EU Proposes to Force Apple to Switch iPhone, iPad, and AirPods From Lightning to USB-C

[beanbaguk]

I love this! ❤️

Anti-EU waffle 🧇
Anti-pro-consumer-regulation waffle 🧇
Pro-Brexit waffle 🧇
And conspiracy theorist nonsense.

Here’s news. If it’s approved (and it likely will now), there is nothing you can do about it! 😂

If you think Apple will pull out of the EU because of this, you are cloud cuckoo! 🤪

 

[polyphenol]

Not real happy on having usb-c connectors on many devices. This level of micro-management inhibits innovation, especially when the next connector that a smaller version of lightning and "better" than usb-c comes along. But you can't legislate incompetence.

Lots of criticism but precious few suggestions as to what else could be done to try to improve interconnections and reduce need for multiple chargers/power supplies.

 

[grandM]

A smartphone connector is NOT something the gov’t should be focused on. It’s more than a stretch to say that it’s in the public’s best interest. The public can, and usually does, decide what’s in their best interest… with their hard earned dollars.

yes

 

[I7guy]

Lots of criticism but precious few suggestions as to what else could be done to try to improve interconnections and reduce need for multiple chargers/power supplies.

[...]

Easy, peasy. Let the market decide.

 

[vipergts2207]

Easy, peasy. Let the market decide.

They tried that and a decade later there are still three different connectors on the market. Here's the thing, realistically nobody buys their smartphone based upon the type of charging port it has. You're pretending like there are bona fide market forces in this domain, when in reality there are a hundred other items and features that are of far greater concern in making a smartphone purchase.

 

[I7guy]

They tried that and a decade later there are still three different connectors on the market. Here's the thing, realistically nobody buys their smartphone based upon the type of charging port it has. You're pretending like there are bona fide market forces in this domain, when in reality there are a hundred other items and features that are of far greater concern in making a smartphone purchase.

I'm stating government interference at this level will not turn out well for the consumer. Well meaning intentions and all of that.

 

[vipergts2207]

I'm stating government interference at this level will not turn out well for the consumer. Well meaning intentions and all of that.

And I'm stating that your solution of "let the market decide" has proven not to accomplish the goal of "what else could be done to try to improve interconnections and reduce need for multiple chargers/power supplies."

 

[I7guy]

And I'm stating that your solution of "let the market decide" has proven not to accomplish the goal of "what else could be done to try to improve interconnections and reduce need for multiple chargers/power supplies."

And I'm stating that this will force a solution, maybe solving one problem but creating others that in the aggregate negate the solution. The best bet is to let the market decide. This is not a safety or societal issue.

 

[vipergts2207]

And I'm stating that this will force a solution, maybe solving one problem but creating others that in the aggregate negate the solution. The best bet is to let the market decide. This is not a safety or societal issue.

Maybe it will create a new problem, maybe it won't. My sincere guess is that it will not, as I've said, everything is going wireless anyway. Almost entirely the sole reason anyone even plugs their phone in anymore is simply to charge it, so the fear of some super awesome new connector coming along that will supplant both USB-C and lightning because of some rich new feature set is rather far fetched. The incentive simply isn't there at this point.

And in any case, none of what you stated makes "let the market decide" a correct answer to "what else could be done to try to improve interconnections and reduce need for multiple chargers/power supplies." It's been tried for a long time and has failed to reach the stated goal. Proof that it's incorrect relies not just on theory, but evidence from years of actual real-world practice.

 

[I7guy]

Maybe it will create a new problem, maybe it won't. My sincere guess is that it will not, as I've said, everything is going wireless anyway. Almost entirely the sole reason anyone even plugs their phone in anymore is simply to charge it, so the fear of some super awesome new connector coming along that will supplant both USB-C and lightning because of some rich new feature set is rather far fetched. The incentive simply isn't there at this point.

And in any case, none of what you stated makes "let the market decide" a correct answer to "what else could be done to try to improve interconnections and reduce need for multiple chargers/power supplies." It's been tried for a long time and has failed to reach the stated goal. Proof that it's incorrect relies not just on theory, but evidence from years of actual real-world practice.

In the spirit of the post, allowing government to usurp user choice is not the correct answer either because imo, it disincentives innovation. Having government micro-manage what should be consumer choice is never the way to go. Proof that government interference doesn't work is to look closely at the AT&T breakup and see if consumer choice in cell phone really is head and shoulders above the rest of the world.

 

[jlc1978]

Here’s news. If it’s approved (and it likely will now), there is nothing you can do about it! 😂

However, by the time it takes effect it'll probabaly be moot since phones more than likely will have moved past a wired connection.

If you think Apple will pull out of the EU because of this, you are cloud cuckoo! 🤪

Of course not, there's money to be made.

Lots of criticism but precious few suggestions as to what else could be done to try to improve interconnections and reduce need for multiple chargers/power supplies.

While USB-C has that potential a common connector may not lead to universal charging solutions, given the different charging voltages, rtes, pinouts, etc.

And in any case, none of what you stated makes "let the market decide" a correct answer to "what else could be done to try to improve interconnections and reduce need for multiple chargers/power supplies." It's been tried for a long time and has failed to reach the stated goal.

Maybe the goal is wrong and the market is merely saying that by its actions. Simply because the market does not achieve a goal doesn't imply market failure.

There is no evidence the new EU directive, if passed and put into law, will achieve that goal either. If it fails to will you concede government regulation is not a correct answer?

Proof that it's incorrect relies not just on theory, but evidence from years of actual real-world practice.

How so? Your assumption is the stated goal is a valid one, which you have not proven, and went on to claim markets therefore don't work.

 

[vipergts2207]

There is no evidence the new EU directive, if passed and put into law, will achieve that goal either. If it fails to will you concede government regulation is not a correct answer?



How so? Your assumption is the stated goal is a valid one, which you have not proven, and went on to claim markets therefore don't work.

The only way the EU law would fail is if Apple and other companies flout it (they won't) or if they pull out of the EU (they won't). They'd be committing malpractice by costing the company and investors billions of dollars per year in revenue that would instead go to competitors.

 

[jlc1978]

The only way the EU law would fail is if Apple and other companies flout it (they won't) or if they pull out of the EU (they won't). They'd be committing malpractice by costing the company and investors billions of dollars per year in revenue that would instead go to competitors.

Not necessarily. Just because a power supply and cable have the same USB - C connector doesn't imply they will work with al devices. A company could build a device that requires PD current and voltage and another a USB-2 spec supply and voltage. In such cases, interoperability is not a given and you may wind up with 2 sets anyway even though they have the same plugs. A company could include handshaking over data line to validate the power supply meets the required specifications and refuse to charge from a non-verified charger.

All of which is possible but unlikely; but there are paths to not reaching the goal even with a new set of laws.

More likely is a wireless future with each company having its own wireless solution; leaving the EU to take another 10 - 14 years to sort things out.

 

[vipergts2207]

Not necessarily. Just because a power supply and cable have the same USB - C connector doesn't imply they will work with al devices. A company could build a device that requires PD current and voltage and another a USB-2 spec supply and voltage. In such cases, interoperability is not a given and you may wind up with 2 sets anyway even though they have the same plugs. A company could include handshaking over data line to validate the power supply meets the required specifications and refuse to charge from a non-verified charger.

All of which is possible but unlikely; but there are paths to not reaching the goal even with a new set of laws.

More likely is a wireless future with each company having its own wireless solution; leaving the EU to take another 10 - 14 years to sort things out.

As you admit, that scenario is unlikely, rendering it a bit of a disingenuous argument.

 

[I7guy]

As you admit, that scenario is unlikely, rendering it a bit of a disingenuous argument.

We really don’t know how this will end up. So the posters argument could turn out to be true or Apple could get rid of the port. Or apple could cave. We can surely speculate away.

 

[0924487]

Two questions to the Forum:

1. Is there any actual technological advantage Lightning still has over USB-C? Does it help with waterproofing, charging rates, or anything else? It’s super annoying my new Apple devices, all acquired with in the last year, use different cable standards. Why?
2. The arguement of innovation stifling must be forward-looking, because Apple already uses the USB-C standard. What I assume must happen when something else comes along, like “USB-D,” is that manufacturers must agree on a standard. Apple must not want that, but Apple could also put forward a standard.

1. Profit from MFI
2. Ecosystem rent-seeking

 

[vipergts2207]

We really don’t know how this will end up. So the posters argument could turn out to be true or Apple could get rid of the port. Or apple could cave. We can surely speculate away.

Yes, but it seems to make sense to speculate about likely outcomes, not unlikely ones. Apple could decide to exit the phone business altogether, but what would be the point of discussing something so unlikely?

 

[Michael Scrip]

Profit from MFI

True... someone here said Apple makes $4 every time someone buys an MFI iPhone cable.

Here's the the deal, though.

I've bought five cables in the past 8 years. Hooray for my $20 going to Apple.

But I also buy a $1,200 iPhone every two years.

So for everyone who says Apple makes all their money from dongles and accessories... they make A LOT MORE money from their actual core products.

But Apple being Apple... they're gonna fight for every last dollar possible. Ugh.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Abazigal]

To me, there’s two main issues with going all in on USB-C.

For one, USB-C itself isn’t that unified, with all the different variants flying around. The EU may want to look into that as well, rather than simply focusing on the physical shape of the connector itself.

Second, what happens if in the future, a new connector is discovered that is superior to USB-C, but also mandates a new form factor? Is everyone supposed to wait for the EU to coordinate the move over to this new USB standard? Does this mean that no phone company is allowed to “break rank” and adopt the new charging port?

I think I get where the EU is trying to go with this, but it strikes me as a very superficial and short-sighted move.

 

[0924487]

True... someone here said Apple makes $4 every time someone buys an MFI iPhone cable.

Here's the the deal, though.

I've bought five cables in the past 8 years. Hooray for my $20 going to Apple.

But I also buy a $1,200 iPhone every two years.

So for everyone who says Apple makes all their money from dongles and accessories... they make A LOT MORE money from their actual core products.

But Apple being Apple... they're gonna fight for every last dollar possible. Ugh.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Another reason is, brand awareness and ecosystem lock in.

 

[profcutter]

In the spirit of the post, allowing government to usurp user choice is not the correct answer either because imo, it disincentives innovation. Having government micro-manage what should be consumer choice is never the way to go. Proof that government interference doesn't work is to look closely at the AT&T breakup and see if consumer choice in cell phone really is head and shoulders above the rest of the world.

That actually points to a lack of regulation and a total failure of the government to regulate against monopolies. The fox is in charge of the henhouse. The fact that the US is down to 3 providers tells you that there is no will to enforce anti-monopoly legislation.

 

[profcutter]

Your capitalist and elitist thinking is very concerning.

I would argue that we should give them affordable housing. Everyone deserves to own a home, especially those of who are employed. If not loan, which I agree for low credit clients, then government grant.

About Boeing, it’s was due to “self-regulation”. FAA is a political institution. That’s why I think heads should be professional licensed Engineers instead of politicians. Further, standard making and inspection power should be given to an independent non-profit technical institution like the IEC. FAA should just take care of budgeting, liaison and enforcement.

Exactly. It’s a case of cost-cutting and unwillingness to regulate. Who monitors emissions from cars in the US? The manufacturers. That’s why VW got away with it for so long. The 737 Max was another case of the FAA letting Boeing make and then break the rules. There’s been a steady erasure of regulation in the US since the late 1970s, and it accelerated under Reagan in the 1980s. Putting coal executives in top spots in environmental regulatory agencies is about defanging those regulations and allowing “the market to decide.” The market thought it was a fabulous idea to put lead in paint and gasoline decades after we knew what it did to our health. When there’s no regulation, and no other choices, allowing the market to decide is to allow yourself to be poisoned.

 

[I7guy]

Yes, but it seems to make sense to speculate about likely outcomes, not unlikely ones. Apple could decide to exit the phone business altogether, but what would be the point of discussing something so unlikely?

What’s a lively outcome? Some seemed to think epic had it in the bag and apple wound be found for monopolistic behavior. An unlikely finish. So no one knows where this will go.

 

[I7guy]

That actually points to a lack of regulation and a total failure of the government to regulate against monopolies. The fox is in charge of the henhouse. The fact that the US is down to 3 providers tells you that there is no will to enforce anti-monopoly legislation.

Correct. Having a lightning port on a cell phone is neither here nor there to regulation and government should, imo, stay out of market decisions.

 

[macar00n]

Law can mandate that a new port must be approved and adopted by ISO or IEC, and at the same time, the old port is deprecated. Companies who continue to use the deprecated port will need to pay a punitive royalty that exponentially grows every months.

It‘s like LTE technology, where a lot of companies and research institutions contribute to the pool of patents, but in this case royalty-free specification proposals. For example, Bluetooth has a non-profit SIG or Special Interest Group overseeing its development.

This is a giant waste of time. If a company chose a non-standard port and the standard port was really that good, people simply wouldn't buy devices with the non-standard port. No, let's let luddites argue over how to write their preference for a particular port now into a law that will remain in place indefinitely. Truly one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. Can you imagine if some imbeciles wrote into law 20 years ago that every device has to have a USBA port, and the law just stayed on the books indefinitely? And companies not using the port anymore (all of them) would be paying a punitive fee that never made sense and especially doesn't now, while every company in every other industry does things that are 1000x as bad for the environment with every unit sold and don't have a law telling them not to?