EU Warns Apple About Limiting Speeds of Uncertified USB-C Cables for iPhones

[red_freezer]

If the EU were so good at electronics why don’t they just make their own devices and stop telling real companies how to make good products! Seems like a bunch of stuffed shirts making decisions about things they have no idea about. Every think about where the fines go and who’s really paying for them and all the attorneys? This is probably why your iPhone cost 1400 instead of 1000. Use your head sheeple!

What do you mean? EU is highly present in the electronics business, they just don't produce a lot of consumer grade electronics. Without ASML of Netherlands there wouldn't be no Apple, Intel, AMD chips, without Bosch, Siemens, Philips, our cars would still be horses, 80% of medical equipment wouldn't exist.

Look at it that way, EU has corporations that enable other corporations to manufacture their stuff. 60% of the metal machining equipment is designed and produced in the EU, the other 30% in Japan. 80% of robotics in factories and assembly line machinery (one offs and standardized) are products of the EU.

As said, European corporations just don't make a lot of consumer electronics, mostly targeting the industry. Not to say there isn't any, Philips, Braun, etc. still produce electronics for the consumer.

As for why there are government level of regulations, it's because dumb consumers don't kill themselves. For example, a blender not blending until the lid is on and locked, is a governmental regulation, otherwise half this forum would walk around without fingers. The same is true with other standards, not just health & safety.

 

[jlc1978]

As for why there are government level of regulations, it's because dumb consumers don't kill themselves. For example, a blender not blending until the lid is on and locked, is a governmental regulation, otherwise half this forum would walk around without fingers. The same is true with other standards, not just health & safety.

Not just consumer but producers a well. Government regulations create barriers to entry that limit competition and thus help keep prices higher.

 

[red_freezer]

Legitimate companies will, but one making ultra cheap ones will have no qualms about labelling cables any way they want.



However, nothing prevents an unscrupulous manufacturer from labeling a cable as 100W but not actually supporting it in it's protocol chip; or using the right chip but a higher gauge wire that can't handle the load and hiding it with a thicker outer shell so it looks like a 5A cable.

Does that mean the reg is bad? No; just that it will not magically result in one cable that meets the spec to rule them all.

Cheap cables will sill exist and cause issues.



Apple could fix that with a redesign of the MagSafe puck or next watch. AirPods already can use either charger if they have a MagSafe case. There is no reason to not be able to extend the iPhone puck to charge a watch as well.

A) Android phones and plethora of other devices use USB PD charging for at least 5 years now, and there was no major "cable-gate" fiasco of fires and deaths both of humans and devices. Frankly, all my devices are on USB-C nowdays, from monitors, to audio interfaces to TVs, the only thing still on micro USB is the lone Playstation 4 controller.

B) If you want to sell cables inside the EU those cables need to be tested to their specifications, if they fail the test, they can not be sold. It's another one of those pesky governmental regulations. Similarly to why they don't have the mass pandemic of memory card/stick fake capacity issues in the EU, because scams like that can not be sold withing the EU, as things are tested before put on the shelves. Of course there is still stuff that gets put up, untested and its a scam, but it gets removed and everyone involved in it fined, from amazon to ebay etc.

C) If you decide to order unknown cables from aliexpress or alibaba, and they turn out to have fake specifications, that is your fault.

D) The EU regulates for the EU, not the world. If Apple wants to sell an iPhone without the USB-C port in the US they are free to do so.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Not just consumer but producers a well. Government regulations create barriers to entry that limit competition and thus help keep prices higher.

Barriers aren't bad. If you can't make product x at minimum security and quality standards then you shouldn't produce that thing.

Somthing being cheap isn't good by default. I can make supercheap goods that also is incredibly dangerous and toxic to humans and nature.

 

[jlc1978]

B) If you want to sell cables inside the EU those cables need to be tested to their specifications, if they fail the test, they can not be sold. It's another one of those pesky governmental regulations. Similarly to why they don't have the mass pandemic of memory card/stick fake capacity issues in the EU, because scams like that can not be sold withing the EU, as things are tested before put on the shelves. Of course there is still stuff that gets put up, untested and its a scam, but it gets removed and everyone involved in it fined, from amazon to ebay etc.

Can you point to some actual cases? The only one I could find was a trademark lawsuit, and the Court of Justice of the European Union found Amazon was not lible for actions by third party sellers.

But to my point, all the regulations in the world will not stop unscrupulous sellers from claiming complaiance while not actually doing what is required.

If people think the new mandate will end fakes and counterfeit packaging while bringing in one cable for all devices, I think they will be sorely disappointed.

C) If you decide to order unknown cables from aliexpress or alibaba, and they turn out to have fake specifications, that is your fault.

And there is very little the EU can do about it, although recent changes to the UPU tariff rates have raised the costs of shipping from China so they offer less of a price advantage.

D) The EU regulates for the EU, not the world. If Apple wants to sell an iPhone without the USB-C port in the US they are free to do so.

Sure, just as EU countries can decide not to sell a product in the US if they don't meet US regulations, such as cars.

My guess is Apple was going to USB-C anyway and would not be surprised if they influenced the date the reg takes affect.

 

[jlc1978]

Barriers aren't bad. If you can't make product x at minimum security and quality standards then you shouldn't produce that thing.

Never said they were; just that they benefit entrenched companies by creating barriers to entry; whether they be safety / quality standards, reporting requirements, etc. that add to the costs of entering a market.

Somthing being cheap isn't good by default. I can make supercheap goods that also is incredibly dangerous and toxic to humans and nature.

Sure, and many will buy them on price alone if they are cheaper than quality products.

Look at the success of aliexpress et. al. selling a lot of knockoffs for cheap.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Never said they were; just that they benefit entrenched companies by creating barriers to entry; whether they be safety / quality standards, reporting requirements, etc. that add to the costs of entering a market.

I know, I'm just pointing out this isn't an argument. As its a neutral statment. Being entrenched isn't bad as long as you don't abuse it.

Sure, and many will buy them on price alone if they are cheaper than quality products.

That is why it's illeg. Such as having lead in gasoline or using some gasses in refrigerant. As well as mixing meat with sawdust.

Look at the success of aliexpress et. al. selling a lot of knockoffs for cheap.

Indeed and that is why such things are confiscated and destroyed in EU for failing to meet the legal requirements to be imported, and the ones that are legal will go in as normal unless they pass the customs etc.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Not just consumer but producers a well. Government regulations create barriers to entry that limit competition and thus help keep prices higher.

In this case it should force component prices down as a standard USB-C across the industry makes supply chains easier to manage and manufacturing and tooling costs should be lower too.

 

[jlc1978]

I know, I'm just pointing out this isn't an argument. As its a neutral statment. Being entrenched isn't bad as long as you don't abuse it.

I agree; I am always surprised when people think regulation somehow sticks it to big companies when it can help limit competion and thus price pressure.

Indeed and that is why such things are confiscated and destroyed in EU for failing to meet the legal requirements to be imported, and the ones that are legal will go in as normal unless they pass the customs etc.

I wonder how much is caught. The EU and US have various laws to stop such items but I'm guessing far more make it through than get stopped; and most that get stoped are the container loads, as they should..

In this case it should force component prices down as a standard USB-C across the industry makes supply chains easier to manage and manufacturing and tooling costs should be lower too.

I'm betting there will be little saved as plugs have been standard for a while, if not between Apple and others, so supply chains are probably pretty well optimized.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Not just consumer but producers a well. Government regulations create barriers to entry that limit competition and thus help keep prices higher.

Let‘s look back at the topic of this thread: Apple limiting functionality of non-MFi certified USB-C cables.
That is Apple creating barriers, limiting conpetition and keeping prices higher.
If government institutes regulation that prohibits Apple from limiting functionality of standard-conforming cables, that removes barriers and encourages competition,

But to my point, all the regulations in the world will not stop unscrupulous sellers from claiming complaiance while not actually doing what is required.

Neither will Apple’s MFi program.
It’s a cash grab.

 

[jlc1978]

Let‘s look back at the topic of this thread: Apple limiting functionality of non-MFi certified USB-C cables.
That is Apple creating barriers, limiting conpetition and keeping prices higher.
If government institutes regulation that prohibits Apple from limiting functionality of standard-conforming cables, that removes barriers and encourages competition,

Nothing in the directive prevents Apple or any other manufacturer from extending a products functionality as long as it also meets the directive's requirements.

A compliant cable will still deliver the required functionality, a MiFi cable could add addition features; something expressly allowed in the directive and USB specification. Data is one area it could be used to extend functionality.

As for regulation, by establishing minimum standards it helps incumbents by making entry harder; no matter the regulation's intent. This is not to say regulation is wrong, but to point out on impact that is often ignored when discussing regulations.

 

[daveathall]

Listen to all those apologising and making excuses for Apple. "We want to pay more so that Apple can achieve what everyone else does."

It's a charging cable, Apple should charge their devices at the same speed as others and not apply a premium price for that privilege. Have you heard yourselves?

 

[jlc1978]

Listen to all those apologising and making excuses for Apple. "We want to pay more so that Apple can achieve what everyone else does."

It's a charging cable, Apple should charge their devices at the same speed as others and not apply a premium price for that privilege. Have you heard yourselves?

I don't think that is what's being said in general.

What I, and others, have said, is MiFi and compliant cables can coexist and that is explicitly allowed by the directive and the USB-C specification.

As long as a manufacturer includes the speeds as outlined in the spec, they are free to add any additional functionality as long as it does not interfere with a standard compliant cable for charging. A manufacturer could add high speed data via a proprietary protocol and be fully compliant with the spec.

At any rate, what Apple or others may do is simply conjecture at this point; and if the EU wants to completely rule out any proprietary implementations alongside the ones required they should amend the directive.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I agree; I am always surprised when people think regulation somehow sticks it to big companies when it can help limit competion and thus price pressure.

Well this one isn't supposed to do that. It's to make everyone have USB c so everything that isn't phones as well such as Logitech keyboards and mouse etc.

I wonder how much is caught. The EU and US have various laws to stop such items but I'm guessing far more make it through than get stopped; and most that get stoped are the container loads, as they should..

The vast majority, about 20% is illegal knockoffs or copies etc

I'm betting there will be little saved as plugs have been standard for a while, if not between Apple and others, so supply chains are probably pretty well optimized.

Well it gets cheaper as its everyone having it even cheap items than normally would use micro usb are now forced to have USB c.

Nothing in the directive prevents Apple or any other manufacturer from extending a products functionality as long as it also meets the directive's requirements.

A compliant cable will still deliver the required functionality, a MiFi cable could add addition features; something expressly allowed in the directive and USB specification. Data is one area it could be used to extend functionality.

Well yes that's completely fine, nobody cares if they do more as long as the minimum standard is maintained.

As for regulation, by establishing minimum standards it helps incumbents by making entry harder; no matter the regulation's intent. This is not to say regulation is wrong, but to point out on impact that is often ignored when discussing regulations.

Well no because this isn't of interest to the regulators. Monopolistic buisnesses are completely legal and if it's one buisness or a million have little value as long the principle of fair competition is maintained and a bunch of other values and regulations

But they have introduced new gatekeeper defenitions that forces companies that are deemed to have a big impact to be banned from doing certain buisness practices not for the sake of competition to them, but for the sake of the competition of the market they control.

Example as we all know. They don't care about competetors to the ios Appstore, but they do care about the market competition of apps that aren't competing against apple or others but have a major impact shaping the competition

 

[daveathall]

I don't think that is what's being said in general.

What I, and others, have said, is MiFi and compliant cables can coexist and that is explicitly allowed by the directive and the USB-C specification.

As long as a manufacturer includes the speeds as outlined in the spec, they are free to add any additional functionality as long as it does not interfere with a standard compliant cable for charging. A manufacturer could add high speed data via a proprietary protocol and be fully compliant with the spec.

At any rate, what Apple or others may do is simply conjecture at this point; and if the EU wants to completely rule out any proprietary implementations alongside the ones required they should amend the directive.

Well, I quite agree, but bottom line, Apple is charging more for the uprated charging speeds, perhaps semantics, but I do get your valid point.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Well, I quite agree, but bottom line, Apple is charging more for the uprated charging speeds, perhaps semantics, but I do get your valid point.

Well not even that. The MFI charging standard is completely supported at every level by USB-PD.

Its just a quality control and paying for a brand. With nothing uneque compared To USB -IF

 

[jlc1978]

Well this one isn't supposed to do that. It's to make everyone have USB c so everything that isn't phones as well such as Logitech keyboards and mouse etc.

I agree, but a number of comments have been of teh "EU is sicking it to Apple," when as you point out that is hardly the case.

Well it gets cheaper as its everyone having it even cheap items than normally would use micro usb are now forced to have USB c.

It will be interesting to see how teh transition finally shakes out.

Well yes that's completely fine, nobody cares if they do more as long as the minimum standard is maintained.

Except of course some commentators on rumor sites...

Well no because this isn't of interest to the regulators.

My point was not that it is of interest to the regulators, just that it is a natural outgrowth of regulation.

Look at USB-C specification. Apple and other companies created a spec that was broad enough to meet whatever purposes they wanted to use it for in the future, and now that is the spec all must follow. I doubt any of the USB participants are upset over the EU rule.

 

[makitango]

Nothing in the directive prevents Apple or any other manufacturer from extending a products functionality as long as it also meets the directive's requirements.

A compliant cable will still deliver the required functionality, a MiFi cable could add addition features; something expressly allowed in the directive and USB specification. Data is one area it could be used to extend functionality.

As for regulation, by establishing minimum standards it helps incumbents by making entry harder; no matter the regulation's intent. This is not to say regulation is wrong, but to point out on impact that is often ignored when discussing regulations.

If you put in a chip that disallows the spec of the cable to be executed even if certified with the USB consortium, there is nothing to excuse that kind of behaviour from the side of Apple. This nonsense is not yet active on any Apple hardware which uses USB-C and the other hardware which already uses it, uses it vastly with higher speeds of charging and data transfers, fully compliant with the specs and not hampered by any proprietary Mfi chips.

Well, I quite agree, but bottom line, Apple is charging more for the uprated charging speeds, perhaps semantics, but I do get your valid point.

Apple wants to stop us from enjoying the cable speeds from the cables we already have and use with Apple hardware and have us buy the same cable again with an Mfi chip just for the iPhone. Way to go with e-waste just so TC can continue with his bean-counting obsession.

 

[jlc1978]

If you put in a chip that disallows the spec of the cable to be executed even if certified with the USB consortium, there is nothing to excuse that kind of behaviour from the side of Apple.

Which is why I said:

Nothing in the directive prevents Apple or any other manufacturer from extending a products functionality as long as it also meets the directive's requirements.

That's different than disabling required functionality.

If they keep compliant and extend the features beyond that required they are doing exactly what the EU allows and requires.

Apple wants to stop us from enjoying the cable speeds from the cables we already have and use with Apple hardware and have us buy the same cable again with an Mfi chip just for the iPhone. Way to go with e-waste just so TC can continue with his bean-counting obsession.

No one has any idea what Apple will do except those working on the USB-C iPhone.

Everything else is conjecture, hyperbole, and rumors that has gotten many all worked up.

 

[makitango]

Which is why I said:

Nothing in the directive prevents Apple or any other manufacturer from extending a products functionality as long as it also meets the directive's requirements.

That's different than disabling required functionality.

If they keep compliant and extend the features beyond that required they are doing exactly what the EU allows and requires.




No one has any idea what Apple will do except those working on the USB-C iPhone.

Everything else is conjecture, hyperbole, and rumors that has gotten many all worked up.

We all know Apple well enough that this is not just rumors. Apple wants to see if the EU will let this pass, and they won‘t. Now Apple plays the same risky game that Epic played. I will enjoy it from the first row.

 

[jlc1978]

We all know Apple well enough that this is not just rumors.

Right. Because MR posters are always 100% accurate when it comes to foretelling what Apple will do.

Apple wants to see if the EU will let this pass, and they won‘t.

Apple can implement MiFi and be 100% in compliance with the letter and spirt of the directive. It explicity allows for extending the capabilities, and does not address data at all.

If, and that's a big IF, Apple implemented MiFi for some very high speed data transfer on a high end iPhone, a compliant cable would still charge at whatever PD level Apple incorporates; which is all the directive requires.

Nothing requires a cable to be 100% compatible with any implementation beyond what is in the directive.

Now Apple plays the same risky game that Epic played. I will enjoy it from the first row.

Following the law is hardly risky.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Listen to all those apologising and making excuses for Apple. "We want to pay more so that Apple can achieve what everyone else does."

It's a charging cable, Apple should charge their devices at the same speed as others and not apply a premium price for that privilege. Have you heard yourselves?

I agree. I’ve never seen such passion and wasted hours discussing something so insignificant as a charging cable in my life.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

We all know Apple well enough that this is not just rumors. Apple wants to see if the EU will let this pass, and they won‘t. Now Apple plays the same risky game that Epic played. I will enjoy it from the first row.

I would say apple isn't dumb.
Thers no reward in this and a 100% guarantee EU will fine apple out of their nose. Thers not a single historical example when they haven't followed the letter of the law.

Epic didn't play a risky game as they attacked legislators and not the necessarily the law of the day. And we se they got 100% of what they wanted.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I agree, but a number of comments have been of teh "EU is sicking it to Apple," when as you point out that is hardly the case.

Indeed and they are just as wrong as the comments saying EU is targeting apple or American companies when it's simply a behavior that is targeted

It will be interesting to see how teh transition finally shakes out.

Indeed considering it's ha hard line and for me I can finally replace some old thing I have as I have just waited to get a new keyboard but didn't want it to have micro usb

Except of course some commentators on rumor sites...

Indeed considering the rumor have zero merit. And MEPs are as in any political system free to say dumb things just as anyother elected politician who don't know what they're talking about( the one commenting isn't writing the legislation)

My point was not that it is of interest to the regulators, just that it is a natural outgrowth of regulation.

Look at USB-C specification. Apple and other companies created a spec that was broad enough to meet whatever purposes they wanted to use it for in the future, and now that is the spec all must follow. I doubt any of the USB participants are upset over the EU rule.

Indeed and sometimes that's also the intention depending on what the goal is.

Such as the USB legislation effectively intrenches the USB-IF for the next 5 years or so

 

[AppliedMicro]

Nothing in the directive prevents Apple or any other manufacturer from extending a products functionality as long as it also meets the directive's requirements.

True, but doesn’t change my (general) point. The current USB-C specification has ample headroom to for extending current functionality (faster charging or transfer speeds) through standard-based means rather than proprietary means.

If Apple wants faster charging that exceeds the minimum of the regulation, there’s no needs to do it proprietarily - except to act as a giant cash grab to rake in more money from consumers. Same is true for faster transfer speeds.

As for regulation, by establishing minimum standards it helps incumbents by making entry harder; no matter the regulation's intent

Debatable. USB-C is a (by now) well-established and AFAIK royalty-free standard. It‘s a very low barrier to clear and there are lots of USB-C products from small or (if you will) non-incumbent manufacturers.

On the flip side, the regulation discourages incumbents with large marketshare from coming up with and implementing proprietary solutions. When an incumbent company with high marketshare (such as Apple) uses proprietary connectors on their devices and accessories, that creates entry barriers for accessory makers that are higher than a government-mandated standard.

I’ve never seen such passion and wasted hours discussing something so insignificant as a charging cable in my life.