You're saying a cable costs the same as a charger? Both monetarily and in terms of environmental impact (raw materials used, energy used in manufacture and shipping)?
I'm saying that a cable (or adapter) with TWO connectors costs more than adding ONE full sized USB connector to the charger.
Quote:
That's the whole point!
A point you miss when you say that Apple's way is less efficient than the EU way.
Frankly the EU standard is butt stupid.
They just standardized on USB 2.0 Micro in 2010 with USB 3.0 Micro on the horizon making all these new chargers obsolescent and unable to provide higher power (150mA vs 100MA low single unit load, 900mA vs 500 mA max load) for faster charging AND allows manufacturers to make chargers that require a separate data cable because one end can be embedded in the adapter itself rather than forced to terminate as a full sized USB plug (to save a few cents).
What they SHOULD have done was standardized on a full sized USB 3.0 port on the charger around the time 3.0 comes out (you know, like 2010) and let the phone companies supply the right cable. Most would supply a USB 2.0 micro cable to USB 2 full sized A anyway but if they wanted to do a dock like Apple, it's not another connector on the phone. Or choose to use the USB 3.0 micro connector on their phones.
Same outcome: fewer power adapters in land fills with 1 fewer cord and uses a standard with a higher data rate for syncing and higher power for quicker recharges that is backward compatible with existing USB 2.0 devices with the right cable (like the existing phones that have a USB 2.0 mini).
The higher cost for the adapters is offset by the fact that phone companies won't be including them for free anymore with their phones AND the fact that a gazillion USB 2.0 adapters wont be hitting the landfills sometime in 2015.
Bloody brilliant thinking on the part of the EU. The only GOOD thing you can say about it is that a micro USB 3.0 connector PROBABLY meets their requirement. As long as the final micro 3.0 connector retains its 2.0 compatible section anyway.
I already have 3 Apple chargers in my house, I can use the same charger to charge my wife's Motorola, Navman and my Kensington battery using a standard Mini USB cable, I can charge the three Bluetooth headsets in my house using a standard micro USB cable then I can charge my two iPhones and an iPod by plugging in an Apple cable.
Using the Kensington battery I can charge my iPhone using any Mini USB cable whether it is in a car or attached to a PC.
The only phone or phone related object in my house which can't be charged using standard cables and chargers I already have is a Nokia N82 which has a micro USB port but cannot charge from it.
While your history is correct, your interpretation of the usefulness of the connector is wrong.
[snip]
In actual fact, the connector is one of Apple biggest advantages. With )S 3.0 allowing tight coupling between the connector and third party devices, we'll see uses for the iPod Touch and the iPhone that not other models from any other manufacture will be able to match.
Even the much desired game controllers will appear. I'd love to see how they would do this for the Pre, with its USB connector.
We now have the popular Nike models working directly. And have seen some medical devices shown. A company is coming out with sensors for measuring numerous dynamic states.
This will be a whole new category that no other phone will be able to participate in.
[snip]
That's really cool, I wasn't aware that people were actually going to be making use of the extra pins.
Yes, it is that simple. Eventually, phones will be sold without chargers and consumers will use the ones they've already got. So instead of manufacturers shipping 180 million chargers each year in the box with the 180 million phones they sell, they'll ship 0 chargers a year in the box with the phone.
Some people will lose or break their chargers, but you can be damn sure it'll be less than 180 million. Let's be generous and put the number of chargers at 18 million (10%). That's 162 million chargers not being made or shipped. That has significant positive environmental impact.
Like I said before, I'm not against the concept. But I'm doubtful that the numbers will work out so favorably. I'm willing to bet, human nature being what it is, that the numbers are much worse than that long term.
Quote:
No, I'm not saying manufacturers all have to adopt the same battery. They will have to ensure that they pick a high upper limit for the current handling capability of the universal charger (the standard isn't set yet). As long as it's high enough, you'll still be able to charge large batteries quickly.
I said the same thing in two posts. The chargers will have to be built to handle the max current needed to charge the biggest batteries in the fastest time. That will waste energy. None of these devices is perfect. And as always, people will leave them plugged in. So bigger rechargers used for smaller batteries will suck more current that smaller chargers would.
There are ways around this, but it costs more.
I believe they rushed this, and haven't taken everything into account, such as Vinea's statement that they should have waited and gone to USB 3.
They are re-working the "connectors"!! Gee, in 3 years from now I don't want to "plug" my phone in anymore when I get home. I just want to take it out of my pocket and put it on the desk and it charges.
That was a licensed system. It seems that inductive charging shouldn't need to be a licensed thing. Nokia is supposedly working on one that charges from stray radio waves, but I don't know if that can really scale up to useable current.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Curious: what other major examples of EU not thinking through standards are you thinking of?
As an aside, I wish some of the EU standards related to mobile telephony -- system-wide GSM standards, for starters -- could have been adopted in the US.
An open standard is nice. However, I really don't like how GSM based signals interfere with a lot of audio and equipment and telephones. It will also induce audible clicks into nearby headphones, connected or otherwise.
That's really cool, I wasn't aware that people were actually going to be making use of the extra pins.
While that might be a rationale, it is disingenuous to suggest that such integration uses would not be possible under the USB standard. One of the examples was the game controller. There is nothing to preclude the use of the USB connector in achieving a similar aim. How else are the many games controllers connected to a PC?
They are cheap now because cell phones come with charger and few people actually need to buy one. Once you get your phone without a charger they will hike the price in the name of an incentive for to get people to keep their old chargers and because you don't have a choice.
You can't prove this. Pure speculation. For the past year Nokia has been standardizing their products. USB charging is now quite common place for BT headsets, and phones. I do not see the price suddenly skyrocketing to accommodate this.
I was stating a fact - computers come with full size USB ports, not micro. This new standard forces apple to include a microUSB to USB adapter to make desktop syncing possible.
To charge and sync my iPhone, I require only 2 things: iPhone-to-full size USB cable and a full size USB to wall plug.
The new standard will require 3 things: iPhone to microUSB cable, microUSB wall plug, and microUSB to full size USB adapter.
Do you see how 2 plastic things becomes 3 plastic things becomes 50 million new plastic things we didnt need before?
Except on 80% of the phones out there (the non-Apple ones), you'll just need the two . The Micro-USB to USB cable that plugs into your PC and your power charger and the USB to wall plug (as shown in one of the pictures in the thread). Now do you see the point?
If you expand your view outside the Apple zone, this makes tons of sense and the fact that Apple joins the standard seems to indicate that it makes sense to Apple as well.
But Apple did not take away your ability to recharge your iPod with it. You were able to charge your iPod using your computer USB port.
Yes, but they still charged you the same, and took out the dock, power charger, and video cables.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE
They are cheap now because cell phones come with charger and few people actually need to buy one. Once you get your phone without a charger they will hike the price in the name of an incentive for to get people to keep their old chargers and because you don't have a choice. I don't know about you but I don't trust charging my phone with cheap no brand charger because the last time I did that years back my phone got fried.
So USB chargers are cheap at the moment because no one needs to buy one?
The standardization would limit innovation in the technology of mobile phones, and for mobile phones, innovation is essential. Market failure IS possible. And just because a problem isn't solved doesn't mean it's not a problem. You're neglecting the factor of time. Your logic and view of economics is skewed.
Isn't that a bit thick? Standardisation of a power socket (as in this case) would limit technology? Come on, give it a rest. Yes this standard was not devised by Apple, but even Apple seems to acknowledge that it's a good standard by adopting it. It even has a plausible chance of making many phone vendor forego a second "data" port and use one port for data and charging, thus saving the environment and the users a lot of hassle.
Will this stop wireless charging development? Why would it? Will it stop data connectivity development? Why would it? Will it make consumers lives easier by allowing cross-vendor charger compatibility? YES!
It's incredible how such a clearly beneficial standard for most users causes 100+ comments just because it wasn't devised by Apple and/or was by the E.U (epitomy of socialism for some).
They are re-working the "connectors"!! Gee, in 3 years from now I don't want to "plug" my phone in anymore when I get home. I just want to take it out of my pocket and put it on the desk and it charges.
I understand perfectly well what you are talking about. Wireless/cordless whatever you want to call it, is essentially inductive charging. And I'm telling you that it's horrendously inefficient. I don't care if you're too lazy to plug a wire in, the fact is that the wired method is more efficient.
Not only that, but now they are going to make all of the old cables and chargers end up in a landfill because now they are all obsolete, except for a select few of course. I'm so glad the EU has spare time on their hands to worry about cell phone chargers. I just wouldn't be able to get by without their help.
Well, the EU does have the WEEE regulations to try and prevent electronics like chargers going to landfill. So at least some of them will be recycled. Anyway, short term pain for long term gain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
Frankly the EU standard is butt stupid.
Oh, and for you guys complaining about the "EU" being stupid, this is not an EU directive! Read the article carefully, you will notice it says "EU backed". This is the manufacturers doing it off their own back (with some EU encouragement), the manufacturers came up with the standard! (see this article)
You are massively overstating the potential drawbacks of this idea.
I said the same thing in two posts. The chargers will have to be built to handle the max current needed to charge the biggest batteries in the fastest time. That will waste energy. None of these devices is perfect. And as always, people will leave them plugged in. So bigger rechargers used for smaller batteries will suck more current that smaller chargers would.
Whilst this is true, the difference in efficiency will be very small. It's more in the raw materials that savings could be made with smaller chargers requiring smaller magnetic components and transistors. But the difference isn't that huge if you compare a 100 mA rated switch mode PSU to a 1 A one.
Whilst this is true, the difference in efficiency will be very small. It's more in the raw materials that savings could be made with smaller chargers requiring smaller magnetic components and transistors. But the difference isn't that huge if you compare a 100 mA rated switch mode PSU to a 1 A one.
In addition (and I pretty much totally agree with Mr H.'s points) I don't know if any of you have tested a power brick recently. All the recent ones I have tested use essentially no power when they are not actually charging something. So this problem has already been addressed.
yes, it is that simple. Eventually, phones will be sold without chargers and consumers will use the ones they've already got. So instead of manufacturers shipping 180 million chargers each year in the box with the 180 million phones they sell, they'll ship 0 chargers a year in the box with the phone.
Some people will lose or break their chargers, but you can be damn sure it'll be less than 180 million. Let's be generous and put the number of chargers at 18 million (10%). That's 162 million chargers not being made or shipped. That has significant positive environmental impact.
No, i'm not saying manufacturers all have to adopt the same battery. They will have to ensure that they pick a high upper limit for the current handling capability of the universal charger (the standard isn't set yet). As long as it's high enough, you'll still be able to charge large batteries quickly.
Isn't that a bit thick? Standardisation of a power socket (as in this case) would limit technology? Come on, give it a rest. Yes this standard was not devised by Apple, but even Apple seems to acknowledge that it's a good standard by adopting it. It even has a plausible chance of making many phone vendor forego a second "data" port and use one port for data and charging, thus saving the environment and the users a lot of hassle.
Will this stop wireless charging development? Why would it? Will it stop data connectivity development? Why would it? Will it make consumers lives easier by allowing cross-vendor charger compatibility? YES!
It's incredible how such a clearly beneficial standard for most users causes 100+ comments just because it wasn't devised by Apple and/or was by the E.U (epitomy of socialism for some).
Regs, Jarkko
You hit the nail on the head, but this is not indicative to all Apple product users. Just the majority in this forum. Melgross, and Solpism do not fall into this category. You have very reasonable debates with them I find.
Comments
You're saying a cable costs the same as a charger? Both monetarily and in terms of environmental impact (raw materials used, energy used in manufacture and shipping)?
I'm saying that a cable (or adapter) with TWO connectors costs more than adding ONE full sized USB connector to the charger.
That's the whole point!
A point you miss when you say that Apple's way is less efficient than the EU way.
Frankly the EU standard is butt stupid.
They just standardized on USB 2.0 Micro in 2010 with USB 3.0 Micro on the horizon making all these new chargers obsolescent and unable to provide higher power (150mA vs 100MA low single unit load, 900mA vs 500 mA max load) for faster charging AND allows manufacturers to make chargers that require a separate data cable because one end can be embedded in the adapter itself rather than forced to terminate as a full sized USB plug (to save a few cents).
What they SHOULD have done was standardized on a full sized USB 3.0 port on the charger around the time 3.0 comes out (you know, like 2010) and let the phone companies supply the right cable. Most would supply a USB 2.0 micro cable to USB 2 full sized A anyway but if they wanted to do a dock like Apple, it's not another connector on the phone. Or choose to use the USB 3.0 micro connector on their phones.
Same outcome: fewer power adapters in land fills with 1 fewer cord and uses a standard with a higher data rate for syncing and higher power for quicker recharges that is backward compatible with existing USB 2.0 devices with the right cable (like the existing phones that have a USB 2.0 mini).
The higher cost for the adapters is offset by the fact that phone companies won't be including them for free anymore with their phones AND the fact that a gazillion USB 2.0 adapters wont be hitting the landfills sometime in 2015.
Bloody brilliant thinking on the part of the EU. The only GOOD thing you can say about it is that a micro USB 3.0 connector PROBABLY meets their requirement. As long as the final micro 3.0 connector retains its 2.0 compatible section anyway.
Using the Kensington battery I can charge my iPhone using any Mini USB cable whether it is in a car or attached to a PC.
The only phone or phone related object in my house which can't be charged using standard cables and chargers I already have is a Nokia N82 which has a micro USB port but cannot charge from it.
9
While your history is correct, your interpretation of the usefulness of the connector is wrong.
[snip]
In actual fact, the connector is one of Apple biggest advantages. With )S 3.0 allowing tight coupling between the connector and third party devices, we'll see uses for the iPod Touch and the iPhone that not other models from any other manufacture will be able to match.
Even the much desired game controllers will appear. I'd love to see how they would do this for the Pre, with its USB connector.
We now have the popular Nike models working directly. And have seen some medical devices shown. A company is coming out with sensors for measuring numerous dynamic states.
This will be a whole new category that no other phone will be able to participate in.
[snip]
That's really cool, I wasn't aware that people were actually going to be making use of the extra pins.
Yes, it is that simple. Eventually, phones will be sold without chargers and consumers will use the ones they've already got. So instead of manufacturers shipping 180 million chargers each year in the box with the 180 million phones they sell, they'll ship 0 chargers a year in the box with the phone.
Some people will lose or break their chargers, but you can be damn sure it'll be less than 180 million. Let's be generous and put the number of chargers at 18 million (10%). That's 162 million chargers not being made or shipped. That has significant positive environmental impact.
Like I said before, I'm not against the concept. But I'm doubtful that the numbers will work out so favorably. I'm willing to bet, human nature being what it is, that the numbers are much worse than that long term.
No, I'm not saying manufacturers all have to adopt the same battery. They will have to ensure that they pick a high upper limit for the current handling capability of the universal charger (the standard isn't set yet). As long as it's high enough, you'll still be able to charge large batteries quickly.
I said the same thing in two posts. The chargers will have to be built to handle the max current needed to charge the biggest batteries in the fastest time. That will waste energy. None of these devices is perfect. And as always, people will leave them plugged in. So bigger rechargers used for smaller batteries will suck more current that smaller chargers would.
There are ways around this, but it costs more.
I believe they rushed this, and haven't taken everything into account, such as Vinea's statement that they should have waited and gone to USB 3.
Ok - Mr.H. My mistake! It's not really wireless the way wireless is generally understood these days. Let's call it "cordless charging".
Did you see the Pre's $80 accessory?
And here some 5 year old tech: http://www.engadget.com/2004/10/20/s...harging-issue/
They are re-working the "connectors"!! Gee, in 3 years from now I don't want to "plug" my phone in anymore when I get home. I just want to take it out of my pocket and put it on the desk and it charges.
That was a licensed system. It seems that inductive charging shouldn't need to be a licensed thing. Nokia is supposedly working on one that charges from stray radio waves, but I don't know if that can really scale up to useable current.
Curious: what other major examples of EU not thinking through standards are you thinking of?
As an aside, I wish some of the EU standards related to mobile telephony -- system-wide GSM standards, for starters -- could have been adopted in the US.
An open standard is nice. However, I really don't like how GSM based signals interfere with a lot of audio and equipment and telephones. It will also induce audible clicks into nearby headphones, connected or otherwise.
That's really cool, I wasn't aware that people were actually going to be making use of the extra pins.
While that might be a rationale, it is disingenuous to suggest that such integration uses would not be possible under the USB standard. One of the examples was the game controller. There is nothing to preclude the use of the USB connector in achieving a similar aim. How else are the many games controllers connected to a PC?
They are cheap now because cell phones come with charger and few people actually need to buy one. Once you get your phone without a charger they will hike the price in the name of an incentive for to get people to keep their old chargers and because you don't have a choice.
You can't prove this. Pure speculation. For the past year Nokia has been standardizing their products. USB charging is now quite common place for BT headsets, and phones. I do not see the price suddenly skyrocketing to accommodate this.
Man. Europe is totally winning.
Unified chargers. Unified currency.
Man. Europe is totally winning.
Another Socialist argument rears its ugly head. How about the world is winning? Can't think past making a fast buck to realize this I guess.
I was stating a fact - computers come with full size USB ports, not micro. This new standard forces apple to include a microUSB to USB adapter to make desktop syncing possible.
To charge and sync my iPhone, I require only 2 things: iPhone-to-full size USB cable and a full size USB to wall plug.
The new standard will require 3 things: iPhone to microUSB cable, microUSB wall plug, and microUSB to full size USB adapter.
Do you see how 2 plastic things becomes 3 plastic things becomes 50 million new plastic things we didnt need before?
Except on 80% of the phones out there (the non-Apple ones), you'll just need the two . The Micro-USB to USB cable that plugs into your PC and your power charger and the USB to wall plug (as shown in one of the pictures in the thread). Now do you see the point?
If you expand your view outside the Apple zone, this makes tons of sense and the fact that Apple joins the standard seems to indicate that it makes sense to Apple as well.
Regs, Jarkko
You'd be surprised at how many times that doesn't happen, esp. at a large store such as Walmart.
This is an article about EU, not the US
That's very funny.
And you missed the entire point of my post.
Did I?
But Apple did not take away your ability to recharge your iPod with it. You were able to charge your iPod using your computer USB port.
Yes, but they still charged you the same, and took out the dock, power charger, and video cables.
They are cheap now because cell phones come with charger and few people actually need to buy one. Once you get your phone without a charger they will hike the price in the name of an incentive for to get people to keep their old chargers and because you don't have a choice. I don't know about you but I don't trust charging my phone with cheap no brand charger because the last time I did that years back my phone got fried.
So USB chargers are cheap at the moment because no one needs to buy one?
The standardization would limit innovation in the technology of mobile phones, and for mobile phones, innovation is essential. Market failure IS possible. And just because a problem isn't solved doesn't mean it's not a problem. You're neglecting the factor of time. Your logic and view of economics is skewed.
Isn't that a bit thick? Standardisation of a power socket (as in this case) would limit technology? Come on, give it a rest. Yes this standard was not devised by Apple, but even Apple seems to acknowledge that it's a good standard by adopting it. It even has a plausible chance of making many phone vendor forego a second "data" port and use one port for data and charging, thus saving the environment and the users a lot of hassle.
Will this stop wireless charging development? Why would it? Will it stop data connectivity development? Why would it? Will it make consumers lives easier by allowing cross-vendor charger compatibility? YES!
It's incredible how such a clearly beneficial standard for most users causes 100+ comments just because it wasn't devised by Apple and/or was by the E.U (epitomy of socialism for some).
Regs, Jarkko
Ok - Mr.H. My mistake! It's not really wireless the way wireless is generally understood these days. Let's call it "cordless charging".
Did you see the Pre's $80 accessory?
And here some 5 year old tech: http://www.engadget.com/2004/10/20/s...harging-issue/
They are re-working the "connectors"!! Gee, in 3 years from now I don't want to "plug" my phone in anymore when I get home. I just want to take it out of my pocket and put it on the desk and it charges.
I understand perfectly well what you are talking about. Wireless/cordless whatever you want to call it, is essentially inductive charging. And I'm telling you that it's horrendously inefficient. I don't care if you're too lazy to plug a wire in, the fact is that the wired method is more efficient.
Not only that, but now they are going to make all of the old cables and chargers end up in a landfill because now they are all obsolete, except for a select few of course. I'm so glad the EU has spare time on their hands to worry about cell phone chargers. I just wouldn't be able to get by without their help.
Well, the EU does have the WEEE regulations to try and prevent electronics like chargers going to landfill. So at least some of them will be recycled. Anyway, short term pain for long term gain.
Frankly the EU standard is butt stupid.
Oh, and for you guys complaining about the "EU" being stupid, this is not an EU directive! Read the article carefully, you will notice it says "EU backed". This is the manufacturers doing it off their own back (with some EU encouragement), the manufacturers came up with the standard! (see this article)
You are massively overstating the potential drawbacks of this idea.
I said the same thing in two posts. The chargers will have to be built to handle the max current needed to charge the biggest batteries in the fastest time. That will waste energy. None of these devices is perfect. And as always, people will leave them plugged in. So bigger rechargers used for smaller batteries will suck more current that smaller chargers would.
Whilst this is true, the difference in efficiency will be very small. It's more in the raw materials that savings could be made with smaller chargers requiring smaller magnetic components and transistors. But the difference isn't that huge if you compare a 100 mA rated switch mode PSU to a 1 A one.
Whilst this is true, the difference in efficiency will be very small. It's more in the raw materials that savings could be made with smaller chargers requiring smaller magnetic components and transistors. But the difference isn't that huge if you compare a 100 mA rated switch mode PSU to a 1 A one.
In addition (and I pretty much totally agree with Mr H.'s points) I don't know if any of you have tested a power brick recently. All the recent ones I have tested use essentially no power when they are not actually charging something. So this problem has already been addressed.
yes, it is that simple. Eventually, phones will be sold without chargers and consumers will use the ones they've already got. So instead of manufacturers shipping 180 million chargers each year in the box with the 180 million phones they sell, they'll ship 0 chargers a year in the box with the phone.
Some people will lose or break their chargers, but you can be damn sure it'll be less than 180 million. Let's be generous and put the number of chargers at 18 million (10%). That's 162 million chargers not being made or shipped. That has significant positive environmental impact.
No, i'm not saying manufacturers all have to adopt the same battery. They will have to ensure that they pick a high upper limit for the current handling capability of the universal charger (the standard isn't set yet). As long as it's high enough, you'll still be able to charge large batteries quickly.
bingo
Isn't that a bit thick? Standardisation of a power socket (as in this case) would limit technology? Come on, give it a rest. Yes this standard was not devised by Apple, but even Apple seems to acknowledge that it's a good standard by adopting it. It even has a plausible chance of making many phone vendor forego a second "data" port and use one port for data and charging, thus saving the environment and the users a lot of hassle.
Will this stop wireless charging development? Why would it? Will it stop data connectivity development? Why would it? Will it make consumers lives easier by allowing cross-vendor charger compatibility? YES!
It's incredible how such a clearly beneficial standard for most users causes 100+ comments just because it wasn't devised by Apple and/or was by the E.U (epitomy of socialism for some).
Regs, Jarkko
You hit the nail on the head, but this is not indicative to all Apple product users. Just the majority in this forum. Melgross, and Solpism do not fall into this category. You have very reasonable debates with them I find.