Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
EU Moves One Step Closer to Mandating Apple to Switch iPhone, iPad, and AirPods to USB-C
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I work in the wireless industry, developing new wireless products and technology. I stand by the opinion it's not the same as a hardware vendor picking which port to use vs. mandating which port they use.
Lightning can be better for mobile devices/phones. USB-C can be great for many things, I use it every day on dozens of devices.
No, this is only the worst parts of Soviet style central planning-- it's the application of government regulation to R&D minutia. It's giving bureaucrats the power over technical decisions.
Innovation doesn't mean "MAX SPECS ALWAYS", it means finding a solution that best balances the technical and user requirements. In this case it could mean there's an ecosystem of peripherals and a large population of existing cables for iPhone and no strong technical need to replace them. It could mean that locking users into USB-C will slow the adoption of USB-D, or the next super special Apple connector if some thing were to come along.
Leaving business room to innovate means not assuming some lawmaker, or forum commenter, can anticipate the future or that they truly understand the market beyond their own personal experience and the angry letters they receive from voters. Every psychologist has learned that if you want to know what people really think, you have to put money on the table-- if you ask them to make decisions without taking a personal stake, they give you their fantasy view. If they have to trade something for a decision you can see how firmly they believe it.
Let consumers vote with their dollars and you'll find a better solution than some committee making laws based on what the Internets taught them.
I do agree that Lightning is mechanically superior to USB-C.
But USB-C is electronically superior. And as a standardized interface is needed, ideally with the abilities of USB-C, and with USB-C being the factual standard for almost any device except iPhones (all tablets, all notebooks, all non-Apple smartphones, HomePods, ... support USB-C), Lightning has become a nice-product and will get obsolete quickly.
(Yes, I'd wish we had USB-C abilities in the shape of Lightning connectors - but Apple missed the opportunity for making this happen.)
Regarding 2): I'm bloody glad that the USB-C specification is more flexible! I don't want to pay for Thunderbolt 3 ability just to charge my power bank, bicycle light, reading light, blood pressure meter, bike computer, bike gear shifter, alarm clock, head phones, you name it...
And yet for decades people claiming knowledge of economics have predicted the collapse of the EU (or the US, or Japan) and yet the world keeps on turning and hasn't fallen down around our heads yet.
Define "quickly". There are literally 1 billion devices on the planet that use a Lightning port.
If Apple had constantly been improving Lightning transfer data speeds and charging speeds for Lightning-only chargers/cables/ports, creating a standard that, year-after-year, offers higher speeds and higher quality connectors, wires, etc., all-around better than any other cable/port out there, then absolutely I would agree that EU is hurting Apple and likeminded competitors when forcing adhere to one standard.
But Lightning ports on iPhones HAVE NOT IMPROVED since Apple put them in iPhones in 2012.
Apple has improved and innovated several things about smartphones and the various consumer tech you might use together with your iPhone.
But Lightning has not changed or improved in almost 10 years.
Apple didn't even implement it's USB 3.0 Lightning port into iPhones that it created for 2015 iPads Pro.
Where is all this innovation from Apple in regards to charging and transfer speeds that the EU is so definitely about to cripple?
Could it possibly be that Apple is holding onto Lightning for iPhones because of its (mega cash cow) MFi certification program and not because its a better solution for consumers?
Hmm. Let's see. Would a business hold onto old tech that's raking in billions year after year with no consequences legally or financially? Or would it offer consumers the best and least expensive solution (for the consumer) if it had to give up all of these billions? Gee, I don't know. What could be the answer?
But Lightning ports on iPhones HAVE NOT IMPROVED since Apple put them in iPhones in 2012.
Apple has improved and innovated several things about smartphones and the various consumer tech you might use together with your iPhone.
But Lightning has not changed or improved in almost 10 years.
Apple didn't even implement it's USB 3.0 Lightning port into iPhones that it created for 2015 iPads Pro.
Where is all this innovation from Apple in regards to charging and transfer speeds that the EU is so definitely about to cripple?
Could it possibly be that Apple is holding onto Lightning for iPhones because of its (mega cash cow) MFi certification program and not because its a better solution for consumers?
Hmm. Let's see. Would a business hold onto old tech that's raking in billions year after year with no consequences legally or financially? Or would it offer consumers the best and least expensive solution (for the consumer) if it had to give up all of these billions? Gee, I don't know. What could be the answer?
Well lucky with your example of a messy USB standard. They all still can charge any iPhone, iPad, headset, trinket etc without you needing to care of the type of cable.
Remember the iPad Pro and iPhone 13 uses only 20w
Well, the world has put its money in USB-C. All laptops and tablets (including Apples), almost all phones and most periphery (if not using MicroUSB) is using USB-C. The few Lightning-connect iPhones have become a niche product now.
It's unlikely that any developer of an innovative product would afford to bet on Lightning any longer - in particular since even Apple as been expected to move iPhones to USB-C for some time.
I think you're mixing up how consumers and expert committees acquire their information.
You also seem to miss that it's the interface (e.g. the connector) that must be standardized to let the consumers freely choose the products they want to purchase - on either side of the interface.
Ha! Gimme a break with the Socialist Societies BS. You do realize that Republicans are for Socialism, but ONLY for the rich. Corporate welfare. Billionaires paying ZERO in taxes. MLK said it 60 yrs ago, “It’s Socialism for the rich & rugged individualism for the rest of us.” The whole Socialism scare tactic is so the right can keep angering their base against the left while they cut the very programs that would actually help them as they give all that money to their rich buddies. It’s a scam. Ya been duped. Or drinking the cool aid. I dunno. But Democratic Socialism is NOT Socialism. The right just wants the Socialism reserved for the 1% who don’t need it. Cops & Fire Fighters are Socialism. You against that? Also with AI & automation replacing more & more jobs, a UBI will be a necessity in the future. Giving money to regular people actually stimulates the economy more than giving it to the rich.
Don’t ask obvious questions! Just celebrate some random company is being forced to do something you think is best. It’s not possible that there are negatives to the force of violence being applied to what connector our phones uses. As long as it goes my way there is no downside!
I don't care about MAX SPECS ALWAYS, I don't even really care about the port used, but I can see the benefits of a common port on all small rechargeable devices, if the EU wants to regulate this I fail to see any argument in your long post about how Apple is somehow going to be prevented from trying to invent the next port. What Apple may be prevented from doing is having a unique port just for themselves, no one has yet given a concrete example of Apple using their proprietary port for anything special that a generic port everyone could use can't accomplish.
Lightning was great when the only other options were the 30-pin connector and micro-B, and it could have been a great replacement to USB if Apple had pushed for lightning to be the standard for USB-C. They didn't, not because they couldn't have but because they wanted to keep that nice lightning lock in and MFi Licensing program going.
Apple is free to contribute to the next great port design and push for its adoption so this law has only imaginary effect on preventing future innovation. There is nothing here preventing a new standard being rolled out in the future.
People keep bouncing around on innovation without providing nay concrete examples beyond the shape of the port which Apple could've pushed to make the standard (as I keep repeating).
Apple isn't hurt by this, innovation isn't hurt by this, a standard port hurts no one and helps everyone. If the port chosen is less than ideal that is partially Apple's fault for fighting this process every step of the way rather than contributing productively.
Nope.
I’m simply saying it’s wrong to force a company to use a standard/interface where there’s no inherent right or wrong answer as to what that standard/interface should be.
I’m saying apple (or any other company) should be free to adopt the interface(s) they believe best for the product they’re creating.
Right, because if MicroUSB would have been forced Apple would have totally spent the R&D on developing Lightning since they wouldn't have been able to use it. Makes sense.
Nothing needs to be changed. The standard putts a minimum floor for things to meet. If a device wants to implement a 1.000w 1000GB/S transfer speed they are free so do so. Nothing tells them to not provide something better, just that they can’t provide something worse.
This what happend in 2009 and what happened 2009 is reason why it will not‘t happen again. Adapters are not an option anymore. The port has to be part of the device. Game over.
I don‘t like this regulation. But it is Apples fault. There was more than enough time for industry to agree to a common standard, but Apple blocked. So the EU had to regulate with the so called Anti Apple law. And there is more to come. The digital markets act (DMA) is about Apple, Google, Amazon and Facebook.
Wrong based on what metric? Companies are forced to use standard interfaces all the time. It's why we have a standard interface for charing electric vehicles and Tesla wasn't allowed to use their own. Everyone benefited from that because now teslas don't need adapters at non-tesla chargers and non-teslas can theoretically use the Tesla charging stations.
You asked me for an answer. Here you go:
No, it's not the governments role to change a product so that I can use it excactly how I want to use it.
But it's the governments role to enable free markets (by defining interfaces so that companies can develop products that can be connected), it's the governments role to break up monopolies (and to help avoid consumers being locked in), it's the governments role to help protect the environment (reducing the amount of electronic waste, at least in the future), it's the governments role to set reliable guidelines for companies (so they can plan their developments, product releases or purchases and can compete on a level playing ground).
It's not Apple's role to decide what port their charging cable is connected to (it's standard USB - not 7V, so strange plug, no weird power adapter). It's not Apple's role to decide the voltage of the wall outlet. It's not Apple's role to decide on the shape of the wall outlet. It's not Apple's role to decide on the mobile phone standard (LTE, 3G or GSM in the past). It's not Apple's role to decide on the radio frequency regulations, on the safety regulations or against misleading advertisement. So why should it be important for Apple to stick to an old port that has become a niche, with the entire world around it embracing a superior USB-C?
...which is nothing compared to the number of USB-C devices...
But ideally, people continue using their Lightning devices for as long as possible (where necessary and appropriate, with adapters).
I think your confused about who can have more information on what is important to their outcomes and purchasing decisions … millions of people or a few committee members.
Why would the connector need to be standardized to allow choice? It’s not an experiment it’s a multifactorial choice. We can easily observe that very few care about this enough that it influences their decisions. You missed that from the comment you quoted by saying people have invested money on USBC. Not relevant. The money that matters is the consumers money. Companies invest in busts all the time.
Imagine the govt said all High def discs had to be HD-DVD and someone said … let’s let people money decide. You would be saying … businesses invested a lot in HD-DvD. Yes but no one cares. It’s consumers that matter because the sum of their choices makes the end outcome not the suppliers choices.
Anyway…bureaucrats do what they do…drunk with power and trying to “make the world a better place” they screw up stuff more often than make it better. If they just wait this will all sort itself out.
MicroUSB had so many drawbacks that USB-C doesn't have in terms of flexibility and future capabilities, it's probably why they weren't mandated to include a microB port on their phones...
As I keep pointing out, Apple is making everything harder on themselves by not working to help develop a good shared port (they did help with the USB-C). If they want a good high quality standard, advocate for that, but they don't want that, they want vendor lock in more than they actually care about the quality of the port.