Does the EU design and manufacture any cellular devices (that anyone actually buys)? Tough talk telling non EU members how to do things. Since when does any EU member country have the expertise to even decide these things?
Yes. Plenty.
These proposals aren't plucked from a Boris Johnson party hat.
They run through years long processes which include consultation at all levels, including industry, expert groups, academia and the general public.
Impact assessments are prepared too.
The EU has two of the world's leading providers of cellular infrastructure and a very wide range of cellular devices. Phones aren't the start and end points of cellular devices.
As for advanced manufacturing, does ASML meet your criteria?
This is stereotypical EU over-reach. The European Economic Community was formed to maintain friendly relations (i.e peace) and facilitate trade between European countries after WW2. Now they are legislating on everything from bananas to buttons and wanting to create a unified European military force.
The correct route would be to form an ISO standard for mobile phones, including battery replacement, charging etc., and let the manufacturer choose whether or not to comply.
The EU is increasingly behaving like a dictator to the World - the opposite of what it was created for.
The EU doesn't dictate anything to the world. Apple are free to sell different iPhones with whatever kind of sealed in batteries they prefer to the rest of the world.
Don't be so sure that the EU don't want to dictate anything to the World. Or that they are only concern about making laws and regulations for the good of the EU.
The phrase was coined by law professor Anu Bradford in 2012. Here's the article she penned in 2012 while a law professor at Columbia Law School. It's a long read but just skimming over the each topic will give you a good idea what she is referring to with the "Brussels Effect'.
But to fair, the phrase was a take off of "The California Effect", that was coined in the mid 90's to describe how the State of California was able to forced companies to apply CA much stricter environmental policies through out the US because they did not what to make products with different standards for different States and they could not ignore CA large market power. And is still happening today.
If the all the US was the World, CA would be the EU.
Jfc, you could have stopped at 'Are you familiar with the "Brussel Effect"? '
And I would have said yes, but that's very different from dictating something. Exactly as I already said, Apple are free to do whatever they want outside the EU borders.
Always an essay with you. Completely unnecessary, no one is paying you per word.
Does the EU design and manufacture any cellular devices (that anyone actually buys)? Tough talk telling non EU members how to do things. Since when does any EU member country have the expertise to even decide these things?
The EU is a political organisation, not a company.
If you mean, do any companies design and manufacture any cellular devices (that anyone actually buys) within the EU then the answer is yes. Gigaset, Medion, Shift, and TechniSat in Germany alone. Nokia, Alcatel, Archos, plenty of others in other countries too. Just because rob53 hasn't heard of things doesn't mean they don't exist.
Does the EU design and manufacture any cellular devices (that anyone actually buys)? Tough talk telling non EU members how to do things. Since when does any EU member country have the expertise to even decide these things?
The EU is a political organisation, not a company.
If you mean, do any companies design and manufacture any cellular devices (that anyone actually buys) within the EU then the answer is yes. Gigaset, Medion, Shift, and TechniSat in Germany alone. Nokia, Alcatel, Archos, plenty of others in other countries too. Just because rob53 hasn't heard of things doesn't mean they don't exist.
Gigaset, formerly known as Siemens, flip-phones among other things Medion, subsidiary of Lenovo (Chinese company) Shift, "shiftphones" designed in Germany, manufactured in China, "By June 2019 Shift had sold 30,000 units." TechniSat, satellite receivers Nokia, I give you this one. Alcatel, is a French brand of mobile handsets owned by Finnish company Nokia and used under license by Chinese electronics company TCL Technology Archos, tablets and some other devices. I've never heard of them but I'm not aware of all companies.
My comment about the EU stands. I know they are a political organization, bordering on a cartel (don't understand why all the member countries have ceded control to an organization instead of being independent countries), but I still believe they have too much power, especially for a political organization that doesn't know what they are doing regarding computer devices, especially their design. Until I see an EU country that actually sells cellular devices on the same level as Apple, I don't agree with them dictating to Apple how Apple MUST design their devices. If you don't like the design, buy something else.
The individual countries haven’t “ceded control”. We’re not a United States.
We’ve centralised a lot of economic bargaining power and business regulation. Because the EU can take it up with corporations that flout our laws, and only needs to do so once, rather than thirty little countries, each individually at risk of being strongarmed by the corporations’ political allies, or overrun by lobbyists with deep pockets.
FWIW, they’re not dictating it to Apple. They’re dictating it to every bit player and major manufacturer, worldwide, who wants to sell here.
Just like the US dictates how German and Japanese manufacturers have to build their cars in order to sell them there.
In further defense of Apple and their design policies. My Apple products are by far and away the longest lived consumer products in my home and good design and dust and water proofing are the key components of reducing e-waste compared to products that have user accessed ports.
None of my Palm Pilots, Nokia, Blackberry, Sony phones were as long-lived as my iPhones which are often passed down to others in good working order when I am done with them.
And having centralized expertise in the replacement of batteries prevents hobbyists from discarding them in the trash.
I think “the right to repair” arguments and e-waste issues have little to do with each other.
In further defense of Apple and their design policies. My Apple products are by far and away the longest lived consumer products in my home and good design and dust and water proofing are the key components of reducing e-waste compared to products that have user accessed ports.
None of my Palm Pilots, Nokia, Blackberry, Sony phones were as long-lived as my iPhones which are often passed down to others in good working order when I am done with them.
And having centralized expertise in the replacement of batteries prevents hobbyists from discarding them in the trash.
I think “the right to repair” arguments and e-waste issues have little to do with each other.
Apple has lots of consumer stuff. Some are worse offenders than others.
Airpods are basically disposable. Soldering SSD to devices and using glue everywhere can mean when one component fails other, completely unaffected components, get yanked.
In my part of the EU (and very probably everywhere in the EU) it is illegal to put e-waste in regular rubbish containers.
There are collection points everywhere (fixed and mobile) plus sorting centres where you can take stuff if needed. On top of that the sales channels where you purchase from are obliged to take old waste in for free.
If necessary, I can even call the local council and they will come and pick it up.
The only thing I’d like to see is an option where a manufacturer can take full responsibility for recycling a unit (in compliance with the reclamation figures), and perhaps a financial incentive to offset the device’s lack of serviceability. Basically turning something in to get cash or credit for a replacement.
My concern here is that serviceability and recyclability should be severable issues.
If a glue process makes it easier for automated recapture vs a mechanical friction retainer, but impedes the ease of repair, recycling should supersede repair.
I’m not an engineer and haven’t done any research on this, just wondering out loud about the trade offs.
I do know that for a building, because of the sunk energy costs, prevailing theory is that you try to rehabilitate the existing structure as much as possible rather than tear it down. Even if that’s less cost-effective for the owner. Because it’s more effective for the environment. (Although there’s still a fair bit of debate on the trade-offs, and that’s a good thing.) I’m also unaware of whether the EU mandates a specific remedy vs leaving it to local concerns. However, the EU tends to come off as 100% prescriptive in these matters vs trying to develop new methods of accomplishing similar aims. Whether that’s objectively true or not, I can’t say.
Regarding the perceived anti-EU bias, the EU protects many of its industries and businesses (and jobs) to the detriment of consumers world-wide. This is why you get push back from a lot of North Americans. They’re fully aware of the hypocrisy. The pro-EU gang come off as willfully ignorant of this, and a dash of humility wouldn’t hurt. North Americans need to more forgiving in that this is a messy, uneven process towards desirable goals, one that will always involve trade-offs. We’re prone to offering up way to much whataboutism in order to avoid responsibility. A dash of humility wouldn’t hurt here either. (Also, being mindful that Europeans aren’t any more monolithic than folks from the States wouldn’t hurt. Nor would an acknowledgment that the U.S. has at times force-fed Europeans its own solutions, leaving some lingering resentments.)
Much of the friction here revolves around differing philosophies and political concerns. It puts us way too far apart on way too important an issue. It’s unfortunate in that we’ll all be taking a gamble on the outcome over the coming years and decades.
Would you buy a car for which you needed special equipment just to pop the hood? And then once you got it open, any part you replaced made the car refuse to run anymore? If not, why are we putting up with phones that have purposely been made like this?
No, I wouldn't buy such a car, though some people might. Specifically those who never ever access the engine bay and just let the dealer do all the maintenance. That said, no car manufacturer offers such a car because there is no significant market demand for it.
On the other hand, I would buy such a phone, and hundreds of millions of other people bought such a phone. Obviously, they don't mind that the device is hermetically sealed. And those who didn't care for such a phone bought a different phone.
Regulations on battery recyclability due to environmental concerns make sense, but beyond that, then the government, rather than the consumers, would be dictating how companies should design their products. The last country that did that was the Soviet Union. That worked well for them, didn't it?
Compact, complex (i.e. powerful/multi-functional) products just don't lend themselves to easy repairability. That's the way it is in mobile tech: Compactness, Power, Repairability -- choose two, you can't have all three. To achieve the easy component accessibility that repairability necessitates you have to sacrifice compactness and/or complexity. And give up on water and dust resistance if you want an easily accessible and replaceable battery.
From the procedure file, which seems to still be missing the file which was voted on this week, I found this snippet:
(my bold in the body of the quote):
"Removability and replaceability of portable batteries and batteries for light weight means of transport:
By 1 January 2024 at the latest, portable batteries incorporated in appliances and batteries for light means of transport should be designed in such a manner that they can be readily and safely removed by qualifiedindependentoperators and replaced with basic and commonlyavailable tools and without causing damage to the appliance or the batteries."
That was an amended text which was apparently voted on at an earlier date.
We'll see what the final text says when it gets uploaded.
Does the EU design and manufacture any cellular devices (that anyone actually buys)? Tough talk telling non EU members how to do things. Since when does any EU member country have the expertise to even decide these things?
Great point. Not long ago, Nokia was the default mobile phone. In less than a decade, gone, with no other EU member entering.
Does the EU design and manufacture any cellular devices (that anyone actually buys)? Tough talk telling non EU members how to do things. Since when does any EU member country have the expertise to even decide these things?
Great point. Not long ago, Nokia was the default mobile phone. In less than a decade, gone, with no other EU member entering.
To be frank, it wasn't a good point at all.
"Tough talk telling non EU members how to do things"
That alone is missing something vital ...
Let me add it:
Tough talk telling non EU members how to do things [inEUjurisdiction]
Isn't that exactly what the EU should be doing?
Or should non-EU companies get to do whatever they want within the EU and be exempt from any control?
Expertise? With Ericsson and Nokia being two of the biggest cellular ICT players in the world? Really?
ASML? Without which we wouldn't have much of the leading edge manufacturing capabilities.
Dare I mention ARM (which spent years as an EU company)?
Yes, in handsets Nokia reigned supreme for a time. I think that is true of most industry leaders. Kodak? Nortel? Sony? Boeing? Philips... ?
The clock is ticking on all leading companies and that's why lots of them will do everything they can to stymie competition if left unchecked.
That's where government can play apart (if it can resist the lobbyists!).
Does the EU design and manufacture any cellular devices (that anyone actually buys)? Tough talk telling non EU members how to do things. Since when does any EU member country have the expertise to even decide these things?
Great point. Not long ago, Nokia was the default mobile phone. In less than a decade, gone, with no other EU member entering.
Nokia aren’t gone, and they’re a company, not an EU Member.
Does the EU design and manufacture any cellular devices (that anyone actually buys)? Tough talk telling non EU members how to do things. Since when does any EU member country have the expertise to even decide these things?
The EU is a political organisation, not a company.
If you mean, do any companies design and manufacture any cellular devices (that anyone actually buys) within the EU then the answer is yes. Gigaset, Medion, Shift, and TechniSat in Germany alone. Nokia, Alcatel, Archos, plenty of others in other countries too. Just because rob53 hasn't heard of things doesn't mean they don't exist.
Gigaset, formerly known as Siemens, flip-phones among other things Medion, subsidiary of Lenovo (Chinese company) Shift, "shiftphones" designed in Germany, manufactured in China, "By June 2019 Shift had sold 30,000 units." TechniSat, satellite receivers Nokia, I give you this one. Alcatel, is a French brand of mobile handsets owned by Finnish company Nokia and used under license by Chinese electronics company TCL Technology Archos, tablets and some other devices. I've never heard of them but I'm not aware of all companies.
My comment about the EU stands. I know they are a political organization, bordering on a cartel (don't understand why all the member countries have ceded control to an organization instead of being independent countries), but I still believe they have too much power, especially for a political organization that doesn't know what they are doing regarding computer devices, especially their design. Until I see an EU country that actually sells cellular devices on the same level as Apple, I don't agree with them dictating to Apple how Apple MUST design their devices. If you don't like the design, buy something else.
Oh for heavens sake.
The EU is not dictating how Apple must design their products, they’re setting regulations that all handset sellers must abide by to sell handsets within the EU. Apple are not bound to sell products within the EU, nor are they bound to sell the same design outside the EU. Apple are more than capable of working within a regulatory environment, they’ve been doing it for their entire existence.
Stop thinking like a victim. Regulations happen all the time all over the world.
I understand all your points, but why should the consumer care if it’s hard to fix or open? They don’t have to fix it, Apple or some other tech does.
Because it generally translates to higher costs to repair, it also generally results in more e-waste by fact that the entire unit is more likely to just simply be replaced instead of replacing the individual broken item. This is honestly an embarrasing question for you to even ask.
My point was that most consumers don’t care. They replace their phones every two or three years regardless of how it still performs. Personally I’d love to have a battery I can change, since I keep my phones until they absolutely die. Same with my computer. I’m still on a 2013 Mac Pro and it still does everything I need it to do.
In further defense of Apple and their design policies. My Apple products are by far and away the longest lived consumer products in my home and good design and dust and water proofing are the key components of reducing e-waste compared to products that have user accessed ports.
None of my Palm Pilots, Nokia, Blackberry, Sony phones were as long-lived as my iPhones which are often passed down to others in good working order when I am done with them.
And having centralized expertise in the replacement of batteries prevents hobbyists from discarding them in the trash.
I think “the right to repair” arguments and e-waste issues have little to do with each other.
My cellphone before the iPhone was released was about the cheapest Nokia candy bar phone you could buy and that thing didn’t give up the ghost until it was over 8 years old (with the original battery) and I didn’t baby it nearly as much as I have the iPhones I have owned.
So happy the EU is getting so involved in technology design /s
First the plug thing now this...it won't be long before we're back to using big clunky products.
This is an update to the batteries directive. It's not something new.
It's an attempt to bring the legislation into line with current EU goals with right to repair, consumer protection and information.
There is quite literally a lot to like.
The iPhone is a disposable item. By the time a battery needs replacing it is well past time for a new iPhone. As for right to repair. Don't care about having some untrained person w/o the proper tools trying to replace the battery in my sealed waterproof device. They should stick to selling screen protectors and cases.
So happy the EU is getting so involved in technology design /s
First the plug thing now this...it won't be long before we're back to using big clunky products.
This is an update to the batteries directive. It's not something new.
It's an attempt to bring the legislation into line with current EU goals with right to repair, consumer protection and information.
There is quite literally a lot to like.
The iPhone is a disposable item. By the time a battery needs replacing it is well past time for a new iPhone. As for right to repair. Don't care about having some untrained person w/o the proper tools trying to replace the battery in my sealed waterproof device. They should stick to selling screen protectors and cases.
If that were the case, there would be no need for Apple to point this out:
"Your battery’s health is significantly degraded. An Apple Authorized Service Provider can replace the battery to restore full performance and capacity. More about service options…"
That is needed because an iPhone battery - under normal conditions - is designed to give 500 full charging cycles while maintaining 80% of its original capacity.
That 'capacity' is something that Apple prefers to not be very transparent on.
So, that's 500 complete cycles under 'normal' conditions.
Over the last five years it has become clear that screen-on time has increased for most users. The operating system now has mechanism to try and make users aware of this. That means batteries are draining faster for many of those users, and then needing to be recharged.
The environments where phones are used also impact battery performance. Hotter than optimum or colder than optimum can affect performance.
The upshot is that, depending on use and operating conditions, many users may well find themselves in need of a new battery well within the expected lifespan of the device.
Who performs the replacement and how, should not represent a limitation for the end user and, preferably, devices should be designed with this kind of action in mind and the process itself should not be technically demanding.
Under no circumstances for example, should screen breakage be a risk as part of an iPhone battery replacement.
So happy the EU is getting so involved in technology design /s
First the plug thing now this...it won't be long before we're back to using big clunky products.
This is an update to the batteries directive. It's not something new.
It's an attempt to bring the legislation into line with current EU goals with right to repair, consumer protection and information.
There is quite literally a lot to like.
The iPhone is a disposable item. By the time a battery needs replacing it is well past time for a new iPhone. As for right to repair. Don't care about having some untrained person w/o the proper tools trying to replace the battery in my sealed waterproof device. They should stick to selling screen protectors and cases.
Get the fuck out of town. There are iPhones in my household that are on their second battery replacement. They work just fine.
Comments
These proposals aren't plucked from a Boris Johnson party hat.
They run through years long processes which include consultation at all levels, including industry, expert groups, academia and the general public.
Impact assessments are prepared too.
The EU has two of the world's leading providers of cellular infrastructure and a very wide range of cellular devices. Phones aren't the start and end points of cellular devices.
As for advanced manufacturing, does ASML meet your criteria?
And I would have said yes, but that's very different from dictating something. Exactly as I already said, Apple are free to do whatever they want outside the EU borders.
Always an essay with you. Completely unnecessary, no one is paying you per word.
If you mean, do any companies design and manufacture any cellular devices (that anyone actually buys) within the EU then the answer is yes. Gigaset, Medion, Shift, and TechniSat in Germany alone. Nokia, Alcatel, Archos, plenty of others in other countries too. Just because rob53 hasn't heard of things doesn't mean they don't exist.
Medion, subsidiary of Lenovo (Chinese company)
Shift, "shiftphones" designed in Germany, manufactured in China, "By June 2019 Shift had sold 30,000 units."
TechniSat, satellite receivers
Nokia, I give you this one.
Alcatel, is a French brand of mobile handsets owned by Finnish company Nokia and used under license by Chinese electronics company TCL Technology
Archos, tablets and some other devices. I've never heard of them but I'm not aware of all companies.
My comment about the EU stands. I know they are a political organization, bordering on a cartel (don't understand why all the member countries have ceded control to an organization instead of being independent countries), but I still believe they have too much power, especially for a political organization that doesn't know what they are doing regarding computer devices, especially their design. Until I see an EU country that actually sells cellular devices on the same level as Apple, I don't agree with them dictating to Apple how Apple MUST design their devices. If you don't like the design, buy something else.
None of my Palm Pilots, Nokia, Blackberry, Sony phones were as long-lived as my iPhones which are often passed down to others in good working order when I am done with them.
And having centralized expertise in the replacement of batteries prevents hobbyists from discarding them in the trash.
I think “the right to repair” arguments and e-waste issues have little to do with each other.
Airpods are basically disposable. Soldering SSD to devices and using glue everywhere can mean when one component fails other, completely unaffected components, get yanked.
In my part of the EU (and very probably everywhere in the EU) it is illegal to put e-waste in regular rubbish containers.
There are collection points everywhere (fixed and mobile) plus sorting centres where you can take stuff if needed. On top of that the sales channels where you purchase from are obliged to take old waste in for free.
If necessary, I can even call the local council and they will come and pick it up.
If a glue process makes it easier for automated recapture vs a mechanical friction retainer, but impedes the ease of repair, recycling should supersede repair.
I do know that for a building, because of the sunk energy costs, prevailing theory is that you try to rehabilitate the existing structure as much as possible rather than tear it down. Even if that’s less cost-effective for the owner. Because it’s more effective for the environment. (Although there’s still a fair bit of debate on the trade-offs, and that’s a good thing.) I’m also unaware of whether the EU mandates a specific remedy vs leaving it to local concerns. However, the EU tends to come off as 100% prescriptive in these matters vs trying to develop new methods of accomplishing similar aims. Whether that’s objectively true or not, I can’t say.
Much of the friction here revolves around differing philosophies and political concerns. It puts us way too far apart on way too important an issue. It’s unfortunate in that we’ll all be taking a gamble on the outcome over the coming years and decades.
On the other hand, I would buy such a phone, and hundreds of millions of other people bought such a phone. Obviously, they don't mind that the device is hermetically sealed. And those who didn't care for such a phone bought a different phone.
Regulations on battery recyclability due to environmental concerns make sense, but beyond that, then the government, rather than the consumers, would be dictating how companies should design their products. The last country that did that was the Soviet Union. That worked well for them, didn't it?
Compact, complex (i.e. powerful/multi-functional) products just don't lend themselves to easy repairability. That's the way it is in mobile tech: Compactness, Power, Repairability -- choose two, you can't have all three. To achieve the easy component accessibility that repairability necessitates you have to sacrifice compactness and/or complexity. And give up on water and dust resistance if you want an easily accessible and replaceable battery.
(my bold in the body of the quote):
That was an amended text which was apparently voted on at an earlier date.
We'll see what the final text says when it gets uploaded.
"Tough talk telling non EU members how to do things"
That alone is missing something vital ...
Let me add it:
Tough talk telling non EU members how to do things [in EU jurisdiction]
Isn't that exactly what the EU should be doing?
Or should non-EU companies get to do whatever they want within the EU and be exempt from any control?
Expertise? With Ericsson and Nokia being two of the biggest cellular ICT players in the world? Really?
ASML? Without which we wouldn't have much of the leading edge manufacturing capabilities.
Dare I mention ARM (which spent years as an EU company)?
Yes, in handsets Nokia reigned supreme for a time. I think that is true of most industry leaders. Kodak? Nortel? Sony? Boeing? Philips... ?
The clock is ticking on all leading companies and that's why lots of them will do everything they can to stymie competition if left unchecked.
That's where government can play apart (if it can resist the lobbyists!).
The EU is not dictating how Apple must design their products, they’re setting regulations that all handset sellers must abide by to sell handsets within the EU. Apple are not bound to sell products within the EU, nor are they bound to sell the same design outside the EU. Apple are more than capable of working within a regulatory environment, they’ve been doing it for their entire existence.
Stop thinking like a victim. Regulations happen all the time all over the world.
The iPhone is a disposable item. By the time a battery needs replacing it is well past time for a new iPhone. As for right to repair. Don't care about having some untrained person w/o the proper tools trying to replace the battery in my sealed waterproof device. They should stick to selling screen protectors and cases.
"Your battery’s health is significantly degraded. An Apple Authorized Service Provider can replace the battery to restore full performance and capacity. More about service options…"
That is needed because an iPhone battery - under normal conditions - is designed to give 500 full charging cycles while maintaining 80% of its original capacity.
That 'capacity' is something that Apple prefers to not be very transparent on.
So, that's 500 complete cycles under 'normal' conditions.
Over the last five years it has become clear that screen-on time has increased for most users. The operating system now has mechanism to try and make users aware of this. That means batteries are draining faster for many of those users, and then needing to be recharged.
The environments where phones are used also impact battery performance. Hotter than optimum or colder than optimum can affect performance.
The upshot is that, depending on use and operating conditions, many users may well find themselves in need of a new battery well within the expected lifespan of the device.
Who performs the replacement and how, should not represent a limitation for the end user and, preferably, devices should be designed with this kind of action in mind and the process itself should not be technically demanding.
Under no circumstances for example, should screen breakage be a risk as part of an iPhone battery replacement.
Stop throwing out perfectly good devices.