Re: only wireless? Given the 50% transfer efficiency everyone who uses battery packs on a routine basis is going to wince over that halving of their backup power.
The person upgrading to iPhone 15 from an older iPhone still uses
the 5W USB-A adapter. No choice but to buy a USB-C one, since it isn't
in the box, and get Apple's since it's the safest bet.
Not true at all. Every USB-A charger a person owns will still work just fine. They only may need to buy a USB-A to USB-C cable.
Apple doesn't make a USB-A to USB-C cable and using third party cables isn't recommended, especially for charging.
Good job EU. That certainly helped cure the landfill issues.
Would love to see some numbers on just how a many old chargers and USB A cords get trashed and that are specifically related to the USB C change.
EU directives are only applicable in the EU.
Nothing is stopping Apple from shipping Lightning phones outside the EU.
That said, there are plenty of other tech related directives that are very old now as they came into force years ago. WEEE and RoHS are two examples.
What do they mean?
Less hazardous materials in the finished product and 'free' recycling. It is even illegal to dump e-waste into landfill.
I say 'free' because in reality it isn't free at all. Every time you purchase an electrical or electronic product, the cost of recycling (including transport to the relevant sites) is already factored into the price.
As for reducing e-waste as a result of the common charging directive, that is the case as per the impact assessments.
There’s definitely something stopping them. Money. They are going to produce an EU phone with usb c and a non EU phone with lightning? The global supply and production chain would make this a nightmare.
Good job EU. That certainly helped cure the landfill issues.
Would love to see some numbers on just how a many old chargers and USB A cords get trashed and that are specifically related to the USB C change.
EU directives are only applicable in the EU.
Nothing is stopping Apple from shipping Lightning phones outside the EU.
Nothing except manufacturing two different iPhones for every iPhone model which would make iPhones more expensive. But Apple actually has a much better reason to shift to USB-C than the EU mandate: Lightning is WAY too slow for transferring the high rez files that iPhone Pros are capable of shooting, whether it's 4K or the upcoming 8K video or 48MP still photo files. Lightning is currently the weak link when using iPhone Pro as a creative visual tool and Apple had to remedy that anyway.
Apple will have a PR nightmare of biblical proportions on its hands if it chooses to intentionally hobble the performance of non-Apple or non-MFi chargers and cables. There's the environmental impact and then there's this: It's one thing to have a MFi certification program that assures buyers who wish to pay a premium that their cables and MagSafe accessories meet Apple specs. And honestly, if the iPhone Pro 15s have Thunderbolt 4, I'd be happy to pay for that assurance in a cable and know that it will actually support Thunderbolt 4 speeds. But it's a WHOLE other thing for Apple to throttle the performance of non-MFi accessories simply because they haven't paid up for the MFi chip. Yes, Apple buyers voluntarily go along with living in a walled garden, but this would be like posting sharp-shooting snipers along the wall's perimeter to be sure we toe the Apple line.
And for what? At this point, the money brought in by the MFi program has to amount to a rounding error in Apple's gross revenue. I don't see Tim risking so much to potentially gain so little.
I don't think the 2023 iPhone models are going to draw more than 20 W. As long as that comes in the form of 9V 2.2A, it will charge at 20 W from whatever source. Or 18 W at 9V 2A, or 15W at 5V 3A. At 20 W, it will charge 15 WHr batteries in about an hour. Apple has steadfastly avoided playing the charging time feature war. It's really not that big of a feature for the vast majority of users, as 5 to 15 W satisfies their needs; and, the feature doesn't really sell phones.
I bet the MFi certification for USBC cables, and possibly even chargers though how far up the chain it goes who knows, is about device security and preventing USBC cables and devices from breaking an iPhone's security. MFi certification will reduce this risk.
As far as data transfer speeds, it's basically like the iPad. Low end iPads get slow USB data transfer speeds as most users of those iPads don't do large file transfers. iPad Pro users, and therefore iPhone Pro users, have a much higher chance of transferring GB+ sized files. Using MFi cables won't enable faster data transfer speeds just as regular iPhones just won't support any thing faster that 480 Mbit/s or 5 Gbit/s whatever it is. It may be that the NAND on those iPhones won't even support faster read/write speeds.
What's the big fuss? I haven't plugged my iPhone into a charger for 3-4 years. I use a Belkin wireless charger, and will continue to do so.
Well good for you.
Tell me something, can you pick the phone up from your “wireless” charger and walk about your house while it continues to charge?
If you answered no, then Qi (inductive not wireless) chargers are no different than your standard USBC or lightning cable chargers. Just more expensive.
I, and other people who pay extra for them, think not having to plug a cable into your phone is a significant difference. It saves time and is less hassle.
I don’t think you understand the meaning of the word significant. Unless saving 2 seconds a day to plug in your phone qualifies as “significant “?
Good job EU. That certainly helped cure the landfill issues.
Would love to see some numbers on just how a many old chargers and USB A cords get trashed and that are specifically related to the USB C change.
EU directives are only applicable in the EU.
Nothing is stopping Apple from shipping Lightning phones outside the EU.
That said, there are plenty of other tech related directives that are very old now as they came into force years ago. WEEE and RoHS are two examples.
What do they mean?
Less hazardous materials in the finished product and 'free' recycling. It is even illegal to dump e-waste into landfill.
I say 'free' because in reality it isn't free at all. Every time you purchase an electrical or electronic product, the cost of recycling (including transport to the relevant sites) is already factored into the price.
As for reducing e-waste as a result of the common charging directive, that is the case as per the impact assessments.
There’s definitely something stopping them. Money. They are going to produce an EU phone with usb c and a non EU phone with lightning? The global supply and production chain would make this a nightmare.
Money isn't an issue. Apple produced a dual SIM iPhone for China. Production would also be a piece of cake for Apple. Much less a nightmare.
As it is, Apple will continue to produce Lightning phones (older models) alongside USB-C phones (the newer models).
Good job EU. That certainly helped cure the landfill issues.
Would love to see some numbers on just how a many old chargers and USB A cords get trashed and that are specifically related to the USB C change.
EU directives are only applicable in the EU.
Nothing is stopping Apple from shipping Lightning phones outside the EU.
That said, there are plenty of other tech related directives that are very old now as they came into force years ago. WEEE and RoHS are two examples.
What do they mean?
Less hazardous materials in the finished product and 'free' recycling. It is even illegal to dump e-waste into landfill.
I say 'free' because in reality it isn't free at all. Every time you purchase an electrical or electronic product, the cost of recycling (including transport to the relevant sites) is already factored into the price.
As for reducing e-waste as a result of the common charging directive, that is the case as per the impact assessments.
There’s definitely something stopping them. Money. They are going to produce an EU phone with usb c and a non EU phone with lightning? The global supply and production chain would make this a nightmare.
Apple have no problem with producing different SKUs to cover different cellular antennas and adoption of eSIMs in different markets. Money isn’t an issue at all, they could easily accommodate the production chain changes if they do wished.
I can understand Apple wanting to require MFi certified cables and even chargers. I have a collection of tiny wired USB-C cables that have come with purchases, all totally inadequate (and probably dangerous) to use with a PD capable charger. If Apple is going to have to take the heat of any iPhone charging mishaps (and they would be blamed) I can see Apple only wanting to do it if problem actually is because of an Apple product and not a cheap cable or charger.
I bought 3 Thunderbolt 100W 40 Gb cables when I got my MacBook Pro and labeled them as such, and would buy a similar one for any USB-C iPhone. I hope that Apple figures out some middle ground so that they can limit their liabilities and still allow existing quality 3rd party accessories.
The person upgrading to iPhone 15 from an older iPhone still uses
the 5W USB-A adapter. No choice but to buy a USB-C one, since it isn't
in the box, and get Apple's since it's the safest bet.
Not true at all. Every USB-A charger a person owns will still work just fine. They only may need to buy a USB-A to USB-C cable.
Apple doesn't make a USB-A to USB-C cable and using third party cables isn't recommended, especially for charging.
Been using high quality USB A to USB C cables for a while now without any issues,
Even though Apple doesn't make one, they do sell at least one third-party cable on the site.
Having designed these types of supplies in the past, I can tell you there is zero chance I would plug in ANY aftermarket charger into my $1200 phone. There are a few components in the charger that are absolutely critical to get right (read: spend another $.05 on, literally). If not, frying the phone is bad, but the supply flaming out in your hand as you plug it in is really bad. If the phone cooks on an Apple charger, you have some recourse with Apple. I can see why Apple would limit the charging current. If I sell a charger, I want the customer to notice the fast charge, so I will goose the output. I don't care if I kill your battery in a few hundred cycles rather than 500 to 600 at a more reasonable rate. When your battery dies prematurely- who do you blame? Apple, of course. GaN chargers can be smaller as they produce less internal heat. HOWEVER, there is a 'right' size for thermal considerations, and smaller is NOT better. I have an Anker charger A1256. I use it to charge Anker battery packs, but never my phone. Please look at the rated max ambient temperature spec- it's 25˚C / 77˚F. Above that, it's the wild west. You have to dig for this- the marketing blather is 104˚F. The real one is 77˚F. Get out the magnifying glass on page 2 of the manual. Wireless works and is what I use mostly. Only drawback is you are sending a fair amount of airgap lost power to the proverbial landfill, times a few billion phones. There goes the planet, again.
Comments
And for what? At this point, the money brought in by the MFi program has to amount to a rounding error in Apple's gross revenue. I don't see Tim risking so much to potentially gain so little.
I bet the MFi certification for USBC cables, and possibly even chargers though how far up the chain it goes who knows, is about device security and preventing USBC cables and devices from breaking an iPhone's security. MFi certification will reduce this risk.
As far as data transfer speeds, it's basically like the iPad. Low end iPads get slow USB data transfer speeds as most users of those iPads don't do large file transfers. iPad Pro users, and therefore iPhone Pro users, have a much higher chance of transferring GB+ sized files. Using MFi cables won't enable faster data transfer speeds just as regular iPhones just won't support any thing faster that 480 Mbit/s or 5 Gbit/s whatever it is. It may be that the NAND on those iPhones won't even support faster read/write speeds.
Unless saving 2 seconds a day to plug in your phone qualifies as “significant “?
As it is, Apple will continue to produce Lightning phones (older models) alongside USB-C phones (the newer models).
The same with tablets of course.
I bought 3 Thunderbolt 100W 40 Gb cables when I got my MacBook Pro and labeled them as such, and would buy a similar one for any USB-C iPhone. I hope that Apple figures out some middle ground so that they can limit their liabilities and still allow existing quality 3rd party accessories.
If the phone cooks on an Apple charger, you have some recourse with Apple.
I can see why Apple would limit the charging current. If I sell a charger, I want the customer to notice the fast charge, so I will goose the output. I don't care if I kill your battery in a few hundred cycles rather than 500 to 600 at a more reasonable rate. When your battery dies prematurely- who do you blame? Apple, of course.
GaN chargers can be smaller as they produce less internal heat. HOWEVER, there is a 'right' size for thermal considerations, and smaller is NOT better.
I have an Anker charger A1256. I use it to charge Anker battery packs, but never my phone. Please look at the rated max ambient temperature spec- it's 25˚C / 77˚F. Above that, it's the wild west. You have to dig for this- the marketing blather is 104˚F. The real one is 77˚F. Get out the magnifying glass on page 2 of the manual.
Wireless works and is what I use mostly. Only drawback is you are sending a fair amount of airgap lost power to the proverbial landfill, times a few billion phones. There goes the planet, again.