Remember, the EU adapted their standard when a better connector came out. You are basically disproving your own argument here.
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.
Here's Why Apple Hasn't Made a Portless iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No I’m not. The EU adopted because there was a new standard to move to, the Micro-USB regulation was voluntary, not mandatory. There is now zero ROI in developing a new port.
Who’s to say we wouldn’t have been laughing at how big and clunky USB-C was in ten-fifteen years - remember USB-A was considered small when it came out in the 1990s.
Again, the government should not be mandating charging ports. It’s just a bad idea. The free market is perfectly capable of solving that problem on its own.
This is a pretty silly take, to be honest. By your reasoning, USB-C would never have become the standard on phones in the first place because developers would have frozen in place with Micro-USB when the EU first started working on their regulation.
As far as "ROI in developing a new port" - that argument is especially laughable. It was Apple who remained the loan holdout for adopting USB-C, and it was because Apple wanted to continue to lock iPhone users to lightning accessory makers and lock accessory makers into Apple's certification fees. The ROI argument would have left iOwners tied to Apple's flimsy slow connector for another decade while the rest of the world moved on.
USB-A was never a connector used on any phone anywhere and it is still featured as the standard computer-side connector for most devices today. Yet despite the regulation from the EU and the "low ROI" it provides, computer makers are still improving on the connectivity standards used on computers.
Lightning, on the other hand, is absolutely laughed at as being incredibly flimsy - far more flimsy than any other standardized device-side connector, and that includes Micro-USB.
The government wouldn't have to if the free market would actually solve those problems that you keep saying it can solve. Clearly it couldn't solve that problem, because a very large portion of that free market had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 2010s.
Hurry up and make it happen, Apple. People will whine like they did with the headphone jack until they realize it isn't needed. Rinse and repeat.
If there was a regulation that said “all phone connectors must be micro-USB then yes, it would have massively slowed down adoption on phones.
That is not the reason Apple didn’t switch earlier. Apple reportedly repeatedly that made “pocket change” on lightening licensing, and I suspect they actually made more money on people buying overpriced usb-c cables than they did on licensing lightening.
They promised lightening would be the connector for the next decade, and they got raked over the coals by normal users for “the money grab” of switching to a clearly superior cable. Why would they rush that transition for a cable that is practically the same for the vast, vast majority of its users? USB-C’s advantage is ubiquity for normal users. They aren’t transferring files via the cable, they’re charging.
My mother in law has held off upgrading her iPhone for two years now because she doesn’t want to buy a bunch of new cables. Literally that’s the only reason, she desperately needs a new one. I suspect she is much closer to apples average user than people like us who post on MacRumors.
The point was what is now a big a clunky port was once considered svelte. So saying “why would we want something smaller than USB-C” is foolish.
I never once had a phone not charge when I plugged a working lightening cable into my iPhone. That’s happened several times in the 18 months I’ve used a USB-C phone, and I charge via MagSafe most of the time.
While I prefer the phone has USB-C, it’s not a better port than lightening is for the main use case, actually charging the device.
Apple was clearly moving to USB-C, just not as fast as some of you would like. They contributed significantly to the standard (actually more than anyone else) and had transitioned almost all of their other products to it. And the free market was working - we saw tons of people on MacRumors saying “I’ll never buy another phone without USB-C”. That’s how it’s supposed to work! Vote with your wallet. Don’t get regulators to come in because you’re impatient.
People are opposed to it because they see the patterns in the world. “If people are EVER exposed to things I don’t like, they may prefer those things over the things I prefer. Meaning, companies make less of what I want, and more of what THEY want. It happened with laptops, it happened with the headphone jack and I can NOT allow it to happen with USB-C. Yes, I understand that companies are for profit entities and are maximizing profits by making things people want OR taking away things people don’t care to lose, but where does that leave MEEE!?”
The unprofitable few?
USB-C was already happening. The EU could have done nothing and the companies that came together to ignore the microUSB memorandum and do USB-C, were going to do USB-C anyway. USB-C was able to happen because microUSB wasn’t a law. USB-C IS a law. That’s what’s backwards.
There was no course correction needed. They should have just looked at the world, went, “Oh, well it’s not microUSB, but it’s good” and just let the memorandum of understanding fade into obscurity. Instead, they were pissed that they were left out of the loop and wanted to put their mark on “something” to say they’re why it exists. “This is what we have done for the people!” LOL
Exactly, had to justify their own existence. Without the foresight to see they were going to freeze innovation, because they don't understand what they're regulating.
Precisely my thought! I don’t want to have a wireless charging mat in my car and prefer to have the phone out of the way anyway.
The USB-C regulation is for devices that use wired charging. Devices that are permanently attached to the mains don't necessarily need it and devices that charge wirelessly don't need a USB-C port.
Directly from the EU website
Given that Apple has given MagSafe to the Qi standard and iPhones will charge on standard Qi chargers, I would say that Apple has nothing to worry about. Shame that the lawyers at Apple can't use a search engine or even thought about asking an EU representative, if the story is true, that they were worried about EU issues...
This is the same as the iPhone screen sharing and Apple Intelligence garbage reasoning from Apple, "we won't release it in the EU because it might fall foul of regulations," sounds to me like they haven't done their homework and most definitely haven't spoken to the EU about those features and whether they would break competition laws.
This feels more like "we don't want to bother with such laws, so if we annoy our users enough with silly nonsensical decisions and blame it on the EU, they will put pressure on the EU and the laws will disappear in a puff of smoke!"
Directly from the EU website
Given that Apple has given MagSafe to the Qi standard and iPhones will charge on standard Qi chargers, I would say that Apple has nothing to worry about. Shame that the lawyers at Apple can't use a search engine or even thought about asking an EU representative, if the story is true, that they were worried about EU issues...
This is the same as the iPhone screen sharing and Apple Intelligence garbage reasoning from Apple, "we won't release it in the EU because it might fall foul of regulations," sounds to me like they haven't done their homework and most definitely haven't spoken to the EU about those features and whether they would break competition laws.
This feels more like "we don't want to bother with such laws, so if we annoy our users enough with silly nonsensical decisions and blame it on the EU, they will put pressure on the EU and the laws will disappear in a puff of smoke!"
I agree, but on the other hand, for the average person wireless headphones are "good enough", especially when outside with environmental noises in the background.
Also, when walking the dog, I'm not constantly ripping my earphones out of my ears/off my head, because the cable is getting caught up in the dog's lead...
And the MagSafe charger in the car is great, get in, slap the phone on the MagSafe puck over the dashboard and forget about it until I get to my destination and then just grab it off its magnetic base and go, no cables to plug in and pull out and no holder to adjust and then release, just slap it on and pull it off...
I think it would be more waterproof, for sure. I never use my USB-C port. I am not, however, representing all users. I have AirPods, wireless CarPlay and I charge wirelessly at home, work, and in my car. I would like a portless iPhone, but I don't think the world is ready. If there was a way to create a MagSafe to USB-C adapter, that might work, but I have no idea whether that is even a possibility.
there is literally no regulation anywhere in the world preventing them from going port less
Sure it is.
If you think wired charging is the future I’ve got bad news. In 10 years it will seem as quaint as 30-pin iPhone connectors.
EU can go jump in the lake with this regulatory nonsense.
Do it anyway, Apple.
BR,
EU citizen
Do it anyway, Apple.
BR,
EU citizen
In fact, there’s an incentive NOT to. If Apple comes up with the next great idea for a port, getting other companies to come together and make it a thing is less likely to happen. This is why Apple’s still fighting the legislation. A general idea to use a common port when that common port suits the power requirements and physical design of the device is good. Like a Memorandum of Understanding. This would allow companies planning on making thinner devices to get together to craft what that port should be.
I was told repeatedly in debates about the DMA that in the EU you have to look at "the spirit of the law" not the letter of the law. Who's to say that EU regulators don't decide the spirit of the law is "phones need to use USB-C to charge" and that the wireless exception was written in for small devices.
I mean, the EU has already done things like declaring iPadOS is a gatekeeping platform under the DMA despite not meeting the usage requirements written into the law; I suspect Apple doesn't trust the EU to not change the rules on them again.
I think it absolutely could be just have the end of the USB-C cord go into the "puck". The puck might have to be a little thicker, but no reason that couldn't work.
I can answer the question. Because it’s a really, really stupid idea.
Over the years, there have been rumors suggesting that Apple eventually wants to make an iPhone without any ports, allowing for a completely wireless charging experience. An iPhone without ports has been speculated about, and Apple has even published patents for an all-glass iPhone with no ports or buttons.
Apple apparently considered making its dream a reality with the upcoming iPhone 17 Air, but ultimately decided not to do so. In his latest Power On newsletter, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman says that one of Apple's ideas for the iPhone 17 Air was to design it without a USB-C port, which means it would only charge via MagSafe.
Apple did not end up going in that direction, because there were internal concerns that eliminating the USB-C port in the iPhone 17 Air would get the company in trouble with regulators in the European Union.
With the iPhone 15 lineup, Apple transitioned away from Lightning and adopted USB-C for iPhones because of an EU law that passed in 2022. The law requires technology companies to use a "common port," aka USB-C, for charging purposes. Technically, the law only applies in the European Union, but it was easier for Apple to make the change worldwide than to develop a special USB-C iPhone in Europe and continue using Lightning elsewhere.
Along with potentially angering the European regulators, getting rid of the charging port on an iPhone entirely would undoubtedly upset customers. When Apple eliminated the headphone jack from the iPhone 7, there was a lot of pushback from iPhone users, and other smartphone brands like Samsung spent plenty of time making fun of Apple's choice before ultimately following Apple's lead and removing headphone jacks from Android smartphones.
The iPhone 16 models now support MagSafe charging at up to 25W, and can fast charge with MagSafe and a 30W power adapter. Fast charging allows an iPhone to charge to 50 percent in 30 minutes, and the faster MagSafe charging puts wireless charging on par with fast charging over USB-C. With fast charging available with MagSafe, there wouldn't be a downside to eliminating the USB-C port in terms of speed, but there would be far less flexibility because USB-C chargers and cables have become so universal.
Though Apple isn't adopting a port-free design for the iPhone 17 Air, it's not an idea the company is abandoning. If the new super thin iPhone sells well, Apple will revisit portless iPhones and slim down the rest of the iPhone lineup, too.
Article Link: Here's Why Apple Hasn't Made a Portless iPhone
Yep. My 2022 vehicle unfortunately has wired CarPlay. Since it is paid for and very low miles I plan on keeping it for a LONG time. Removing the charge port would be an instant deal killer for me.
USB - C exists only because there was not a standard and there was incentive for phone manufacturers to develop new types of charging ports.
I would actually welcome a portless iphone. the ports are not only points of failure (dust gets in, etc) they are also an attack vector for law enforcement. A portless iphone would completely kill greykey.