Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Brazil could stop worrying about homes not having enough spare chargers (that will probably end up in landfill sites), and put more the energy into slightly more pressing matters, like managing their local forest.
 
Last edited:
Personally I don’t give two F what they do. Simply stated that if it was really about the environment, they technically shouldn’t include either anymore.
I totally agree with that. And I also don't buy that they do it for the environment. But whatever the reason, I think that removing the charger is a good start.

Btw, in my household, the cables coming with other electronic devices are a bigger problem than the ones I get with my iPhone. I have a drawer full with very short micro USB cables that I have been getting with every single chargeable device I bought in the last couple of years. With recent devices, I have been getting very short USB-A to USB-C cables. All of these cables are too short for practical use. Besides this, the power brick side of things seems to still be standardized on USB-A.
 
  • Like
Reactions: steve09090
Personally I don’t give two F what they do. Simply stated that if it was really about the environment, they technically shouldn’t include either anymore.
If they really cared about the environment they wouldn’t ship iPhones. They’d have them delivered to the Apple Store with minimum packaging and customers would have to pick them up. We can play the “if they really…” game all day long.
 
  • Like
Reactions: compwiz1202
You said that the example of buying a car without wheels isn't a great example because you can choose what you want buy when you get that car.

In the same exact same way, you can choose to buy a charger with a phone. If a car doesn't have to come with wheels (by your choice) then why does a phone have to come with a charger (by your choice), as you can buy it when you buy the phone.
The car without wheels is not a good example because you can't order it like a pizza by using an app like iFood. You need to check it by visiting the local store.

That means you can easily spot a problem, due to the nature of said product. That is, if such problem is not hidden.

Also, you can't buy said car SEALED, inside a box. There are some products that even if you buy from a local store, you will only open the package when you are on your way home. And if that's the case, you are allowed to return it, due to a hidden defect NOW discovered (and yes, the absence of a relevant part/accessory that hinders the continuous use is considered a flaw).

A car without wheels is considered a "plain", obvious issue, so evident that a normal person (even a layman) can notice it. I could say the same about a clock that doesn't show what time is it.

The absence of a charger, not so much in my opinion. It's assumed to be there (I mean, that you'll be able to continue using this phone somehow), otherwise it would not be sold.

For example, we don't usually buy a television set without the power cord, with the argument that we can find a similar one anywhere. Once you install this TV, you'll assume that it will turn it on.

Apple is relying on the assumption that you already own a computer that can charge said PHONE (I can do this with my iPAD, using my PC, despite taking more time) or a previous charger from an old iPhone.

This is a mistake, many people get rid of previous equipment or buy for the 1st time.

The iPAD (or iPhone) can be bought from a guy that lives 2000 miles + from you. Back when we still could buy from Apple ($$$$$$$), I purchased my IPP 10.5 from BHPHotoVideo, which is from N.Y., and shipped to Brazil using a freight forwarder. "eBay-like" websites are probably the most used. I don't think many people buy from local stores, including any from Apple. Because it's a lot more expensive if you choose them.

Probably because some online sellers avoid paying the same number of (import) taxes. You know how that works...

The same "Consumer Code" (from Brazil) states that you are allowed (provided you don't use it in a way that would prevent this right from being exercised, so don't abuse this) to return it and get 100% of your money back. For no reason.

You can never do the same if you buy some clothes and despite them still in the same package unopened, try to return it, if you do this from a physical STORE, where you had the chance to check it with your hands and eyes. The seller in such cases, have the right to refuse the product back or even that you replace it with a similar one (let's say you don't want the iPhone anymore and opt for a Samsung).

If you try to go back there with the iPhone box sealed, you may or MAY NOT get to exchange it.

I don't think you can get enough details of what you buy from your computer, if you bought from a guy living in another distant state where a few details may be missed (note: the CODE also says it's a right to be fully informed about all product traits). Even if you were, the law assumes otherwise, that your perception of what you bought was incomplete.

Art. 49. The consumer may desist from a contract in a period of up to seven days after the moment when the contract is signed or when the product or service is delivered, whenever the product or service is hired outside a commercial establishment, especially through a phone or house visit.

Sole paragraph. If the consumer decides to use his right to desist from the contract as foreseen in this article, any amounts that have been paid, for any reason, during the reflection period will be returned immediately, with financial adjustments.


Even if that right is there, these lawsuits don't touch on the subject of not being able to get the money back and buying another PHONE (for example), they mention that article I told you about: 18.

The one that you can't sell anything (at least here) if it's considered inadequate for the intended purpose.

This last news says this is based on:

Art. 39. Forbidden abusive practices by the products or service provider includes:

I - conditioning product or service delivery to the delivery of another product or service as well as specific quantitative limits without just cause;


The full decision (in portuguese) about the latest FINE against Apple can be read here.

The judge said Apple is conditioning users to still buy the charger made by them, not another one. I mean, think about it:

- The alternative is NOT to avoid buying the CHARGER. You still need to do it.

So by removing it, you are still forced to buy it anyway, only this time you do this separately. The "ECO" argument is idiotic, because if you do a new purchase you harm the environment by shipping (again), and the old phone charger may not be compatible with the newest technology (assuming Apple only sends you the charger cable with the latest iPhone).

Apple also tells us that we should NOT buy similar CHARGERS, and even Amazon was sued by them for selling counterfeit products.

The ruling said this is another form of "conditioning" (as that article 39-I states). But this time, it's different: you are not prevented of buying if you don't get the charger, however you can't use it if you don't buy it.

It's like I sell you the air conditioner without the remote control to operate it.

You can still buy it without it. But since you can't (continue) using it without said remote control, you need to buy from me anyway.

Specious reasoning.
 
Last edited:
  • Disagree
Reactions: strongy
[...]

The absence of a charger, not so much in my opinion. It's assumed to be there (I mean, that you'll be able to continue using this phone somehow), otherwise it would not be sold.

For example, we don't usually buy a television set without the power cord, with the argument that we can find a similar one anywhere. Once you install this TV, you'll assume that it will turn it on.
True, but the power code of the TV is analogous to the cable with an iphone. A TV you have to supply the outlet, while an iphone you have to supply the charger. However, should the power cord to the TV go bad, you can easily and inexpensively replace it.
Apple is relying on the assumption that you already own a computer that can charge said PHONE (I can do this with my iPAD, using my PC, despite taking more time) or a previous charger from an old iPhone.
Yes. Apple (imo) is relying on the fact that in 2022, many people have encountered smarphones and have ways to charge them including:
- usb ports on computers
- usb ports in outlets
- wireless both inbuilt in car and off-the-shelf
- usb ports in various devices and of course bricks
This is a mistake, many people get rid of previous equipment or buy for the 1st time.
Maybe. Could be many, some of few.
The iPAD (or iPhone) can be bought from a guy that lives 2000 miles + from you. Back when we still could buy from Apple ($$$$$$$), I purchased my IPP 10.5 from BHPHotoVideo, which is from N.Y., and shipped to Brazil using a freight forwarder. "eBay-like" websites are probably the most used. I don't think many people buy from local stores, including any from Apple. Because it's a lot more expensive if you choose them.

Probably because some online sellers avoid paying the same number of (import) taxes. You know how that works...

The same "Consumer Code" (from Brazil) states that you are allowed (provided you don't use it in a way that would prevent this right from being exercised, so don't abuse this) to return it and get 100% of your money back. For no reason.

You can never do the same if you buy some clothes and despite them still in the same package unopened, try to return it, if you do this from a physical STORE, where you had the chance to check it with your hands and eyes. The seller in such cases, have the right to refuse the product back or even that you replace it with a similar one (let's say you don't want the iPhone anymore and opt for a Samsung).

If you try to go back there with the iPhone box sealed, you may or MAY NOT get to exchange it.

I don't think you can get enough details of what you buy from your computer, if you bought from a guy living in another distant state where a few details may be missed (note: the CODE also says it's a right to be fully informed about all product traits). Even if you were, the law assumes otherwise, that your perception of what you bought was incomplete.

Art. 49. The consumer may desist from a contract in a period of up to seven days after the moment when the contract is signed or when the product or service is delivered, whenever the product or service is hired outside a commercial establishment, especially through a phone or house visit.

Sole paragraph. If the consumer decides to use his right to desist from the contract as foreseen in this article, any amounts that have been paid, for any reason, during the reflection period will be returned immediately, with financial adjustments.


Even if that right is there, these lawsuits don't touch on the subject of not being able to get the money back and buying another PHONE (for example), they mention that article I told you about: 18.

The one that you can't sell anything (at least here) if it's considered inadequate for the intended purpose.

This last news says this is based on:

Art. 39. Forbidden abusive practices by the products or service provider includes:

I - conditioning product or service delivery to the delivery of another product or service as well as specific quantitative limits without just cause;


The full decision (in portuguese) about the latest FINE against Apple can be read here.

The judge said Apple is conditioning users to still buy the charger made by them, not another one. I mean, think about it:

- The alternative is NOT to avoid buying the CHARGER. You still need to do it.
ok.
So by removing it, you are still forced to buy it anyway, only this time you do this separately. The "ECO" argument is idiotic, because if you do a new purchase you harm the environment by shipping (again), and the old phone charger may not be compatible with the newest technology (assuming Apple only sends you the charger cable with the latest iPhone).
Every single charger for ipad and iphone that apple has produced is compatible with every single iphone. There are two choices of cables for iphones at the moment. There are also different configurations of power cords. 2 prong, 3 prong etc.
Apple also tells us that we should NOT buy similar CHARGERS, and even Amazon was sued by them for selling counterfeit products.
What? Apple says to be wary of counterfeit chargers, just like one shouldn't buy a "genuine Rolex" from a street vendor.
The ruling said this is another form of "conditioning" (as that article 39-I states). But this time, it's different: you are not prevented of buying if you don't get the charger, however you can't use it if you don't buy it.

It's like I sell you the air conditioner without the remote control to operate it.

You can still buy it without it. But since you can't (continue) using it without said remote control, you need to buy from me anyway.

Specious reasoning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strongy
Every single charger for ipad and iphone that apple has produced is compatible with every single iphone. There are two choices of cables for iphones at the moment. There are also different configurations of power cords. 2 prong, 3 prong etc.

Well not really

Surprised you haven't got one of these still in full working order honestly
 
Well not really

Surprised you haven't got one of these still in full working order honestly

Every. Single. Charger. And. Cable. And while I did say 2 choices of the cables there are adapters. At any rate, the point is with 1.8 billion devices in the world, it's a good possibility a repeat iphone customers will have both a cable and charger. While Brazil is, I guess, forcing more environmental waste with this act, to serve the minority at the expense of the majority. I find it hard to believe that iphone customers have one cable and one charger. If either fails during the middle of the night and your iphone battery dies, one is out of luck.
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.

Every. Single. Charger. And. Cable.

Thanks for clearing that up 👍

moving-goalpost.gif
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
When you trade in the phone you get a fraction of what it's worth. If that works for you, that's great, but I can't believe the majority are happy with that.

I generally only upgrade when I need another handset, I always have a relative needing a new phone, I have someone using a 6s waiting for me to upgrade. The difference from a 12 to a 14 isn't really much and certainly not worth (to me) $1000 or so to do that upgrade, but a 12 to a 14 plus someone going from a 6s to a 12 for the same total spend is much more worthwhile. In this case he'd still have his old charger and I'm not sure what he'll do with the 6s, but that was his first iPhone and he had no charger at the time.

I do get and appreciate your joke. I'd just rather do "cat charger > /usr/???" where ??? can be parent, sibling, friend, etc. :)

Also, in my case (and I am well aware that I'm not typical here), I seem to have have an endless need for old chargers to power various arduino and raspberry pi projects. I usually buy a handful every time I visit Ikea, but the "free" one with an iPhone would be very welcome for me.

Thanks for that perspective. I realize now that I shouldn't assume everyone has extra chargers lying around. So, we probably should expect that many people will suffer an extra cost, above that suffered by people who already have a charger.

I generally keep my phones for over 3 years; my 12 was replacing a 6s. So, I just recycle them with Apple and they give me a token amount. They ask that I don't include the charger when sending it in. I know that I'm not the usual case.
 
Not with the cable that they include with iPhone, AirPods etc now. That’s my whole point. Now they include a cable that doesn’t work with those chargers supposedly everyone already has. So you either go out and buy a new usb-c charger to use those new cables or you stick to your old charger and cable and still create more waste (a cable you won’t be using)

Your way: 1 old charger, 1 new charger, 1 old cable, 1 new cable

Apple's way: 1 old charger, 1 old cable, 1 new cable

So one less charger produced and transported unless the customers choose to buy a new charger. But that's on them and not Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy and strongy
chargers far outlast cables, the original cables that came with these usba charger already got burned strips on the lighting side, and if i buy a new one, that defeats the purpose of apple environmental sensibility.

Chargers outlast cables, I agree. They also most of the times outlast the device they came with. That's why it's important to get away from chargers being sold with devices.

If you buy a new cable, that's on you, not Apple, unless you buy it from Apple, in which case they charge you a lot of money. Some of that money Apple can use to buy carbon quotas to achieve their goals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strongy
Then free cases/screen protectors are red herrings since Brazilian law doesn't say anything about them.

How does giving a charger to customers who need a charger, bad for the customer?

It's not bad for customers, but it's bad for Apple's environmental and climate goals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strongy
The car without wheels is not a good example because you can't order it like a pizza by using an app like iFood. You need to check it by visiting the local store.

That means you can easily spot a problem, due to the nature of said product. That is, if such problem is not hidden.

Also, you can't buy said car SEALED, inside a box. There are some products that even if you buy from a local store, you will only open the package when you are on your way home. And if that's the case, you are allowed to return it, due to a hidden defect NOW discovered (and yes, the absence of a relevant part/accessory that hinders the continuous use is considered a flaw).

A car without wheels is considered a "plain", obvious issue, so evident that a normal person (even a layman) can notice it. I could say the same about a clock that doesn't show what time is it.

The absence of a charger, not so much in my opinion. It's assumed to be there (I mean, that you'll be able to continue using this phone somehow), otherwise it would not be sold.

For example, we don't usually buy a television set without the power cord, with the argument that we can find a similar one anywhere. Once you install this TV, you'll assume that it will turn it on.

Apple is relying on the assumption that you already own a computer that can charge said PHONE (I can do this with my iPAD, using my PC, despite taking more time) or a previous charger from an old iPhone.

This is a mistake, many people get rid of previous equipment or buy for the 1st time.

The iPAD (or iPhone) can be bought from a guy that lives 2000 miles + from you. Back when we still could buy from Apple ($$$$$$$), I purchased my IPP 10.5 from BHPHotoVideo, which is from N.Y., and shipped to Brazil using a freight forwarder. "eBay-like" websites are probably the most used. I don't think many people buy from local stores, including any from Apple. Because it's a lot more expensive if you choose them.

Probably because some online sellers avoid paying the same number of (import) taxes. You know how that works...

The same "Consumer Code" (from Brazil) states that you are allowed (provided you don't use it in a way that would prevent this right from being exercised, so don't abuse this) to return it and get 100% of your money back. For no reason.

You can never do the same if you buy some clothes and despite them still in the same package unopened, try to return it, if you do this from a physical STORE, where you had the chance to check it with your hands and eyes. The seller in such cases, have the right to refuse the product back or even that you replace it with a similar one (let's say you don't want the iPhone anymore and opt for a Samsung).

If you try to go back there with the iPhone box sealed, you may or MAY NOT get to exchange it.

I don't think you can get enough details of what you buy from your computer, if you bought from a guy living in another distant state where a few details may be missed (note: the CODE also says it's a right to be fully informed about all product traits). Even if you were, the law assumes otherwise, that your perception of what you bought was incomplete.

Art. 49. The consumer may desist from a contract in a period of up to seven days after the moment when the contract is signed or when the product or service is delivered, whenever the product or service is hired outside a commercial establishment, especially through a phone or house visit.

Sole paragraph. If the consumer decides to use his right to desist from the contract as foreseen in this article, any amounts that have been paid, for any reason, during the reflection period will be returned immediately, with financial adjustments.


Even if that right is there, these lawsuits don't touch on the subject of not being able to get the money back and buying another PHONE (for example), they mention that article I told you about: 18.

The one that you can't sell anything (at least here) if it's considered inadequate for the intended purpose.

This last news says this is based on:

Art. 39. Forbidden abusive practices by the products or service provider includes:

I - conditioning product or service delivery to the delivery of another product or service as well as specific quantitative limits without just cause;


The full decision (in portuguese) about the latest FINE against Apple can be read here.

The judge said Apple is conditioning users to still buy the charger made by them, not another one. I mean, think about it:

- The alternative is NOT to avoid buying the CHARGER. You still need to do it.

So by removing it, you are still forced to buy it anyway, only this time you do this separately. The "ECO" argument is idiotic, because if you do a new purchase you harm the environment by shipping (again), and the old phone charger may not be compatible with the newest technology (assuming Apple only sends you the charger cable with the latest iPhone).

Apple also tells us that we should NOT buy similar CHARGERS, and even Amazon was sued by them for selling counterfeit products.

The ruling said this is another form of "conditioning" (as that article 39-I states). But this time, it's different: you are not prevented of buying if you don't get the charger, however you can't use it if you don't buy it.

It's like I sell you the air conditioner without the remote control to operate it.

You can still buy it without it. But since you can't (continue) using it without said remote control, you need to buy from me anyway.

Specious reasoning.
You have done nothing to convince me by saying 'this is different'. All you have convinced me in, is that App,e have been singled out and there is zero consistency in the ruling. Based on your analysis, I see no reason why Apple won’t win this appeal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strongy
Apple:
-lets cut carbon emissions not providing free chargers with iPhones
World:
-please, use USB-C standard for save MILLIONS in carbon emissions and stop doing stupid things that just make you richer (casually...)
 
  • Like
Reactions: DevNull0
I mean, using that logic, you can argue that any accessory should be included. Where do you stop? Should a case be included? Headphones? How about Macs that are sold without Final Cut Pro X? I mean, without FCPX you can't do pro-video on the mac!

Apple should be able to sell each item a la carte. Just want the phone? Why pay for a charger too -- need just a charger, why pay for anything other than a charger? Bundling unneeded hardware is just wasteful.

This is just silly...
No, just the ones that are necessary to actually use the device. That's the line you stop at. A case or headphones are necessary, but a charger is.
 
No, just the ones that are necessary to actually use the device. That's the line you stop at. A case or headphones are necessary, but a charger is.
Charger isn’t necessary the phone can be charged with any usb port 🤷‍♂️
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy
If this is about the environment for Apple, offering a free charger would not be a good solution. Most customers would probably choose "include a charger" even if they didn't need one which would defeat the purpose of excluding chargers for environmental reasons.
I recently purchased a custom seat for my Harley. There was no mention in any of the sales process that the seat comes with a hold strap. It doesn't. However when the seat arrived the fine print of the documentation stated the seat comes with a complimentary seat strap if you wish. Just call.

It is that simple.

Saddlemen fot the win
 
A car does not come wrapped in a box without any text pointing that there is no charger inside.

I luckily don’t own a e-car, but the last fueled car i bought had a sentence in the contract that i need to fill-up and what’s already inside just last 15km.

And thats the problem with iPhones, you buy a Blackbox without any notice that an additional charger is needed, then yes it’s incomplete.
A new car comes with a tank of gas -- so you can at least get the damned thing home.
 
What is it about Macrumors and people who seem to be programmed to defend a trillion dollar company as if it were a family member?

It's been said before and I'll repeat it here... but Apple could just offer a free accessory...

Pick one:

  • Charger
  • Wired Headphones and a 3.5mm adapter
  • Decent PTU case.
  • xxx months of Apple TV or Music on top of the current 3 month freebie.
  • App Store $xxx credit...

Surely a simple selection like this means nobody loses out and nothing goes to waste...
Got an adapter, choose headphones.
got headphones, choose a case.
Don't want a case... get some free TV or Music.
If all of that seems like bollocks... get a free App Store credit.

Apple offer fkkall any more and their prices go up and up every few generations.
I don’t see how I am defending apple & you interpreted that way. I’m just saying if the brazillians could BUY one (iPhone with charger in the box) in BRAZIL (where such a high tax is imposed), they could just buy a far better charger than one from Apple.

Here are some far better one if that will help you understand:
-anker
-aukey
-baseus
-ugreen


& those free accessory from options? Doubt that will ever happen
 
  • Like
Reactions: strongy
First 4 posts and probably many more don't seem to understand the case.

It's the law in Brazil, case closed.

Fact, Apple is in essence criminal here, not abiding by the Brazilian law.
You don’t understand my statement.
The law is weird on its own & I was not even mentioning anything about the law.

I’m just saying if the Brazillizns could afford a costly iphone without charger, they could also afford a charger if they have not yet had one (even though it is weird to not already possessing one)

There are far better & cheaper chargers out there namely, baseus, ugreen, anker, aukey

I don’t know what is hard about that
 
  • Like
Reactions: strongy
If this is about the environment for Apple, offering a free charger would not be a good solution. Most customers would probably choose "include a charger" even if they didn't need one which would defeat the purpose of excluding chargers for environmental reasons.
I didn't think of it at the time of my prior comment but here's a potential win for everybody. I think they should increase the selling price of the iPhone by $19 (or equivalent) and offer two options at checkout:

A) "Include a charger"
B) "I don't need a charger and would like a gift card instead"

Those who choose option A get a charger included and those who choose option B get their $19 back but have to spend it at Apple.
 
I am sure changing the packaging and providing the chargers will cost more than the fine.
They can easily make an inexpensive combo package that includes the overpriced power adapter for free (sort of like how they include a wrist band with the Apple Watch). They just don't want to.
 
I didn't think of it at the time of my prior comment but here's a potential win for everybody. I think they should increase the selling price of the iPhone by $19 (or equivalent) and offer two options at checkout:

A) "Include a charger"
B) "I don't need a charger and would like a gift card instead"

Those who choose option A get a charger included and those who choose option B get their $19 back but have to spend it at Apple.

That could be an option Brazil would be ok with but I still think it unnecessarily complicates things. Apple keeping prices the same and then allowing customers to easily add a charger for as little as $19 during checkout is better IMO. Apple (and many other companies) would prefer to advertise/promote the price as low as possible rather than at a higher price with additional items or a gift card a customer didn't necessarily want/ask for.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.