian Regulator Seizes iPhones From Retail Stores as Apple Fails To Comply With Charger Requirement (9to5mac.com) 184

Posted by msmash from the how-about-that dept.
The Brazilian Ministry of Justice ordered in September the suspension of iPhone sales in the country after concluding that Apple harms consumers by not offering the power adapter included with the device. Even after million-dollar fines, Apple still fails to comply with the requirement -- which has now led to the Federal District-based consumer protection regulator seizing iPhones from retail stores. From a report: As first reported by Tecnoblog, Procon-DF has seized "hundreds of iPhones in different retail stores in Brasilia," the capital of Brazil. In an action named "Operation Discharge," the regulator aims to force Apple to comply with local law that requires smartphones to be shipped with the charger included in the box.

According to the report, the iPhones were seized at carrier stores and authorized Apple resellers. The regulator has ordered the banning of any iPhone model that lacks the charger included in the box. Although Apple stopped shipping the accessory for free with iPhone 12, the company also updated iPhone 11 with a new, more compact box without the charger. After the iPhones were seized, Apple Brazil requested the government to allow sales of the smartphone in the country until the final decision of the dispute. The company told Tecnoblog that it continues to sell iPhones in Brazil despite the operation.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Brazilian Regulator Seizes iPhones From Retail Stores as Apple Fails To Comply With Charger Requirement More

Brazilian Regulator Seizes iPhones From Retail Stores as Apple Fails To Comply With Charger Requirement

Comments Filter:

  • Seems stupid to me (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I'm not against people getting a charger with their phone. But why has the charger got to be actually in the box with the phone as opposed to being supplied with it in the ticket price?

    How many different wall sockets are there in the world? You have to supply an adapter plug for all of the world's wall sockets in every single phone box? Bigger boxes! More costs for everybody! Everybody has to pay for every adapter plug even though they only need one! Nonsense!

    Just supply a locally appropriate charger in a s

    • Re:Seems stupid to me (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Narcocide ( 102829 ) on Friday November 25, 2022 @02:28AM (#63078340) Homepage

      Since it's Brazil, my guess is that it has something to do with them not being able to stop their own vendors charging extra and lying about it if it's in a separate box.

      • Re:Seems stupid to me (Score:5, Interesting)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Friday November 25, 2022 @05:57AM (#63078514) Homepage Journal

        From what I read the issue is that if you sell something that requires accessories to work in Brazil, you must indicate that clearly on the box and in advertising. It was designed to stop vendors hiding the true cost of ownership and locking consumers into buying expensive accessories, which to be fair is a major part of Apple's business model.

        • But the new standard is USB-PD, so any 3rd party charger works fine. Assuming you are using the USB-C to lightning cable and not an older USB-A from a previous phone. Do you know how many of those single USB-A wall warts I have littering my house because they came with the iPhone? I simply dont use single socket chargers. I have charging hubs. When I travel I have a 4port thats 110/220 and has adapters for a few european plugs as well as North America (keeps an outlet free on a cruise when you can use the

          • Sounds like you need to use free cycle or a neighborhood social media group to give them away to those who can use them

          • You talk so authoritatively about electrical standards in Brazil.

            Do you live in Brazil?

            It's nice you have all this crap in your house ("Do you know how many of those single USB-A wall warts I have littering my house because they came with the iPhone? I simply dont use single socket chargers. I have charging hubs. When I travel I have a 4port thats 110/220 and has adapters for a few european plugs as well as North America (keeps an outlet free on a cruise when you can use the euro port). I dont do monotask

          • So it sounds like it needed to be clearly indicated on the box that the Charger Not Included to comply with the law (as opposed to bringing up irrelevant personal info... i could bring up my experience where I have just enough chargers BECAUSE they included them in all the places i normally am)

        • From what I read the issue is that if you sell something that requires accessories to work in Brazil, you must indicate that clearly on the box and in advertising. It was designed to stop vendors hiding the true cost of ownership and locking consumers into buying expensive accessories, which to be fair is a major part of Apple's business model.

          As an Apple product user - which exact expensive accessories have I been forced to buy from Apple?

          I have a Logitech wireless mouse, a Logitech wired gamer keyboard, Bose Bluetooth headphones, Sharp 42 inch second monitor. A Dell USB-C to USB/HDMI/Ethernet adapter to power the Sharp Monitor, two non-Apple TByte HDs for backup and a Western Digital Passport for transferring large files a Monsoon computer speaker system and a UE bluetooth floating speaker for when I want music in the hot tub, and several o

          • I bet almost all of the products you specified has a built in apple tax, just like the charging cables. If you want it to interoperate flawlessly (asides from the standard USB devices... which you know they tried to override the overwhelming market forces with lightning and firewire), you (indirectly) typically need to pay apple

        • Reasonable [Re:Seems stupid to me] (Score:4, Insightful)

          by XXongo ( 3986865 ) on Friday November 25, 2022 @11:40AM (#63078962) Homepage

          Seems reasonable to me that there might be a law in some countries saying that if you buy something, what you buy should be an operational product, with no caveat "this doesn't actually work as we sold it, you need to pay for some other stuff from us to be able to use it."

          "Thanks for buying your new car! By the way, would you like wheels on it? We can sell you wheels for another ten thousand dollars. No, of course we don't provide wheels with the car. Why would you think that? Our company policy is that since everybody has a bunch of spare wheels around their house, they should just find an adaptor so you can fit your old wheels to our proprietary bolt standards. Everybody should have adaptors.

          "What, you don't have the right wheel adaptor? No problem. Cash or charge?"

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Macdude ( 23507 )

            "Thanks for buying your new car! By the way, would you like gas with it?"

            If you buy a car without wheels, isn't that's on you for not reading the specifications before paying for it?

            • If you don't know a car requires wheels (silly example, but many people are not tech savvy)... or more similar... what if the car doesn't have a gas tank port / charger included in the price? When's the last time you requested to look to see if the gas door was actually connected?

          • what you buy should be an operational product

            What you should buy is something clearly described to you. Pissing about whether a charger should be included or not is completely irrelevant. What is important is that the purchases *knows beyond any doubt* whether the charger is included.

            You want to be really pro-consumer, then make everything optional and make it clear. Yeah maybe I don't want wheels on my car because I prefer these other ones I'll buy separately rather than the cheap shit included ones.

            Same with a charger. I don't want some crappy inclu

        • "Woke, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC" Which is why the "woke" invented the term to describe themselves and did so increasingly for a few years, to the annoyance of practically everyone. Now that it's caught on and they've ruined the term by countless public acts of stupidity, they have to pretend it was a pejorative created by "fuckwits," who are themselves!

      • As if. customer in Brazil is unable to figure if a box was opened already and the charger is "gone".
        Or the police for that matter is unable to figure.

        Must hurt to live in a third world country and being of the impression, that all the other countries around are on an even lower level of development.

    • Re:Seems stupid to me (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Whiney Mac Fanboy ( 963289 ) <whineymacfanboy@gmail.com> on Friday November 25, 2022 @02:56AM (#63078360) Homepage Journal

      You have to supply an adapter plug for all of the world's wall sockets in every single phone box? Bigger boxes!

      Congratulations, that is the stupidest thing I have read all day, and I've just gotten out of an all day workshop with Test management, so that's saying something.

      When Apple shipped their phones with chargers, they didn't include each power outlet type. Why would they have to now?

      Beyond stupid.

      • But that did affect planning and distribution. Its a little like that in the USA with gasoline. One, not all just one, reason gasoline cost what it does is that they have to speculate how much diesel to make, how much 87 octane to make, and how much 93 octane to make. Now if everything standardized one one type of fuel that step is not necessary. We already have a power standard; the usb cable. Its the adapter that puts the power situation in a planning shitshow. Besides, every swinging dick and their old

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dbialac ( 320955 )
          Uhm, if you go to other countries, you find the same exact thing. Different types of cars require different fuel grades. Sports cars require higher octane fuels to run properly while a standard car is just fine with 87 octane.
          • And that affects cost. Dont make enough 87, price goes up because demand outpaces supply. Surely you grasp the advantage of 1 production line with a universal base of customers. CA fucks up car sales all across the US when they pass a requirement. Car makers arent going to just stick that into CA cars, they end up making all buyers buy that change. Sometimes its environmental or safety related, sometimes its just stupid. In all cases its much easier to make the change for the entire assembly line than to on

    • My guess is Apple will tie this requirement to the EU requirement that all mobile phones sold in the EU must use USB-C starting in 2024 and include a new adapter with their next phone model. https://apple.slashdot.org/sto... [slashdot.org]

      Since Apple wasn't happy about being forced to comply with the EU's or Brasil's requirements, I can imagine they might still pull some shenanigans like either limiting the charging speed on non-Apple adapters, or limiting the data transfer rate on the USB-C port to USB-2 speeds as sugge

      • The idiotic thing is that newish iPhones all use usb-c. The connector is different, so you need a different cable. I have lots of lightning cables that will become useless.

        • Re: Seems stupid to me (Score:5, Informative)

          by Pieroxy ( 222434 ) on Friday November 25, 2022 @04:38AM (#63078432) Homepage

          The idiotic thing is that newish iPhones all use usb-c. The connector is different, so you need a different cable. I have lots of lightning cables that will become useless.

          USB-C is the connector. So in fact, it *cannot* be USB-C with a different connector. That's, by definition, not USB-C.

          All iPhones since the iPhone 5 use Lightning, and none use USB-C.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by kbg ( 241421 )

          Well you can blame Apple for not using a non standard cable in the first place.
          But you do know that you can get a Lightning to USB-C adapter?

        • wtf you talking about, my dude?

          Zero iPhones ship with USB-C.
          iPad Pros do, though.

        • The connector is different

          The law exclusively covers the connector and support for USB-PD. You can do what you want beyond this with the connector, but the connector needs to be in place.

          • Parent wrong about it supporting "USB-C", even if we ignore the technical silliness of that (USB-C is a connector, not a protocol).
            The iPhone supports USB2, and does not support USB-PD, and does not support 3A power input, meaning it doesn't even support any USB-C specific features.

            Apple has hacked in USB-PD "support" via the E75 MFi chip in the Lightning-to-USB-C cable, though.
            But that's a bit of a stretch for claiming that the phone supports it.
            Since the Lightning connector can't talk over the CC cha
        • But if you have an Apple device then you don't mind using dongles for everything. Get a USB-C to lighting dongle and use those cables!

          • \o/
            I have roughly 10 Apple devices.
            And no dongle!

            Yay!

            • Dongle is a pretty ambiguous term, these days.
              As the person you replied to used it, yes, yes you do.

              They're using it as "anything that converts incompatible signals".
              That includes your Lightning-to-USB-C cable.

              Lightning is fundamentally incompatible with USB-C signaling. That's why it's handled by the E75 MFi chip that's bonded to the inside of the connector on the cable.
              It's a fancy looking dongle, I'll grant you that, but a dongle it is nonetheless.

      • That would be commercially idiotic. Companies tend to not fuck their customers to make political points. They fuck customers to make money.

        If someone goes "Well this iphone takes 18 hours to charge, thats useless, I'll buy a Samsung instead" then all apple has gained is a lost customer AND a regulator having to make FURTHER regulations to forbid further scheming.

        Microsoft learned this one the hard way in the tail end of the browser wars. All they gained from intransigence against regulators was losing almos

      • starting in 2024 and include a new adapter with their next phone model.
        And why would require that a new adaptor ...

        Facepalm ...

    • I'm not against people getting a charger with their phone. But why has the charger got to be actually in the box with the phone as opposed to being supplied with it in the ticket price?

      How many different wall sockets are there in the world? You have to supply an adapter plug for all of the world's wall sockets in every single phone box? Bigger boxes! More costs for everybody! Everybody has to pay for every adapter plug even though they only need one! Nonsense!

      Just supply a locally appropriate charger in a separate box with the phone purchase for Pete's sake.

      True, one should just get price reduction on this bundle if you don't need a charger and elect to skip it or, alternatively, be able to exercise the option to get a device case instead? I must have close to a couple of dozen still functional chargers of different Watt values from defunct Apple and Android devices that are still perfectly usable. I use some of them to charge or power all kinds of gizmos from Raspberry PI projects through power banks, ear plugs and headphones to rechargeable AAA batteries for

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by zmooc ( 33175 )

      Just supply a locally appropriate charger in a separate box with the phone purchase for Pete's sake.

      Sounds like a horrible idea to me. I have tens of unused adapters lying around and really don't want or need any more than I already have. These days, shipping a charger with a phone is totally ridiculous. Soon laptops and all other battery-powered devices with a USB-C connector will join that club. Brazil seems to be doing the exact opposite of what would be common sense: forbid tying accessory sales to phone sales.

      • Sounds like a horrible idea to me. I have tens of unused adapters lying around and really don't want or need any more than I already have. These days, shipping a charger with a phone is totally ridiculous.

        Well, yes, it's ridiculous. I guess Apple should just increase the prices and glue a charger to the box. And give you some money back if you return an unopened charger.

    • Whatever happened to wireless phone charging?

    • How many different wall sockets are there in the world?
      Two or three. And they are all compatible with simple chargers.

      You have to supply an adapter plug for all of the world's wall sockets in every single phone box?
      Simple answer: nope.
      Complex answer: you supply a connector fitting to the country you sell your device in.
      Simple.

      Just supply a locally appropriate charger in a separate box with the phone purchase for Pete's sake.
      That is exactly what the law is asking for. But: no charger in the box ..

    • No, the problem is that Apple wasn't including any charger in the ticket price. The charger is extra, and in Brazil it's not cheap.

  • Next step, include the slowest charger that will still work with the iPhone.

    • Next step, include the slowest charger that will still work with the iPhone.

      I recall Apple doing this before to appease consumer expectations and/or government requirements of a phone coming with a charger in the box. As a result I had a somewhat large collection of 5 watt USB-A chargers. I pared that stockpile down by giving away a few, tossing out a few more that failed, and I'm now down to just one or two. I learned to have a spare charger on hand ever since I had a panic over a dead laptop charger many years ago, the lesson was that a spare charger was cheap insurance agains

    • Yep, and increase the price of each Brazilian "compliant" iPhone by $99. Or, ship a free "government compliant" slow charger, but lock the phones to Brazilian chargers only, then make up the cost by charging licensing for any Brazilian compliant chargers. Green-wash the message with "we're doing this to make sure people don't throw away the government compliant chargers and use some cheaper chargers from the rest of the world".

      Or, simply pull iPhones out of Brazil (Apple already has a supply chain shorta

      • Oh that is evil. I like it. Do you work for a cable company by any chance?

      • determine how much people are actually willing to pay for the latest iPhone in Brazil.

        iPhones, except for the still sold, cheapest of the cheapest, yesteryear model, are already extraordinarily expensive in Brazil. They're considered luxury items that people buy either because they absolutely love Apple (the minority), or to show off how much money they have (the majority). For a basic affordability comparison, an iPhone 14 Pro Max 512 GB is priced 12,150 BRL here, which, at our minimum wage of 5.50 BRL/hr, means 2,200 hours of work. That's as if that same model had a price tag of $16,500 do

  • I donâ(TM)t care about a charger in the box. I have a five port charger in the living room (four USB-A up to 19 Watt, one USB-C charger up to 33 Watt). In my study, I can plug the phone into a hub (7ports plus 3 charging ports), into a Mac, or into a monitor. In my care thereâ(TM)s a two port charger. A single port charger is just very inefficient. So in my living room, we can charge 2 iPhones and an iPad using only one wall plug instead of three, plus the charger has a two meter cable.
    • 19W over USB-A?
      One wonders how they do that.

      I didn't think there was a standard (though there are several proprietary extensions) for offering more than 1.5A over USB-A.
      • Unless of course you meant 19W across all 4 ports, in which case- there's your argument for individual chargers.

        An iDevice will pull up to 2A over USB-A, IIRC, but only using special Apple signaling on the data lines (part of the MFi specification)
        • Well, my iPad and my iPhones charge a lot faster on these connectors. So maybe your theoretical knowledge doesn't quite agree with my reality.
          • There's simply no way that your devices charge faster on that thing than any other MFi-compatible 12W charger.
            Give me the device model, and I'll prove it with the documentation for it if I must.

            If you mean your iPad and iPhones charger faster than they do on a non-MFi USB-A charger (which is generally limited to 900mA) then we have no disagreement.
            If you're trying to imply that they're charging at 19W, and are faster than a normal MFi charger, then no, my theoretical knowledge isn't the problem- your be

      • 19W over USB-A

        It's an Anker charger. They have been supplying 19Watt through a USB-A connector for ages. The complete charger has a limit of about 60Watt. The ports can supply 4x19 + 1x33 Watt as long as the power lasts.

        • "Supplying" is one thing.
          Something being able to pull it is another.

          Unless you are using a device that supports Anker's PowerIQ, those USB-A ports are supplying you with a maximum of 1.5A (7.5W).

          • those USB-A ports are supplying you with a maximum of 1.5A (7.5W).
            That would be a voltage of 5V, which makes no sense.

            Perhaps your "theoretical knowledge" is just fantasy?

            • That would be a voltage of 5V, which makes no sense.

              What the fuck are you talking about.
              5V is the only voltage supported on USB-A, except for a couple of proprietary Qualcomm fast-charging protocols.
              Apple's only USB-A fast-charging protocol is the MFi "2.4A" protocol, which is indeed limited to 5 fucking volts, as is all standard USB-A

              Perhaps your "theoretical knowledge" is just fantasy?

              No, you're just a fucking moron.

      • One wonders how they do that.

        9V @ 2.1A. Otherwise known as Qualcomm QC2.
        USB's spec only ever really covered 5V at 0.5A. Everything else was a bolt-on until USB-PD was created. Incidentally USB-PD also existed before USB-C and also supported far higher charging speeds over USB-A.

        • 9V @ 2.1A. Otherwise known as Qualcomm QC2.

          Ya- I suspected there was some kind of proprietary extension that allowed it.
          Whatever it was, I knew it did not apply to his iDevices.

          Incidentally USB-PD also existed before USB-C and also supported far higher charging speeds over USB-A.

          Unsure how it could have.
          It relies on binary communications over the CC channel- there is no such channel on USB-A.
          That's why USB-A quick-charging hacks rely on bizarre voltage signaling on the D+/D- lines
          Do you have a citation?

          • There are different revisions of the USB power delivery spec, AFAIK revisions 1 was for USB A/B connectors, revision 2 supports both the legacy A/B and the new C while revisions 3.0 and 3.1 are for USB C connectors. To make things even more confusing each of the revisions seems to have versions, USB-IF are awful at naming things.

            USB IF seem to put both revision 2.0 and revision 3.1 in the same zipfile https://www.usb.org/sites/defa... [usb.org] I have skimmed the specs at various times but not read them in detail.

            My

            • In practice though I don't think USB PD on A/B connectors was ever widely implemented. I suspect the requirement for special cables and connectors put manufacturers off.

              I've definitely never encountered such a beast. Fascinating though.

              I appreciate the good info.

        • USB's spec only ever really covered 5V at 0.5A.

          USB2.

          USB3 supports up to 900mA for "high power devices", and 1.5A for BC (Battery Charging) mode- which is a "no-data" charging mode (requires putting a resistor across the data lines).

    • I donâ(TM)t care about a charger in the box.

      You live in Brazil: Yes/No

      If you don't live in Brazil, why are you wasting my time jabbering about charger standards in Brazil?

      I have a five port charger in the living room (four USB-A up to 19 Watt, one USB-C charger up to 33 Watt). In my study, I can plug the phone into a hub (7ports plus 3 charging ports), into a Mac, or into a monitor. In my care thereâ(TM)s a two port charger. A single port charger is just very inefficient. So in my living room, we can charge 2 iPhones and an iPad using only one wall plug instead of three, plus the charger has a two meter cable.

      And do you think that this is typical of households in Brazil?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by nasch ( 598556 )

      I donâ(TM)t care about a charger in the box.

      You should definitely tell the Brazilian regulators; I'm sure they didn't consider the fact that gnasher719 doesn't care about a charger in the box.

  • Forest for the trees (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LeeLynx ( 6219816 ) on Friday November 25, 2022 @05:26AM (#63078476)
    Commenters seem to be missing the actual problem. In yet another example of corporate hubris, Apple decided little annoyances like consumer protection regulations do not apply to them. They were warned, they were fined, yet they persisted, because they are Apple and no one is going to tell them what they can and cannot do. The Brazilian government decided to use its only remaining enforcement option, thus demonstrate to Apple that the company is, in fact, subject to the law. Then, and only then, did Apple seek the judicial relief they should have sought in the first place - assuming they legitimately believed all along the regulators were wrong, and were not just counting on lack of enforcement.

    Tech companies should not get a pass when they ignore legal restrictions on the basis of inconvenience or threat to profitability, irrespective of whether you think the regulation is a dumb idea. That behavior is the chief threat they pose.
    • Doesn't change the fact that the legal restrictions are idiotic. And there is no threat to profitability, because Apple can charge more for a phone with a useless charger than for a phone without a useless charger.

      • because Apple can charge more for a phone with a useless charger than for a phone without a useless charger.

        They probably can't; after all, if the charger is useless, then buyers won't be willing to pay more for a phone+charger than they were for the phone. And presumably Apple is already charging what they think the market will bear for an iPhone in Brazil.

    • Apple didn't take this to court only after their products were seized. Apple had an open court case on this and asked the court to hold off enforcement until the matter was settled. The court rejected this request or the police acted on seizures prematurely.

      I have to wonder if Apple was alone in this. Were other phones seized as well for failure to comply? I have to wonder if Apple is getting special treatment by the government because the government has a better chance to collect. It's possible the go

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by nasch ( 598556 )

        Have you considered the possibility that everyone else was already compliant?

        • I have considered that. That is why I asked. It seems unlikely that Apple would be the only phone maker to not comply, and if they were then why was that not mentioned in the story?

    • The chief thread posed by any corporation is that they will rent politicians for the purpose of buying laws. Many or even most of our laws are now written by corporate lawyers, and handed to paid congresscreeps for sponsorship. This is actual, literal fascism and it's a much bigger threat than corporations pretending governments don't have power and then finding out that they do.

    • In yet another example of corporate hubris, Apple decided little annoyances like consumer protection regulations do not apply to them.

      Why do you call it "consumer protection regulations"? Countries with actual consumer protection regulations don't have this requirement. It also makes zero sense, the consumer is not being negatively impacted by having the additional ability to buy something *without* being forced to have unneeded extras included in the purchase price. Additionally consumers benefit greatly from the ability to go buy different products from different vendors.

      E.g. I don't use any USB-C chargers from phones to charge my phone

      • If you and by airplane in a foreign country, lose your phone and buy a phone in a shop: you expect a charger. Or how exactly do you charge a phone without a charger?

        Countries with actual consumer protection regulations don't have this requirement.
        I thought you lived in the EU. Perhaps you should check laws? You can not sell a phone in the EU without a charger, facepalm.

  • E-waste galore (Score:2, Informative)

    by dbu ( 256902 )

    The world is struggling to reduce e-waste, and Brazil is striving to create even more by forcing the bundling of chargers we don't need...

    In other news, the EU wants to impose the unbundling of the sale of chargers from that of electronic devices: “This will limit the number of unwanted chargers purchased or left unused. Reducing production and disposal of new chargers is estimated to reduce the amount of electronic waste by almost a thousand tonnes' yearly” : https://ec.europa.eu/commissio... [europa.eu]

    Go

    • Since the new transformers are more efficient how does that net out on total energy?

      They can just offer a $20 iTunes card to anybody who trades one in still sealed in the box.

      It's a stupid law but usually most people here aren't agreeing with me on rulerless societies.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      The world is struggling to reduce e-waste, and Brazil is striving to create even more by forcing the bundling of chargers we don't need...

      In other news, the EU wants to impose the unbundling of the sale of chargers from that of electronic devices: âoeThis will limit the number of unwanted chargers purchased or left unused. Reducing production and disposal of new chargers is estimated to reduce the amount of electronic waste by almost a thousand tonnes' yearlyâ : https://ec.europa.eu/commissio [europa.eu]...

      Go

      • Makes perfect sense. The charger you get "bundled for free" is the crappy charger - usually an 800mA-1A (4-5W) charger. Modern phones can charge off it, but it's slow. Modern phones can charge much faster - all iPhones can do 10W charging (2A) at a minimum for years, and many are able to do 20W and 30W charging.

        But if you want the faster charger you have to buy it - it's never bundled in.

        Is throwing in a shit charger a common Apple thing? My last iPhone was almost a decade ago. My current Android phone came with a very nice high speed USB-C charger in the box.

Slashdot Top Deals

To the systems programmer, users and applications serve only to provide a test load.

Close