Lightning versus USB-C: Pros and cons for the iPhone

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 34
    stompystompy Posts: 389member
    sunman42 said:
    stompy said:

    The agreement's goal is to reduce electronic waste in the system since smartphone owners could use one cable to charge multiple devices. 
    ... will the E.U. force manufacturers to sell devices WITHOUT charging cables? If not, I guess the reduced waste is for aftermarket cables?
        The article states that phones will have to be sold without chargers, and notes that Apple has been doing so for the last couple of iPhone cycles.

    I specifically wrote “charging cables”, by which I mean “the wire that connects a power adapter to your phone””.I’m well aware that Apple removed power adapters  in 2020.
    edited June 13 watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 34
    MaxLe0p0ldMaxLe0p0ld Posts: 23unconfirmed, member
    The EU should just have gone and say that the Chargers & one End of the Cable have to be USB-C - 
    this way we could have kepts USB-C -to-> Lightning Cables 
    slowly start the Phase-out of USB-A (!) with all its sub Connectors like USB-B / Mini / Micro Connectors.

    That would have been a much better Approach !

    We would finally get Printers with USB-C / RJ45 / WiFi and perhaps Thunderbolt ?

    But also the USB Consortium could take a Lead out of Apple's Textbook and better define USB-C and make a Program out of it.

    Removing some of the Derivatives of Cables & demand USB-C Rev. 2.1 to make all Cables 40Gigabit + 240Watt Standard compatible instead, to exterminate any lesser than Cables AND give the Consumer trustworthy Standard - so any USB-C Cable can also be used as Thunderbolt 4 Cable.

    watto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 34
    entropysentropys Posts: 3,508member
    sunman42 said:
    bshank said:
    What is not mentioned is how many small and medium sized businesses make MFi products. Apple supports these businesses by having such a certification program that gives people “choice”, something I thought the EU was all about. So much for fake anti-trust and anti-competitive narrative. The EU will be doing damage to those small businesses that make the majority of their profit off the MFi program, some being European. That’s another reason Apple hasn’t changed from Lightning I would assume, so they don’t pull the rug out from other companies that depend on selling certified Apple accessories. But I guess Margarethe Vestager and her cohort will feel like they are powerful or some crap, while subverting the EU and EC’s own stated goals. Seems equally short sighted as decrying violent tyrants like Vladimir Putin while creating an energy policy that depends on that dictator. 

    The EU is for a choice of European-made goods. When it comes to South Korean or US companies’ products, not quite so much.

    Big Government favours Big Corporations. They both like Big Unions.

    their natural enemies are smaller ones of each.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 34
    xbitxbit Posts: 357member
    Anilu_777 said:
    The EU is engaging in massive overreach. They don’t have the understanding or technical expertise to demand one charger. And what happens when a better system is developed? Or do they not bother because the precious EU might not like it? I’m Canadian and I’m fine with Lightning. 
    The EU mandated GSM are a wireless technology but that never stopped European carriers adopting 3G, 4G and now 5G. In fact, the standardisation of wireless technologies across Europe made their adoption easier.

    Legislation can be updated and this is why standards bodies like the USB-IF exist.
    muthuk_vanalingamMplsP
  • Reply 25 of 34
    Imo they should introduce a port less iPhone 15 and an USB C iPhone 15 Pro. Both delivered with a MagSafe cable instead of a lightning. It would accelerate the transition to full wireless charging for the general audience and pros can enjoy having their USB C port for fast charge/ transfer speeds.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 34
    Two things I wish would have happened:

    1: EU requirements saying USB-C or better ( I know, how to define “better” is not clear )

    2: Apple came out with a Lightning 2 that was faster 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 34
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,662member
    jimh2 said:
    MplsP said:
    "USB C is the future!" - Craig Federini (and everyone here who tried to justify the complete removal of USB A ports on MacBooks 7 years ago)

    It's funny how many people here were more than happy to trumpet Apple's removal of USB A ports as a move towards the future but suddenly change their tune when the big, mean, EVIL EU dares force Apple to switch to the USB C port! I like the lightning port for the reasons mentioned above, but Apple has already started moving its devices over to USB C, creating inconsistency within its own ecosystem. Moving everything over to USB C will ultimately be more convenient for everyone and shouldn't compromise function at all.

    I find it ironic when people say "just remove it completely and go wireless." If you're already wireless then what do you care about the port anyway? Like the article says, if the existing base of peripherals is an argument for keeping lightning then it's an equal argument against going completely wireless. The argument to eliminate the port completely is more akin to a 3 year old stamping their feet because they have to do something they don't want to than it is a rational argument. 

    Also, as the article points out, for a company that claims environmental concerns are a priority, forcing everyone to waste 30%+ percent of the energy used to charge their phones hardly seems responsible. 
    There is a major difference between a company decided to remove a port from a product and being told you cannot use the port you want to sell. Good example of government overage. 
    Seems the only difference is perception and indignation. 
    crowleywatto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 34
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,662member
    mike1 said:
    MplsP said:
    "USB C is the future!" - Craig Federini (and everyone here who tried to justify the complete removal of USB A ports on MacBooks 7 years ago)

    It's funny how many people here were more than happy to trumpet Apple's removal of USB A ports as a move towards the future but suddenly change their tune when the big, mean, EVIL EU dares force Apple to switch to the USB C port! I like the lightning port for the reasons mentioned above, but Apple has already started moving its devices over to USB C, creating inconsistency within its own ecosystem. Moving everything over to USB C will ultimately be more convenient for everyone and shouldn't compromise function at all.

    I find it ironic when people say "just remove it completely and go wireless." If you're already wireless then what do you care about the port anyway? Like the article says, if the existing base of peripherals is an argument for keeping lightning then it's an equal argument against going completely wireless. The argument to eliminate the port completely is more akin to a 3 year old stamping their feet because they have to do something they don't want to than it is a rational argument. 

    Also, as the article points out, for a company that claims environmental concerns are a priority, forcing everyone to waste 30%+ percent of the energy used to charge their phones hardly seems responsible. 
    The problem with and lunacy of the requirement is that it mandates a connector that likely would be obsolete and inferior in a few years. So what then? Wait for the EU to decide which connector is best for all of humankind 5 years too late. What would have happened if the EU existed in 1988 and said that 5” floppy disks should have been mandatory on all computing devices?!
    Because the rule is written in stone and can never be changed. And they would never listen to the industry to update the standard? Your histrionic argument falls rather flat. 
    crowleymuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 29 of 34
    bshankbshank Posts: 245member
    MplsP said:
    mike1 said:
    MplsP said:
    "USB C is the future!" - Craig Federini (and everyone here who tried to justify the complete removal of USB A ports on MacBooks 7 years ago)

    It's funny how many people here were more than happy to trumpet Apple's removal of USB A ports as a move towards the future but suddenly change their tune when the big, mean, EVIL EU dares force Apple to switch to the USB C port! I like the lightning port for the reasons mentioned above, but Apple has already started moving its devices over to USB C, creating inconsistency within its own ecosystem. Moving everything over to USB C will ultimately be more convenient for everyone and shouldn't compromise function at all.

    I find it ironic when people say "just remove it completely and go wireless." If you're already wireless then what do you care about the port anyway? Like the article says, if the existing base of peripherals is an argument for keeping lightning then it's an equal argument against going completely wireless. The argument to eliminate the port completely is more akin to a 3 year old stamping their feet because they have to do something they don't want to than it is a rational argument. 

    Also, as the article points out, for a company that claims environmental concerns are a priority, forcing everyone to waste 30%+ percent of the energy used to charge their phones hardly seems responsible. 
    The problem with and lunacy of the requirement is that it mandates a connector that likely would be obsolete and inferior in a few years. So what then? Wait for the EU to decide which connector is best for all of humankind 5 years too late. What would have happened if the EU existed in 1988 and said that 5” floppy disks should have been mandatory on all computing devices?!
    Because the rule is written in stone and can never be changed. And they would never listen to the industry to update the standard? Your histrionic argument falls rather flat. 
    Governments should not be deciding what connectors electronics manufacturers put on phones. It is pure stupidity to tie up government debate around such an issue easily resolved by the private sector on it’s own. Maybe focus of finding a new source of natural gas and oil rather than automating your energy policy with Putin and grinding the government through debates about charging connections. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 34
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,662member
    bshank said:
    MplsP said:
    mike1 said:
    MplsP said:
    "USB C is the future!" - Craig Federini (and everyone here who tried to justify the complete removal of USB A ports on MacBooks 7 years ago)

    It's funny how many people here were more than happy to trumpet Apple's removal of USB A ports as a move towards the future but suddenly change their tune when the big, mean, EVIL EU dares force Apple to switch to the USB C port! I like the lightning port for the reasons mentioned above, but Apple has already started moving its devices over to USB C, creating inconsistency within its own ecosystem. Moving everything over to USB C will ultimately be more convenient for everyone and shouldn't compromise function at all.

    I find it ironic when people say "just remove it completely and go wireless." If you're already wireless then what do you care about the port anyway? Like the article says, if the existing base of peripherals is an argument for keeping lightning then it's an equal argument against going completely wireless. The argument to eliminate the port completely is more akin to a 3 year old stamping their feet because they have to do something they don't want to than it is a rational argument. 

    Also, as the article points out, for a company that claims environmental concerns are a priority, forcing everyone to waste 30%+ percent of the energy used to charge their phones hardly seems responsible. 
    The problem with and lunacy of the requirement is that it mandates a connector that likely would be obsolete and inferior in a few years. So what then? Wait for the EU to decide which connector is best for all of humankind 5 years too late. What would have happened if the EU existed in 1988 and said that 5” floppy disks should have been mandatory on all computing devices?!
    Because the rule is written in stone and can never be changed. And they would never listen to the industry to update the standard? Your histrionic argument falls rather flat. 
    Governments should not be deciding what connectors electronics manufacturers put on phones. It is pure stupidity to tie up government debate around such an issue easily resolved by the private sector on it’s own. Maybe focus of finding a new source of natural gas and oil rather than automating your energy policy with Putin and grinding the government through debates about charging connections. 
    One of the roles of governments is to create regulations and standards when such rules are needed for broader societal reasons. Clearly the EU felt the private sector hadn’t solved the problem. Maybe the private sector was too stupid to come up with their own solution?

    ‘They should be working on xxx’ is a classic straw man argument that’s completely irrelevant. 
    avon b7muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 31 of 34
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,297member
    MplsP said:
    bshank said:
    MplsP said:
    mike1 said:
    MplsP said:
    "USB C is the future!" - Craig Federini (and everyone here who tried to justify the complete removal of USB A ports on MacBooks 7 years ago)

    It's funny how many people here were more than happy to trumpet Apple's removal of USB A ports as a move towards the future but suddenly change their tune when the big, mean, EVIL EU dares force Apple to switch to the USB C port! I like the lightning port for the reasons mentioned above, but Apple has already started moving its devices over to USB C, creating inconsistency within its own ecosystem. Moving everything over to USB C will ultimately be more convenient for everyone and shouldn't compromise function at all.

    I find it ironic when people say "just remove it completely and go wireless." If you're already wireless then what do you care about the port anyway? Like the article says, if the existing base of peripherals is an argument for keeping lightning then it's an equal argument against going completely wireless. The argument to eliminate the port completely is more akin to a 3 year old stamping their feet because they have to do something they don't want to than it is a rational argument. 

    Also, as the article points out, for a company that claims environmental concerns are a priority, forcing everyone to waste 30%+ percent of the energy used to charge their phones hardly seems responsible. 
    The problem with and lunacy of the requirement is that it mandates a connector that likely would be obsolete and inferior in a few years. So what then? Wait for the EU to decide which connector is best for all of humankind 5 years too late. What would have happened if the EU existed in 1988 and said that 5” floppy disks should have been mandatory on all computing devices?!
    Because the rule is written in stone and can never be changed. And they would never listen to the industry to update the standard? Your histrionic argument falls rather flat. 
    Governments should not be deciding what connectors electronics manufacturers put on phones. It is pure stupidity to tie up government debate around such an issue easily resolved by the private sector on it’s own. Maybe focus of finding a new source of natural gas and oil rather than automating your energy policy with Putin and grinding the government through debates about charging connections. 
    One of the roles of governments is to create regulations and standards when such rules are needed for broader societal reasons. Clearly the EU felt the private sector hadn’t solved the problem. Maybe the private sector was too stupid to come up with their own solution?

    ‘They should be working on xxx’ is a classic straw man argument that’s completely irrelevant. 
    MplsP said:
    bshank said:
    MplsP said:
    mike1 said:
    MplsP said:
    "USB C is the future!" - Craig Federini (and everyone here who tried to justify the complete removal of USB A ports on MacBooks 7 years ago)

    It's funny how many people here were more than happy to trumpet Apple's removal of USB A ports as a move towards the future but suddenly change their tune when the big, mean, EVIL EU dares force Apple to switch to the USB C port! I like the lightning port for the reasons mentioned above, but Apple has already started moving its devices over to USB C, creating inconsistency within its own ecosystem. Moving everything over to USB C will ultimately be more convenient for everyone and shouldn't compromise function at all.

    I find it ironic when people say "just remove it completely and go wireless." If you're already wireless then what do you care about the port anyway? Like the article says, if the existing base of peripherals is an argument for keeping lightning then it's an equal argument against going completely wireless. The argument to eliminate the port completely is more akin to a 3 year old stamping their feet because they have to do something they don't want to than it is a rational argument. 

    Also, as the article points out, for a company that claims environmental concerns are a priority, forcing everyone to waste 30%+ percent of the energy used to charge their phones hardly seems responsible. 
    The problem with and lunacy of the requirement is that it mandates a connector that likely would be obsolete and inferior in a few years. So what then? Wait for the EU to decide which connector is best for all of humankind 5 years too late. What would have happened if the EU existed in 1988 and said that 5” floppy disks should have been mandatory on all computing devices?!
    Because the rule is written in stone and can never be changed. And they would never listen to the industry to update the standard? Your histrionic argument falls rather flat. 
    Governments should not be deciding what connectors electronics manufacturers put on phones. It is pure stupidity to tie up government debate around such an issue easily resolved by the private sector on it’s own. Maybe focus of finding a new source of natural gas and oil rather than automating your energy policy with Putin and grinding the government through debates about charging connections. 
    One of the roles of governments is to create regulations and standards when such rules are needed for broader societal reasons. Clearly the EU felt the private sector hadn’t solved the problem. Maybe the private sector was too stupid to come up with their own solution?

    ‘They should be working on xxx’ is a classic straw man argument that’s completely irrelevant. 
    Exactly. 

    And that has been outlined at virtually every opportunity by the EU. 

    They have made it crystal clear where their objectives lie, the road that has led us to this point and where they want to go.

    Industry has not harmonised the situation and is unlikely to at any point. 

    There are still too many products out there with too many proprietary charging solutions. 

    I have a Simple Human automatic soap dispenser and a Philips One Blade trimmer at home. Both of them have proprietary (or non-standard) chargers. 
    muthuk_vanalingamMplsP
  • Reply 32 of 34
    bshankbshank Posts: 245member
    sunman42 said:
    bshank said:
    What is not mentioned is how many small and medium sized businesses make MFi products. Apple supports these businesses by having such a certification program that gives people “choice”, something I thought the EU was all about. So much for fake anti-trust and anti-competitive narrative. The EU will be doing damage to those small businesses that make the majority of their profit off the MFi program, some being European. That’s another reason Apple hasn’t changed from Lightning I would assume, so they don’t pull the rug out from other companies that depend on selling certified Apple accessories. But I guess Margarethe Vestager and her cohort will feel like they are powerful or some crap, while subverting the EU and EC’s own stated goals. Seems equally short sighted as decrying violent tyrants like Vladimir Putin while creating an energy policy that depends on that dictator. 

    The EU is for a choice of European-made goods. When it comes to South Korean or US companies’ products, not quite so much.

    So the EU wants their products handicapped against other countries’ products so to have a large competitive advantage in Europe. Competition chief is there to make sure there is an uneven playing field. Good to know
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 34
    Just pick a standard and stick with it and be consistent across all product lines… and let a standards review be conducted every 5 years for better proposed technologies to allow for advancements and improvements. 


    Stop incentivizing these manufactures to change charging and cable standards/styles with every other product refresh. It just enriches them, and costs the consumers.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 34 of 34
    CheeseFreezeCheeseFreeze Posts: 1,018member
    Anilu_777 said:
    The EU is engaging in massive overreach. They don’t have the understanding or technical expertise to demand one charger. And what happens when a better system is developed? Or do they not bother because the precious EU might not like it? I’m Canadian and I’m fine with Lightning. 
    Are they?
Sign In or Register to comment.