It is stupid legislation like this that gives businesses their foot in the door to government control. It then becomes an incestual relationship - you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours. If we stuck to principled powers that the government should have, then there would be far fewer backroom agreements because companies would already know that the government couldn't 'go there'.
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 Reaches Agreement to Force iPhone and AirPods to Adopt USB-C by Fall 2024
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
or they phase them out by 2024. By that point only the the SE2 and regular iPad (which seems to be getting regular updates) would need a refresh as they should have a 2023 model and 2024 iPhone with USB-C ports so they can relegate the 2023 model (iPhone 15) to budget status. And they could still keep selling older lighting devices in specific markets like India and the US if they wanted to while they cleared out inventory.
A lot of news make this as it is something special against Apple and that was somewhat to be expected (everything seems to be related to Apple in some way, just more clicks) but it really isn't the case.
This is about everything.
This is about everything.
When apple come up with Lightning it was better than the micro / mini usb stuff which was popular back then, whilst I’m not against Apple switching to USB c it should
be down to apple not a government - it’s connectors the EU are controlling today but where is a line drawn where governments won’t try interfere? Apple will have no motivation to come up with a better connector than USB C because they wouldn’t be allowed to put it on their devices without sharing it with the rest of the market.
be down to apple not a government - it’s connectors the EU are controlling today but where is a line drawn where governments won’t try interfere? Apple will have no motivation to come up with a better connector than USB C because they wouldn’t be allowed to put it on their devices without sharing it with the rest of the market.
Imo, apple is right about stifling innovation. Hopefully in the US we get the innovative version of the iPhone.
Lightning is a far better design physically. USB-C is a horrible design in comparisson. Blame Apple for updating it to current transfer speeds.
As long-time Apple users, we are simply not accustomed to be given choice.
The cost of that choice would be setting up production of two distinct devices. (Which is bound to cost more than doing so for a single device.) Then putting them up for sale and, if the sales are strongly in one direction, possibly ending up with containers full of devices with the other option. And possibly having to significantly discount the ones which didn't sell well.
Apple didn't offer 30-pin and Lightning options of the same device, did they? So why should they do so for a future device using USB-C rather than Lightning?
We consumers really don't have attribute by attribute freedom to choose. We get offered a number of devices each with a whole bundle of specs already decided. And, all too often, cost is a major determinant rather than specs - and we go for the lowest cost that is good enough.
Last edited:
By innovative you mean the current USB 2.0?
People seem to forget that USB-C did not exist commercially when Apple introduced lightning and Apple committed to not changing the port again (for about a decade) so people would not have any fears about buying accessories. Had USB-C been a little quicker to the market I'm sure we would be in a different situation now, but the 30-pin connector had to go and they couldn't wait for a committee to decide on a standard. I don't think anyone, even Apple, anticipated USB-C being adopted as a standard as quickly as it was (and it still wasn't quick)
Almost every phone that came out at the same time as the iPhone 5 used either Micro USB-A or Micro USB-B like Samsung - and those were very short-lived and awkward to use for a phone.
Last edited:
No I was more referring to lightning 2 or whatever apple might want to come up with.
Your arguments are tiresome. Save us all from reading your endless pointless questions and just tell us why you are so sure that Lightning is better than USB-C because, frankly, practically no one agrees with you and welcomes the transition to USB-C.
I watch a lot of repair videos and I see way way more instances of busted USB-C ports than Lightning ports. Of course your mileage may vary and the overall number of broken ports is probably well within the norm for both types.
For me, in my family, we probably have had over 50 devices with Lightning since the iPhone 5 (2012) and zero have needed the port to be repaired or replaced. I've had maybe a handful of lightning cables just "wear out", but I'd much rather have the cable wear out than the port.
I don't have that many USB-C devices in the family ... my work laptop, a few Nintendo Switch's, a few school Chromebooks, and Nintendo controllers. None have failed, either, so I have that going for me. The only thing is that the Nintendos can be a bit finicky on whether it wants to charge or not, but that might be more on Nintendo than the USB port itself.
The difference between having USB-C on the iPhone vs. iPads/Macs is that the iPhone is typically used at a much higher usage rate. Plus, at least for me, it spends way more time in my pocket, collecting lint and other crap. It's used in outdoor environments way more often. So the ports may end up "abused" more often. Plus, my phone gets charge at least once a night, and with an aging battery, it's charged at least twice a day, plus I tend to charge it in my car when using GPS. So the port gets much more usage than my iPad (which I might charge twice a week, at most).
I don't disagree that the current Lightning connector is long in the tooth. There are things that it just can't do. But if Apple could up the capabilities of the current Lightning port to include the advantages of USB3/USB4 and be able to keep compatibility with current Lightning accessories and devices, I'd rather they do that. Alas, that probably won't happen and I'll be dragged into the USB-C standard eventually.
This is why don't be surprised that Apple had quietly prototyped both the regular iPhone 14 and the iPhone 14 Pro models with either Lightning or USB Type C ports with Thunderbolt 3/USB 3.2 Gen 2 (10 gigabits/second transfer rate) ports. With the EU regulation now coming into force, Apple may just choose the USB Type C port iPhone 14 model to start production probably in July 2022.
Robust as in less prone to breakage when clumsy user trips over cord or yanks it from the wall or other act of negligence? How about USB-C being capable of faster data transfers, faster charging and works better all around for the 99% of people who aren't clumsy?
You know what is more robust about USB-C? It's a thicker cable. While I've never had a USB-C connector fail, I've had dozens of Lightning cables fail because the fragile, thin cable breaks where it enters the connector. Bends, tugs, etc., and that super-skinny cable fails. Apple-brand cables are just as bad (or worse) than others. That's NOT robust.
The male Lightning connector itself becomes flakey. The tiny contacts get dirty and tarnished being openly exposed to everything. USB-C male connector has contacts deep inside connector making them less susceptible to wear and tear by direct contact with other items in a tech bag, purse, glove compartment, etc.
Last edited:
The American view of freedom and rights as defined by the ability to sell whatever you want is not a shared value anywhere else on earth. How is that hard to understand? The idea that Apple has some divine right to sell stuff and that the people of the EU do not have the right to regulate what is sold is frankly laughable.
If you want to sell a phone in the EU, it has to meet certain standards. It can't cause radio interference, has to support all of the official languages, and it has to have USB-C.
There shouldn't be anything controversial about any of those requirements.
This isn't any different than saying car brake lights have to be red in color and that turn signals must be amber. It might limit your freedom as a designer to make the perfect RGB-lit gamer car, but that isn't as important as having a common standard.
Last edited:
Congratulations, you just employed a few hundreds friends and family members of government officials, with this idea. 😄
🤡 Lightening is considerably a more robust connector, provides positive locking, and requires less physical space on the device. The only thing that Apple is guilty of is not updating the specs. I'd take a lightning style thunderbolt connection over the the current design any day of the week.
And now that the EU is involved in the design of electronics, good luck ever progressing past what USB-C is currently spec'd at.
The way this is usually done is that the actual technical specification is separate from the law and can be updated when needed, and the technical working group maintaining the specification will have members from the interested companies.
Imagine if this was back when we had micro USB as a "standard".....they would have said...can't have usb-c - it will generate too much waste.
over reaching idiots
over reaching idiots
Wrong. These companies that have to comply with rules are all participating in the development of USB-C and/if whatever comes next after it. If they reach whatever the limit of USB-C is, they'll develop something new.
Except, of course, rear turn signals on USA vehicles!
Having occasionally followed a US vehicle in the UK, I am astonished that anyone would want red rather than amber! Takes me a moment to realise it isn't them dabbing their brakes - because it is so odd to UK drivers.
(Didn't it come about from over-zealous application of the "only red at rear" principle?)
There is also a minor exemption that can allow some old (pre-1965) cars to have white front indicators.
I have been clear that I want USB-C. I too welcome the transition to USB-C.
I am [not] sorry that wanting government to have limited powers is tiresome. History is awash with 'very tired' people that thought the government could do everything for them.
