I don't have a problem with USB-C per se, and I'll admit that it'll be convenient to use the same chargers for a Mac and an iPhone. And like most everyone else, I probably have a drawer full of obsolete charging cords from past devices. BUT I do have a problem with government bureaucrats mandating a particular technology. To me, this is a recipe for stifling innovation. Suppose that 40 or 50 years ago, some government bureaucrats had said, "Enough with all these various I/O port standards. Just use RS-232 and move on." Can you imagine what a drag that would have been on technological progress? Let the free market work this out.
Greg Joswiak, known as "Joz," ... said Apple [will]... comply... with the European Union's decision to require a standardized charger for consumer devices.
That statement doesn't say whether Apple will continue to sell iPhones (new or old models) with Lightning connectors as an "offering" in non-EU markets. Apple usually sells older iPhone models at cheaper prices, and there's no way those old models will get updated to USB-C. So the EU will lose access to "older model iPhones". But North America sure won't lose access to Lightning on older models. This means everyone in the EU will have to spend more money, on average, for an iPhone.
There is a rumor that Apple engineers wanted to move to USB-C only on all iApple devices, but that Apple was waiting for the EU decision, as it helps to sell the idea to the market. So once the decision by the EU was made, Apple is full steaming ahead with a USB-C iPhone.
This makes sense. If they'd done it prior to the decision we'd have had a bunch of the usual suspects complaining that Apple is only doing it to "force" everyone to buy new cables and chargers. Now they can just shrug their shoulders and say, "Hey, it's the law, and the law won."
Ok I don't get this. People moaning and wailing about how horrible it is that Apple is being forced to switch to a USB C port, complaining "what happens when the USB C port is outdated?" and then saying "well we should just remove the port!" (picture a toddler stamping his feet and pouting) If you think the phone will be fine without a port, what difference does it make what port it has? And how in God's name can you be concerned that the EU has locked the iPhone to a port that will be outdated and then argue that it doesn't need aport at all?
The two things aren't mutually exclusive. If it has a charging port it must be USB-C. If it doesn't the law doesn't apply.
What this prevents is some new port, call it "Lightning-C", from being developed and used.
First of all, remember that it’s required by the END of 2024, not the beginning. So while I feel as though Apple is likely to have it next year, near the end of 2023, that could be wrong, and Apple might prefer another year to prepare. We don’t know when Apple began serious work in this. It could have been three years ago, and it could have been this year.
there are still a bunch of questions. Will Apple just have USB C transfer, and if so, at what speeds? Will they decide to put a single Thunderbolt controller in the SoC, and if so, which version, 3, 4 or the newest coming out possibly late next year or sometime in 2024, 5, with it’s much higher speeds? Will 3nm enable that? This is what I’m interested in knowing.
Ok I don't get this. People moaning and wailing about how horrible it is that Apple is being forced to switch to a USB C port, complaining "what happens when the USB C port is outdated?" and then saying "well we should just remove the port!" (picture a toddler stamping his feet and pouting) If you think the phone will be fine without a port, what difference does it make what port it has? And how in God's name can you be concerned that the EU has locked the iPhone to a port that will be outdated and then argue that it doesn't need aport at all?
I think it’s a bit more complex than that as to what the EU requirements are. Right now, it’s still confusing as to whether the EU will allow just wireless charging. After all, that, in itself, has numerous different pads, rings, etc. so if they require one connector type, what does that mean with wireless? Are they going to say it’s ok as long as it’s the Qi system (maybe that’s not the spelling)? But there are variations on that too, so will they allow just one?
what if Apple comes out with a “MagSafe” connector that magnetically clips the cable on, with tabs that are embedded into the surface of the phone case something like the keyboard connector on the iPads, with no slot for a connector to fit into? That would also be “wireless” and would also pass data. Would that be allowed?
I feel this is just a start. How would you feel if the EU said next every phone will have a certain screen resolution, or be manufactured in one of the EU countries? Who owns the USB-C standard? What are the interests of the EU and their relationship with companies holding the USB-C standard? If this was a mandate in the US you could bet someone in Congress would be pushing a company in their portfolio would be awarded a contract to manufacture parts that companies like Apple and Samsung would need to comply.
Well, India told Apple they must manufacturer a percentage of iPhones in India if they wanted to sell iPhones in India. Where does it end? Global corporations like Apple have every swinging dick punching them in the balls to comply with their rules. We got Brazil ordering chargers be included while the EU mandates USB-C to save the planet. Bizarre to the max.
Ok I don't get this. People moaning and wailing about how horrible it is that Apple is being forced to switch to a USB C port, complaining "what happens when the USB C port is outdated?" and then saying "well we should just remove the port!" (picture a toddler stamping his feet and pouting) If you think the phone will be fine without a port, what difference does it make what port it has? And how in God's name can you be concerned that the EU has locked the iPhone to a port that will be outdated and then argue that it doesn't need aport at all?
I think it’s a bit more complex than that as to what the EU requirements are. Right now, it’s still confusing as to whether the EU will allow just wireless charging. After all, that, in itself, has numerous different pads, rings, etc. so if they require one connector type, what does that mean with wireless? Are they going to say it’s ok as long as it’s the Qi system (maybe that’s not the spelling)? But there are variations on that too, so will they allow just one?
what if Apple comes out with a “MagSafe” connector that magnetically clips the cable on, with tabs that are embedded into the surface of the phone case something like the keyboard connector on the iPads, with no slot for a connector to fit into? That would also be “wireless” and would also pass data. Would that be allowed?
this is why it’s a problem.
Wireless was deliberately not put under the microscope because it was deemed that it isn't suffering from the same level of fragmentation. Remember, this legislation goes way beyond the realm of the mobile phone.
Lightning is physically a more robust plug/connection (there will be people that argue this but AI and others have had articles explaining it and I’ve personally had more issues with intermittent USB-C type connectors).
I think this is unambiguously true. Lightning is physically a much better connector.
People should listen to Joz's full comments on this issue. I 100% agree with him that the EU is being too prescriptive. This is really not a small point and I think it explains why there are so few leading tech companies in Europe.
Of course, there's an important flip side -- EU countries have longer life expectancy, cheaper health care, better public transportation, etc.
If somebody ever combines the advantages of the US with the advantages of the EU they will take over the world. Spoiler alert -- it ain't gonna be China. More likely is that it will either be the US or the EU learning from the other.
Seems more like the EU not wanting to back down against an American company rather than solve a real problem. The issue of vendors using different plugs was largely addressed back when microUSB became available, prior to that companies, including Apple, had to develop their own plug to suit the functionality of the device.
Unpopular opinion no 1: the EU are way too late with this legislation. Lightning came out in 2012 when the EU were pushing microUSB. It's 2022, and we're in the era of sunsetting charging connectors for wireless solutions, yet the EU's requirement doesn't even become binding until 2024. So if the 2024 iPhone even has a charging port, it will be USB-C, generating the 1st round of waste, then another round of waste when apple abandons a charging port altogether. So why not just let Apple naturally sunset the port rather than forcing a change that's not good for anyone?
Unpopular opinion no 2: It's a step backwards, lightning provides everything the iPhone needs, while being a smaller, simpler and more durable connector with less pins and less parts. So not only is it not a needed change, but it's worse than what they've been using for a decade.
Unpopular opinion no 3: This doesn't solve any new problems, there is no USB-C utopia on the horizon that changing the cable didn't already achieve with the iPhone 12. (Apple changed the charging cable to USB-C with the iPhone 12.)
Unpopular reality no 1: This is only going to save on landfill if Apple stop including a charging cable in the box. If we live in a world where we're loaded with USB-C cables and chargers (and I believe we do), then why include a cable or charger in the box at all?
Unpopular reality no 2: USB-C cables are confusing. The USB-C plug has no relationship to the cable's functionality. Some USB-C cables can be used for connecting an external display, some can't, some can run a display, but only at a low resolution. A similar situation exists with external storage where some cables can power the drive, some can't, some can enable full speed disk access, some can't. Lightning doesn't have this problem - all features of lightning, from charging, connecting an external storage or peripheral to providing external video output were all capable on every lightning cable. The idea that USB-C solves cable waste is incorrect, and the cables that can perform all functions are thicker and more expensive than what we already have today.
This should’ve happened years ago! Since Apple obviously haven’t cared about improving lighting, except some small incremental changes they did.
The current devices or protocols aren’t even close to max usbc has to offer.
Granted the switch will be painful for some. Or not really, my lightning gadgets won’t become obsolete or stop working when their usbc counterparts come out. I’ll either sell them or use them until they become inoperable.
People really need to step back and take a chill pill here. This is - will be an upgrade, win win.
This should’ve happened years ago! Since Apple obviously haven’t cared about improving lighting, except some small incremental changes they did.
The current devices or protocols aren’t even close to max usbc has to offer.
Granted the switch will be painful for some. Or not really, my lightning gadgets won’t become obsolete or stop working when their usbc counterparts come out. I’ll either sell them or use them until they become inoperable.
People really need to step back and take a chill pill here. This is - will be an upgrade, win win.
This has nothing to do with devices, protocols, usb-c or any other technical issue. It’s about a foreign entity imposing its will upon an American company and forcing it to manufacture its products to their specifications. And those gloating over this will change their tunes when something better and more innovative comes along and can’t be implemented until that foreign entity gives the okay, which could take years of bureaucrats ‘studying' the issue.
This should’ve happened years ago! Since Apple obviously haven’t cared about improving lighting, except some small incremental changes they did.
The current devices or protocols aren’t even close to max usbc has to offer.
Granted the switch will be painful for some. Or not really, my lightning gadgets won’t become obsolete or stop working when their usbc counterparts come out. I’ll either sell them or use them until they become inoperable.
People really need to step back and take a chill pill here. This is - will be an upgrade, win win.
This has nothing to do with devices, protocols, usb-c or any other technical issue. It’s about a foreign entity imposing its will upon an American company and forcing it to manufacture its products to their specifications. And those gloating over this will change their tunes when something better and more innovative comes along and can’t be implemented until that foreign entity gives the okay, which could take years of bureaucrats ‘studying' the issue.
My concern is that fewer 'something betters' will come along because the EU will prevent the effort from being rewarded. But maybe not... maybe Apple will be willing to make a different (lesser) product for the EU while continuing to innovate elsewhere.
This should’ve happened years ago! Since Apple obviously haven’t cared about improving lighting, except some small incremental changes they did.
The current devices or protocols aren’t even close to max usbc has to offer.
Granted the switch will be painful for some. Or not really, my lightning gadgets won’t become obsolete or stop working when their usbc counterparts come out. I’ll either sell them or use them until they become inoperable.
People really need to step back and take a chill pill here. This is - will be an upgrade, win win.
This has nothing to do with devices, protocols, usb-c or any other technical issue. It’s about a foreign entity imposing its will upon an American company and forcing it to manufacture its products to their specifications. And those gloating over this will change their tunes when something better and more innovative comes along and can’t be implemented until that foreign entity gives the okay, which could take years of bureaucrats ‘studying' the issue.
Ahem. You’re definitely making this a much bigger thing than it is. Those foreign entities and internal entities force their specifications on manufacturers all the time.
ANSI, ISO, JIS, FCC, ECC and so on. What radio frequencies cellular devices use, how they manufacture batteries, what plastics and materials can be used in foodstuffs. Lead paint, environmental standards, safety standards on arsenic usage etc.
Now, this is only a port standardization for similar devices. This is a good thing. There is a provision on this law that takes into account future ports and the bureaucrats don’t make the decision in a vacuum. There will be lobbying from the industry.
This is in no means the death of innovation. Not for ports, like the standards for radio equipment was not for Wi-Fi, cellular and so on.
And heck yea I’m going to gloat over this. This should’ve happened across all Apple devices with the MacBooks 7 years ago.
This should’ve happened years ago! Since Apple obviously haven’t cared about improving lighting, except some small incremental changes they did.
The current devices or protocols aren’t even close to max usbc has to offer.
Granted the switch will be painful for some. Or not really, my lightning gadgets won’t become obsolete or stop working when their usbc counterparts come out. I’ll either sell them or use them until they become inoperable.
People really need to step back and take a chill pill here. This is - will be an upgrade, win win.
This has nothing to do with devices, protocols, usb-c or any other technical issue. It’s about a foreign entity imposing its will upon an American company and forcing it to manufacture its products to their specifications. And those gloating over this will change their tunes when something better and more innovative comes along and can’t be implemented until that foreign entity gives the okay, which could take years of bureaucrats ‘studying' the issue.
Ahem. You’re definitely making this a much bigger thing than it is. Those foreign entities and internal entities force their specifications on manufacturers all the time.
ANSI, ISO, JIS, FCC, ECC and so on. What radio frequencies cellular devices use, how they manufacture batteries, what plastics and materials can be used in foodstuffs. Lead paint, environmental standards, safety standards on arsenic usage etc.
Now, this is only a port standardization for similar devices. This is a good thing. There is a provision on this law that takes into account future ports and the bureaucrats don’t make the decision in a vacuum. There will be lobbying from the industry.
This is in no means the death of innovation. Not for ports, like the standards for radio equipment was not for Wi-Fi, cellular and so on.
And heck yea I’m going to gloat over this. This should’ve happened across all Apple devices with the MacBooks 7 years ago.
Jozwiak did not say that all Apple devices, or even all the iPhone models, are being converted to USB-C. Apple could do to iPhones what it is now doing with iPads, which is offer different ports on different models. Don't gloat too early. He he gloats last gloats best.
Personally, I don't remember ever saying that Apple should not use USB-C, my position was always about Apple's freedom to choose. And if they choose USB-C, that's fine with me.
Great. Not having USB C was a deciding factor in passing on the iPhone 14 Pro - didn't want to get stuck with that obsolete tech even longer. My iPad pro, my company laptops (customer, employer), my MacBook Pro: They all use USB C.
Apple stopped innovating on the iPhone connector after Lightning was released, and USB C will not only have the advantage of not being a non standard cable that you might not have as available as USB C - it's also much slower both for data transfer and transfers less power.
Ok I don't get this. People moaning and wailing about how horrible it is that Apple is being forced to switch to a USB C port, complaining "what happens when the USB C port is outdated?" and then saying "well we should just remove the port!" (picture a toddler stamping his feet and pouting) If you think the phone will be fine without a port, what difference does it make what port it has? And how in God's name can you be concerned that the EU has locked the iPhone to a port that will be outdated and then argue that it doesn't need aport at all?
I think it’s a bit more complex than that as to what the EU requirements are. Right now, it’s still confusing as to whether the EU will allow just wireless charging. After all, that, in itself, has numerous different pads, rings, etc. so if they require one connector type, what does that mean with wireless? Are they going to say it’s ok as long as it’s the Qi system (maybe that’s not the spelling)? But there are variations on that too, so will they allow just one?
what if Apple comes out with a “MagSafe” connector that magnetically clips the cable on, with tabs that are embedded into the surface of the phone case something like the keyboard connector on the iPads, with no slot for a connector to fit into? That would also be “wireless” and would also pass data. Would that be allowed?
this is why it’s a problem.
Wireless was deliberately not put under the microscope because it was deemed that it isn't suffering from the same level of fragmentation. Remember, this legislation goes way beyond the realm of the mobile phone.
Ok I don't get this. People moaning and wailing about how horrible it is that Apple is being forced to switch to a USB C port, complaining "what happens when the USB C port is outdated?" and then saying "well we should just remove the port!" (picture a toddler stamping his feet and pouting) If you think the phone will be fine without a port, what difference does it make what port it has? And how in God's name can you be concerned that the EU has locked the iPhone to a port that will be outdated and then argue that it doesn't need aport at all?
The two things aren't mutually exclusive. If it has a charging port it must be USB-C. If it doesn't the law doesn't apply.
What this prevents is some new port, call it "Lightning-C", from being developed and used.
Ok I don't get this. People moaning and wailing about how horrible it is that Apple is being forced to switch to a USB C port, complaining "what happens when the USB C port is outdated?" and then saying "well we should just remove the port!" (picture a toddler stamping his feet and pouting) If you think the phone will be fine without a port, what difference does it make what port it has? And how in God's name can you be concerned that the EU has locked the iPhone to a port that will be outdated and then argue that it doesn't need aport at all?
I think it’s a bit more complex than that as to what the EU requirements are. Right now, it’s still confusing as to whether the EU will allow just wireless charging. After all, that, in itself, has numerous different pads, rings, etc. so if they require one connector type, what does that mean with wireless? Are they going to say it’s ok as long as it’s the Qi system (maybe that’s not the spelling)? But there are variations on that too, so will they allow just one?
what if Apple comes out with a “MagSafe” connector that magnetically clips the cable on, with tabs that are embedded into the surface of the phone case something like the keyboard connector on the iPads, with no slot for a connector to fit into? That would also be “wireless” and would also pass data. Would that be allowed?
this is why it’s a problem.
My point was about the hypocrisy of people complaining that the 'big bad EU' is dictating the port because a bureaucracy never updates its regulations but then in the next breath saying we should remove the port altogether. Clearly, their issue is that they don't like being told what to do and are trying to come up with some excuse as to why it's bad, even it's completely illogical and makes them look like an idiot.
As far as the 'what if xxx comes up with something better,' Like I said there's been no great outcry that lightning has been stuck on a 20 year old standard so complaining that they're being forced to use something that will be more than adequate for the foreseeable future is also quite disingenuous. If they're ok with lightning/USB 2.0 speeds they should be good with USB C for at least 20 years.
There's also nothing that says the standard can't be updated. The EU very pointedly tried to get the industry to solve this problem themselves. If a USB D connector should be developed and agreed upon then the law can be updated.
I feel this is just a start. How would you feel if the EU said next every phone will have a certain screen resolution, or be manufactured in one of the EU countries? Who owns the USB-C standard? What are the interests of the EU and their relationship with companies holding the USB-C standard? If this was a mandate in the US you could bet someone in Congress would be pushing a company in their portfolio would be awarded a contract to manufacture parts that companies like Apple and Samsung would need to comply.
Well, India told Apple they must manufacturer a percentage of iPhones in India if they wanted to sell iPhones in India. Where does it end? Global corporations like Apple have every swinging dick punching them in the balls to comply with their rules. We got Brazil ordering chargers be included while the EU mandates USB-C to save the planet. Bizarre to the max.
This should’ve happened years ago! Since Apple obviously haven’t cared about improving lighting, except some small incremental changes they did.
The current devices or protocols aren’t even close to max usbc has to offer.
Granted the switch will be painful for some. Or not really, my lightning gadgets won’t become obsolete or stop working when their usbc counterparts come out. I’ll either sell them or use them until they become inoperable.
People really need to step back and take a chill pill here. This is - will be an upgrade, win win.
This has nothing to do with devices, protocols, usb-c or any other technical issue. It’s about a foreign entity imposing its will upon an American company and forcing it to manufacture its products to their specifications. And those gloating over this will change their tunes when something better and more innovative comes along and can’t be implemented until that foreign entity gives the okay, which could take years of bureaucrats ‘studying' the issue.
Clearly you've never purchased a German car that's had to comply with US regulations. How dare the U.S. force a GERMAN company to abide by U.S. rules when doing business here! Clearly the U.S. government is nothing but a communist totalitarian dictatorship! /s
Comments
there are still a bunch of questions. Will Apple just have USB C transfer, and if so, at what speeds? Will they decide to put a single Thunderbolt controller in the SoC, and if so, which version, 3, 4 or the newest coming out possibly late next year or sometime in 2024, 5, with it’s much higher speeds? Will 3nm enable that? This is what I’m interested in knowing.
what if Apple comes out with a “MagSafe” connector that magnetically clips the cable on, with tabs that are embedded into the surface of the phone case something like the keyboard connector on the iPads, with no slot for a connector to fit into? That would also be “wireless” and would also pass data. Would that be allowed?
this is why it’s a problem.
Wireless was deliberately not put under the microscope because it was deemed that it isn't suffering from the same level of fragmentation. Remember, this legislation goes way beyond the realm of the mobile phone.
People should listen to Joz's full comments on this issue. I 100% agree with him that the EU is being too prescriptive. This is really not a small point and I think it explains why there are so few leading tech companies in Europe.
Of course, there's an important flip side -- EU countries have longer life expectancy, cheaper health care, better public transportation, etc.
If somebody ever combines the advantages of the US with the advantages of the EU they will take over the world. Spoiler alert -- it ain't gonna be China. More likely is that it will either be the US or the EU learning from the other.
The current devices or protocols aren’t even close to max usbc has to offer.
Granted the switch will be painful for some. Or not really, my lightning gadgets won’t become obsolete or stop working when their usbc counterparts come out. I’ll either sell them or use them until they become inoperable.
People really need to step back and take a chill pill here. This is - will be an upgrade, win win.
ANSI, ISO, JIS, FCC, ECC and so on. What radio frequencies cellular devices use, how they manufacture batteries, what plastics and materials can be used in foodstuffs. Lead paint, environmental standards, safety standards on arsenic usage etc.
This is in no means the death of innovation. Not for ports, like the standards for radio equipment was not for Wi-Fi, cellular and so on.
Personally, I don't remember ever saying that Apple should not use USB-C, my position was always about Apple's freedom to choose. And if they choose USB-C, that's fine with me.
As far as the 'what if xxx comes up with something better,' Like I said there's been no great outcry that lightning has been stuck on a 20 year old standard so complaining that they're being forced to use something that will be more than adequate for the foreseeable future is also quite disingenuous. If they're ok with lightning/USB 2.0 speeds they should be good with USB C for at least 20 years.
There's also nothing that says the standard can't be updated. The EU very pointedly tried to get the industry to solve this problem themselves. If a USB D connector should be developed and agreed upon then the law can be updated.