Apple Ordered to Stop Selling iPhones Without Charger in Brazil [Updated]

[dahacouk]

Hey, we should be producing and buying less stuff, not more stuff..
ehhh?
what about they sell you every year a new phone ? Does that count as a more stuff?

😂 I'm sorry. Please can you explain the logic behind you statement? 😂 Just because people try and sell you stuff doesn't mean you have to buy it does it? Serious question. You don't buy everything that people try and sell you do you? No, of course not. My current MacBook Pro was purchased in 2018 and before that 2008: 10 years! My current iPhone was purchased in 2020 and before that 2015: 5 years! Now... What are you saying?

 

[DJMacmini]

How many times have we seen phones overheat or catch fire because the customer used a 3rd party charger? To prevent this Apple needs to include the charger.

 

[dahacouk]

How many times have we seen phones overheat or catch fire because the customer used a 3rd party charger? To prevent this Apple needs to include the charger.

So just buy an Apple charger! LOL!

 

[jms-uk]

I charge it from my MacBook Pro. Do none of you have laptops with USB-C connections? Where are all the Apple Mac users?

My late 2013 r-MBP doesn't have USB-C, nor does the 2015 27" iMac I use at work. I have plenty of charging devices, but they are all with USB-A connection. Which works for me now, as I have SE2020 iPhone, few years old Redmi phone and an iPad Air 2.

I am sure there are a lot of (Apple) users that don't have any USB-C ports/chargers...

 

[hans1972]

Glad that at least Brazil had the balls to order Apple for it. Before I bought my iPhone 12 I was using Samsung. That charger had only USB A port. That means I had to buy a new charger to use with my new cable. Apple started shipping USB C chargers with iPhone 11 only.

Or you could have bought a new cable to use with your old Samsung USB-charger.

 

[dahacouk]

2) getting nothing and then needing to buy a separate thing.

Please explain how this generates more waste? Where's the logic?

 

[dahacouk]

My late 2013 r-MBP doesn't have USB-C, nor does the 2015 27" iMac I use at work. I have plenty of charging devices, but they are all with USB-A connection. Which works for me now, as I have SE2020 iPhone, few years old Redmi phone and an iPad Air 2.

I am sure there are a lot of (Apple) users that don't have any USB-C ports/chargers...

Great! So they can buy a USB-A to Lightning cable if they haven't already got a box full of them. Sorted!

 

[Tsepz]

Everyone knows the voucher solution. So the fact that Apple isn’t offering that says it has nothing to do with the environment.

And if everyone has dozens of unused Apple chargers at home, then Apple could offer to take and refurb/donate them to new users who don’t have one.

None of this has to do with the environment, not when Apple charges $20 for a power adapter. Brazil’s decision makes sense. At some point, Apple will take out the power cord from every device and charge for it.

Exactly! Well said.
We all know it had nothing to do with the environment.

 

[scaramoosh]

The problem with this is iPhone cables last a year before they're broken as everyone in the family fights for them.... so I'm always ordering new cables. Every single person I've met that is a normie and not a tech person, is on their 3rd cable before their contract is over. So this law is assuming your have tons of them in a draw..... no Apple cables do not last, they're designed to be weak.

 

[G5isAlive]

How many times have we seen phones overheat or catch fire because the customer used a 3rd party charger? To prevent this Apple needs to include the charger.

Because people are stupid to buy cheap chargers when Apple warns them not to…this is Apples fault?!

 

[ProfessionalFan]

So just buy an Apple charger! LOL!

They should just include a voucher for a charger in the box. Then nobody gets a charger they don't need and the environment is happy. And for those that do need a charger, they can get one without extra expense. If you say this also is a bad idea, it means you care about Apple's profit margins more than the environment.

 

[hans1972]

Apple should have just been honest about why they removed the charger, or not mentioned it at all. Making the "for the environment" claim reduced credibility and called far more attention to the change. If it was "for the environment," prices would have been deducted accordingly, and they weren't. It was "for the extra pocket change."

Apple was very clear about the benefits: Reduced use of zinc and plastic (biggest use of plastic for Apple). Zinc requires mining and plastic is a petroleum product. Also the reduction in package size meant they could ship many more iPhone per plane.

Apple calculated the environmental impact to be the same as reming 450 000 gas cars from the roads each year.

Making things cheaper isn't a good way to do it if you want to produce less of them. If Apple can make money on being climate friendly instead of losing money, wouldn't that be a good thing if you care about these things?

 

[Kottu]

Then you are a minority. Android has had usb c for years.

I had a Samsung Note 9 before I bought iPhone 12. That one had a USB A carger. When I sold my Samsung, I couldn't sell it without a charger by giving an excuse that Apple didn't provide a charger with my brand new iphone 12 pro max. It doesn't matter how Apple try to explain their view, most of iPhone customers did buy extra chargers. Behind Apple's motivation, making more profit was the only reason.

 

[dahacouk]

They should just include a voucher for a charger in the box. Then nobody gets a charger they don't need and the environment is happy. And for those that do need a charger, they can get one without extra expense. If you say this also is a bad idea, it means you care about Apple's profit margins more than the environment.

This is a great idea. And you are not first to propose it. And I thought the first time it was a good idea too! See these...

I'd have thought simply offering a free USB-A to Lightning cable, or even a USB-C to USB-A adaptor that would allow the supplied cable to plug into USB-A, would have addressed almost all real need. Include a token in the box that can be redeemed in a shop or online - ideally via all third-party sellers. Thus they only supply when customers ask, and limit demand to one per customer.

These are awesome ideas. Let people decide themselves. Give people choice in the matter.

And if you are still not happy with my reply... 😂

 

[loby]

Oh wow... I really think they should have never removed the charger to begin with. Missing wired headphones...don't really mind that as it is not essential to the continued operation of the phone.

They removed it for “environmental reasons” but still charge the same price or higher, not deducting the price of the charger and headphones. Nice try Apple…

 

[polyphenol]

How many times have we seen phones overheat or catch fire because the customer used a 3rd party charger? To prevent this Apple needs to include the charger.

And how does that help anyone who needs a second or a replacement charger? Or, as I alluded to in an earlier response, charges in vehciles rather than buildings?

We end up in the same old place. Do we as individuals have full responsibility for selecting and buying safe chargers? Or do governments have to step in and impose at least a base level safety standard? Or do we assume Apple chargers are safe and have our choice restricted to them alone?

As individuals, we have little ability to verify the integrity and safety of products like charges. Obviously, we can check there are no obvious physical issues, and that they plug in securely. Then we are somewhat stuck. We only have reputation to go on - and that is susceptible to manipulation.

About the only way I can see of putting responsibility fully onto manufacturers/importers is to impose a duty on them to both stand behind their products and include insurance against any consequences from things such as overheating/causing fires.

It would have to be some sort of pre-paid third party insurance - and would need to be verifiable. Say, check the QR code on your device and see the insurance certificate. The cost of this insurance would be such that devices classified as poor would never be offered a policy.

Effectively making contracting out safety requirements to commercial organisations.

 

[hans1972]

They should just include a voucher for a charger in the box. Then nobody gets a charger they don't need and the environment is happy. And for those that do need a charger, they can get one without extra expense. If you say this also is a bad idea, it means you care about Apple's profit margins more than the environment.

The best thing for the environment is that nothing get produced.

If chargers become more expensive some people will not buy it. They will find an existing charger they can re-use or they'll do with less chargers.

 

[polyphenol]

The problem with this is iPhone cables last a year before they're broken as everyone in the family fights for them.... so I'm always ordering new cables. Every single person I've met that is a normie and not a tech person, is on their 3rd cable before their contract is over. So this law is assuming your have tons of them in a draw..... no Apple cables do not last, they're designed to be weak.

If you are going to have to buy at least three, might as well get a three-for-the-price of-two deal on cables and be prepared!

I still have my original iPhone 6S Lightning cable. I've never had an Apple cable fail - but I am well aware others have.

 

[hans1972]

So if the cost of the charger was indirectly included in the price of the iPhone, why not reduce the price of the iPhone if you’re not including the charger?

The cost for a 5W charger would in those volumes would probably be around $1-$3.

Let's say Apple calculated the price of the iPhone would be $987 with the charger. They could then sell it for $985 without reducing profit margins. But Apple doesn't do pricing like that in both cases it would cost $999.

Or maybe they calculated it to be $1005 with the charger and reducing the cost with $2 makes Apple more positive to reduce their margin and go for $999 instead of lets say $1029 or $1099

It's just to many factors at play to say if it affected pricing in any meaningful way.

Also, why shouldn't company make profit on being environmental friendly?
Is there a requirement one should suffer?

 

[hans1972]

Not to mention, if you have a C charger from their laptops or iPads, that won't work. You need a brick with a C port, not hard wired C. It's just too oddly specific, iPhones are the only unit in their lineup that still charges with lightning. along with some silly accessories

Every Apple charger meant to charge a USB-C MacBook comes with an USB-C port.

I'm using my 2015 Apple charger, which came with the MacBook (2015), to charge my iPhone and iPads sometimes.

 

[mrochester]

Reading the comments there’s a clear divide between people who want to see Apple have to pay to include a charger in every box and to hell with the environmental consequence of that and those who are happy to see no charger included in the box and let people who need one pay for it separately.

It’s also clear that more right wing, authoritarian countries are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming into adopting legislation that forces companies to reduce the amount of stuff that they make so as to encourage continued use of stuff that has already been made.

 

[G5isAlive]

They should just include a voucher for a charger in the box. Then nobody gets a charger they don't need and the environment is happy. And for those that do need a charger, they can get one without extra expense. If you say this also is a bad idea, it means you care about Apple's profit margins more than the environment.

No. It means I think most people are inherently greedy and always grab things that are free, need them or not. And I also believe most people are naive if they don’t think Apple passes on all costs to the consumer one way or the other. Just like I believe 95% of the people complaining here about cash grabs already own a charger and are just being greedy wanting a ‘free’ charger they don’t need and naive to think we don’t all pay for that. And to the very small percentage that just bought a $700 or more phone and do not have the charger? I don’t want to subsidize you. Go spend another $30 of your money for your charger.

 

[hayden-scott]

Awesome. Now you pay US$18 extra for an iPhone regardless whether you needed the charger. (You didn’t think Apple were going to provide the charger for free, did you?)

 

[mrochester]

No. It means I think most people are inherently greedy and always grab things that are free, need them or not. And I also believe most people are naive if they don’t think Apple passes on all costs to the consumer one way or the other. Just like I believe 95% of the people complaining here about cash grabs already own a charger and are just being greedy wanting a ‘free’ charger they don’t need and naive to think we don’t all pay for that. And to the very small percentage that just bought a $700 or more phone and do not have the charger? I don’t want to subsidize you. Go spend another $30 of your money for your charger.

Agreed.

Including a voucher for a ‘free’ charger just means Apple will end up making and shipping more chargers than people need because people will want the free thing regardless of whether they need it or not.

To stop people consuming so much stuff unnecessarily you have to a) make stuff people do have last longer and b) make stuff more expensive to discourage frivolous and wasteful purchases.

Adding friction to the purchase of a charging brick (by both being more money and taking more actions) means consumers will consider more carefully whether they need one or not. Costing more money is the single most effective way to discourage a behaviour as the vast majority of consumers are price sensitive (I.e., most people will prioritise the price of something over the difficulty of obtaining it which is why a free charger if you ask for it is not as effective at reducing the number of charger bricks being made as a charger that costs money).

This is all basic human psychology. The business interest is to remove friction (make it easier for people to spend money) and the regulators interest is to add friction to make it harder for people to spend money and buy ‘stuff’.

 

[antmarobel]

I bought my 13 Pro Max on Amazon Brazil few weeks ago and I want my charge at once!