Hacker News Reader

Comment by TheYumasi | Hacker News Reader

As an EU citizen, I am really happy with this decision.

I am an iPhone user, but having an iPhone is not ubiquitous here, almost all of my friends/special other, use an Android phone with USB-C. Most of their laptops, Mac or not, use or allow USB-C for charging. This as been the case for a few years now, yet, if I go somewhere for more than a full day and forget my lighting cable, my phone will become a useless paperweight while every non-iPhone user is fine in the meantime because of the wide adoption of USB-C. It is also ironic how Apple markets heavily on how you can take great RAW photos or videos but somehow you have to use lightning USB2 speeds to transfer them. Lightning is barely smaller than USB-C, and clearly my iPhone thickness will not change if it switches to USB-C.

As for the e-waste generated by "having to throw all of those lightning cables", how is it not e-waste that someone buying an iPhone will have yet another lightning cable that will only be used to charge it. If we want to really be more environmentally friendly, wouldn't it make more sense to have no cable at all with the devices we buy, force the sellers to clearly tell the consumers about it and offer the cable on the side only if needed? With that cable being usb-c, the consumer don't have to think about the cable type, for non-tech savvy people, that would be "the regular charging cable" and that's it. I would also add that all lightning cables won't suddenly go to the landfill in 2024. Many people will keep their iPhones/AirPods for a while after that date. Many would probably donate their old lightning cables to whoever needs them. In the meantime, we all already have an ever growing landfill in our homes called the cable drawer, and it is also an issue that needs to be addressed.

View on HN

There's nothing wise or moral about this decision.

Mandating a technology standard, purely for personal preference and convenience reasons -- not for reasons related to safety, or pollution, or security -- especially for things that change as fast as phones, is one of the most short-sighted and naive things any government could do.

There's a long history of Apple using proprietary connectors to achieve performance specifications above what the currently available standardized connectors could provide. Hell, in all likelihood, Apple is likely to ditch a charging connection altogether in favor of wireless charging in the near future. The EU is mandating technological stagnation. They will always be behind the market.

Apple hasn't changed the 'fast-changing' lightning connector since 2012, and USB-A lasted from 1996 to, well, present. USB-C came out in 2014 and is likely going to outlive us both. Connectors simply don't change that fast, and I'm not sure why people think they do.

I think even the EU can regulate on that kind of schedule.

The only reason connectors would change fast is to sell another cable and charger every time you buy a phone.

Or to make them slimmer, lighter, improve performance or improve the user experience.

I think with the size of USB-C and Lightning, we are pretty close to the point (if not there already) where structural limitations are not going to let us go much (if any) smaller. No one wants a connector that will break after 10 uses.

USB-C, electrically, has enough headroom that performance should not be an issue for a very, very, very long time. Already you can push more data over a USB-C cable than a phone can meaningfully handle.

The only thing that really comes to mind is we could go to fiber core for crazy data speeds but those are so delicate I don't think the improvement would be worth the hassle unless we have a big improvement there.

I think C could easily adopt a fiber, there's the "tongue" bit in the middle of the socket, and empty space in the middle of the plug, could easily have a fiber run down the middle there.

The difficulty isn't in fitting the physical fiber, they're tiny, it's in the delicacy of highspeed fiber optics.

There are literally USB-C cables with fiber cores, right now... on the market.

A USB-C cable with fiber core is what Oculus Go suggested to connect to a PC.

Those use a converter in the cable itself though right?

Standardization also improves user experience. And it does so here and now, as opposed to some hypothetical future gains.

iPhones don't even ship with a charger anymore and they definitely did not lower their prices when the decision to leave them out. It's a win-win for them – they can claim to be more environmentally conscious etc. while reducing their BOM cost.

Apple and other phone companies don't depend on selling cables and chargers. If they did, they would have been doing a much better job and they'd be more like Anker and Griffin.

> USB-A lasted from 1996 to, well, present. USB-C came out in 2014 and is likely going to outlive us both. Connectors simply don't change that fast

How convenient of you to forget Mini-USB and Micro-USB and regular USB-B

and Dock?

One end of the cable changed but I think the point was that the other end, the part that was built into your laptop, didn't.

I still have a stash of USB-B, mini-USB, and micro-USB cables with the USB-A because I've got a printer, a camera, and devices (Kindle, older battery) that use those ports. I have a USB-C -> USB-A hub. In 5-10 years from now, I might have gone all USB-C.

> There's a long history of Apple using proprietary connectors to achieve performance specifications above what the currently available standardized connectors could provide.

Lightning was good when it came out (compared to the various micro-USB options), but it's not held up. Even Apple knows this and they've moved away from it on their iPads.

In the same regard it will be now hard to move from USB-C to something better due to regulation.

As others in this thread have mentioned, the "unofficial" regulation that drove most non-apple phones to micro-USB, and then to USB-C did not prevent progress.

The laws are not going to mandate USB-C of a certain revision, etc. The laws simply mandate cooperation in a market that has been mostly cooperative, save for a single participant.

If I'm reading it properly the law does mandate certain USB revisions. For example devices that pull more than 15 watts but less than 100 have to support the 2021 version of IEC 62680-1-2.

Even if laws were written in stone, we could just get new stones, or plaster over and write new laws in to the old stones.

The Personal Electronic Device Port Amendment Act 2025, and so on and so forth.

Do you know how long this takes? Most probably it will take years to change.

That seems reasonable.

Tends to take years to develop new connectors, and longer still to develop new objectively better connectors.

The USB-C specification is 8.5 years old at this point, and we will have another year before this mandate takes effect.

Hopefully future EU mandates can optimize that near-decade timespan from standardization to being legally allowed by hardware manufacturers.

So… your quote boils down to "if the device operates within the parameters supported by standard X then it must comply with it"?

This seems like it inherently provides wiggle room when you have a legitimate reason that you can't follow the public standards?

Lightning was a design put forth by a company that wasn't Apple during the USB IF's design stage of USB-C. It was rejected because the pins were on the outside, not the inside, and would allow easy damage of both the cable and the connector. It was rejected purely on completely sane technical and mechanical reasons.

Apple shipped it anyways, and all Lightning cables have failed or will fail for exactly the reasons it was rejected. Apple chose the cable because of how easily it fails.

Lightning was never good, and Apple has a long history of fucking customers, period.

What world are you living in?

What on earth. Some people have an irrational hate for Apple that borders on a mental illness.

I’ve never had a single lightning cable fail ever since they switched to them.

> Lightning was a design put forth by a company that wasn't Apple during the USB IF's design stage of USB-C.

Do you have some references for this? I had never heard of Lightning having been developed anywhere but at Apple and specifically for their iDevice line and a check on Wikipedia's Lightning connector page has no references to anything that can substantiate this claim. Either a great example of historical erasure, or you're making this up.

TL;DR: Source?

"during" ≠ "as part of", so technically they're as-written right either way, albeit I do suspect they did mean "as part of", so, I'll second that source request

>purely for personal preference and convenience reasons

Those are not the reasons.

It gets kind of lost in the summary, but only devices that are rechargeable via a wired cable have to be chargable via USB-C. So going fully wireless is perfectly legal. It's also perfectly legal to offer other charging ports in addition to USB-C, though that's less likely to happen in phones.

And while this regulation puts some limitations on innovation in connectors, Thunderbolt shows that there is lots of room to innovate within the USB-C format (in a way that's compatible to normal USB).

Permitting wireless charging without a USB-C option basically topedos the legislation. This whole affair is going to end up as an embarrassing meme.

Well i dunno, it worked tremendously well for USB 2, don’t you think? Might be my age, but I distinctly remember having heaps of different charging cables. Gone, thanks to EU legislation.

Why would it be different this time?

I too remember the bad old days of a different charger for every phone, and for no real reason in most cases (other than profit-motive).

It was about the charger and they settled on USB as the outlet.

Now the EU is settling on the socket on the devices, that's dofferent.

You're not completely honest here, though. It was either Type A jack for power supplies without a cable, or Type B micro jack for fixed cables, and the latter very much specifies the port on the device.

> Gone, thanks to EU legislation.

Sort of. Standardizing on a USB-A charger did slightly push people to use a USB form plug on the other end - but data transfer is what really killed the proprietary connectors.

The multitude of USB connectors has been pared down - mini USB was withdrawn due to its design flaws, micro USB was obnoxious for 5Gbps data transfer, as was the larger USB-B plug. The convenience and capabilities of USB-C have slowly replaced them both on the device side, as well as the capability to go higher than 5 Gbps.

If anything has slowed adoption of USB-C, I'd point at desktop PCs and the reluctance to put 'real' USB-C ports on them. This is mostly because of what I consider to be a design error on the USB-IF's part - they added backward compatibility, allowing a USB-C dongle to supply a USB-A connector, when they should have supplied forward compatibility instead. This left a lot of bundled cables as well as hardware dongles like wireless mouse adapters stuck on USB-A.

The decision passed today also talks about harmonizing wireless charging in the future, to make sure it's compatible across brands and device types. Presumably that would happen once the technology has matured a bit more.

And with this outlook, industry should/will get ahead of the legislators and gravitate towards a standard of their own.

The current legislation was introduced because 1 manufacturer chose to not follow the standard and mostly for profit reasons.

How so? Wireless charging is still slower and inferior (in the usability sense) than wired charging, and I don't see that changing any time soon.

Move to wireless only is shame since charge is slow, not good for battery health, breaks many compatibility like wired only CarPlay, and not fixing big file (high quality 4K video) transferring issue.

Wireless magsafe is like half the speed of wired (peak 18w, nominal 11w vs 20w)

I’m not in a hurry, I can charge slowly during the night.

Remember when people said they’d never use an phone that needs to be charged every 2 days? Now we all charge our phones every day. Habbits change with technology.

Personally fast charging changed everything. Plug phone at random occasion (few minutes before leaving home or during short ride) and never have to think of overnight charging. I've mounted magsafe thing on my car dashboard and it was somewhat of disappointment. Sure it's convenient but slower charge was def noticeable.

But the whole point is being able to depend on a cable that just about everyone has. All of your gear has USB-C. Apple just being cocky.

Like this you waste charging cycle. I doubt this "few minutes before leaving home" can charge your phone up to 100%. Every cycle you do not charge from 0% up to 100% can be considered a wasted cycle. And in wasting things we are good ;)

I don’t need anywhere near 100%. Mere 20% with low battery mode will last me the evening.

That is not accurate, as far as I understand. The opposite might even be the case.

From what I understand, the battery is damaged most when close to 0% or close to 100%.

So, if a phone could do, say, 1000 full cycles until the battery reaches a certain stage of degradation, and now you used an identical phone, but with shorter cycles only down to 20%, then charge to 80%, you could not only do 1000 of those short cycles, but even 1000/60% = 1667, and still have the battery in a better shape than the one with 1000 full cycles.

I am not certain about this, though.

wireless charging efficiency isn't too great either

https://debugger.medium.com/wireless-charging-is-a-disaster-...

Fast charging is bad for the battery. I’d actually be happier if the wireless MagSafe charger was slower, say around 5-8W. I have all the time in the world while asleep, why would I care if it finished charging in 1 hour vs 3 hours?

Few percent of capacity over incredible convenience easily wins. IPhone batteries are trivial to replace these days too.

For you it’s easy - there are Tons of crappy chargers and weak power supplies you can use.

I have the MagSafe battery and if your iPhone is hot it won't charge wirelessly at all. It was frustrating to come prepared with a 100% phone and 100% battery pack, and leave an event with a dead phone and 60% still in the battery pack.

> There's nothing wise

There is, for example the fact that the standard is set by comittee means large players have more say but cannot dictate the market. This allows innovation that doesn't benefit one party.

> purely for personal preference and convenience reasons

Not the reason behind the move

> not for reasons related to safety, or pollution, or security

Those are some of the benefits but not all

> especially for things that change as fast as phones

Connectors are standards, plus phones do not change that often, they get marginally better but most of them have looked largely the same for a decade.

> There's a long history of Apple using proprietary connectors to achieve performance specifications above what the currently available standardized connectors could provide

Previously there was also a long history of interoperability between Apple designs that no longer exists. And before that there was a long history of Apple being a tiny company constantly on the verge of bankruptcy. Long history is a pretty short time nowadays.

> Apple is likely to ditch a charging connection altogether in favor of wireless charging in the near future.

I cannot wait to have the slowest charging phone on the market as a selling point.

> he EU is mandating technological stagnation.

The EU mandating GDPR has increased security protection on data around the globe, and decreased bloatware. A large player like europe setting a standard means that companies follow that legislation to not have 2 products one for Europe and one outside.

> There's a long history of Apple using proprietary connectors to achieve performance specifications above...

Oh please, Apple has barely improved Lightning since its introduction a decade ago (2012!). Yes, back then, it was better than what was available, but the industry has moved on, and Apple has stagnated.

> Hell, in all likelihood, Apple is likely to ditch a charging connection altogether in favor of wireless charging in the near future.

Unlikely. For one thing, wireless charging is still much slower than what you can get with a cable, and for another, users will not tolerate needing to lug around a charging pad (with its own cable), or hope that someone nearby has one. Yes, I know similar things about tolerance were said about the removal of headphone jacks, but I don't think this is quite the same situation.

> The EU is mandating technological stagnation. They will always be behind the market.

I haven't read the text of the law, but I would hope that it's flexible enough to allow for embracing improvements to technology.

But even if that process is slow, I don't think that's a bad thing. Fast-changing technology generally does not really help users (it can, but I think more often it does not). Yes, benefits can be realized over time, but these sorts of changes create confusion and waste if not done well. I really don't care if Apple wants to put a new connector on iPhones, but it takes them 3 years instead of 1 year to do it because of legal/regulatory issues.

> Mandating a technology standard, purely for personal preference and convenience reasons -- not for reasons related to safety, or pollution, or security

Pollution is* a concern here, though I agree that's probably not the primary reason this law was drafted. I'm with you on the general discomfort around regulations targeted toward preference/convenience. But I think it's a little unfair to call it "personal preference". Lighting is inferior to USB-C in almost every way (the only advantage Lightning has is that it's slightly smaller, but not to a degree that really matters). Apple continues to use Lightning out of stubbornness and NIH syndrome, and that hurts consumers overall.

But consider all the places that have two cables. I've seen dual-cable setups in Lyft/Uber vehicles, and at friendly coffee shops and stuff like that (hell, I still see a few places that additionally have micro-USB cables). What a huge waste of material! And yeah, you can buy single cables that have multiple "heads" on them, but I very rarely see those in the wild. If there was actually a good technical reason why we have this split, then sure,

> especially for things that change as fast as phones

I don't think that's really true anymore. Most smartphones are basically the same as they were 5 years ago. Incrementally better camera hardware, incrementally better display technology, more RAM, faster processors, more storage. But I see very little change year to year. Maybe there will be some big new changes coming soon, but I don't see any evidence of that.

> is one of the most short-sighted and naive things any government could do.*

Heh, I think you underestimate government capacity for short-sightedness. This particular thing seems pretty middling and mediocre to me on that scale.

> Unlikely. For one thing, wireless charging is still much slower than what you can get with a cable, and for another, users will not tolerate needing to lug around a charging pad (with its own cable), or hope that someone nearby has one. Yes, I know similar things about tolerance were said about the removal of headphone jacks, but I don't think this is quite the same situation.

But users do accept carrying charging pads. Smartwatches, electric toothbrushes and shaving apparatus have charging pads/cables and no one complains about carrying those when going on a trip.

For the average consumer, the iPhone really doesn't need a port of any kind anymore. What it needs is all day battery life. As Apple doesn't really care about "pro" smartphone users who use external devices like DAC-s or IR cameras they will ditch the port at some point. If they cared about "pro" smartphone users, they would've come out with a USB-C iPhone in 2018 or 2019.

> no one complains about carrying those when going on a trip.

I kinda think "going on a trip" is a minority subset of the times when people bring charging gear with them. Regardless, I personally would find it a huge annoyance to have to carry a charging pad. Right now I just bring my laptop charger, and use it for both my laptop and (Android) phone. I don't want to bring a charging pad in addition.

The devices you list are not used/charged in a moving vehicle, but rather at its destination. A phone is considerably different in this very relevant regard.

> Oh please, Apple has barely improved Lightning since its introduction a decade ago (2012!). Yes, back then, it was better than what was available, but the industry has moved on, and Apple has stagnated.

You mean: in 20 years Apple has had only two connectors, and they worked and work extremely well. Meanwhile the industry "that moved on" invented 6 different incompatible connectors, didn't even specify a charging standard until 2010s (IIRC) and is now busy inventing USB 4 Gen 1x15 revision 16

That's a bit of an unfair argument, since you're mixing various things together that are not connectors (USB 4... etc.).

Bottom line is that the industry has actually been converging on USB-C for some time now. And again, I think it's unfair to compare an industry with tens (hundreds?) of players having trouble agreeing on something, when we're talking about Apple -- a single entity -- obstinately refusing to drop their obsolete, outdated "uniqueness" in this case.

I get why Apple chose to do Lighting instead of microUSB back in 2012 (I have lost track of the high number of microUSB connectors I have broken), but the funny thing is that Lightning didn't really offer any technical benefits beyond the more sturdy form factor at the time. Lighting was USB2 (and more or less still is), and microUSB carried USB2 signals just fine. They went their own way there for pretty dubious reasons. Well, ok, one obvious reason: they wanted to restrict who could build an iPhone/iPad accessory, because using the Lightning connector required licensing it from Apple.

So basically Lightning exists for one physical sturdiness reason (which, alone, probably would not be justification to do something new), and one anti-competitive reason.

Apple should have just stuck with microUSB, and then switched to USB-C once that made sense. But no, that would have reduced their iron grip on what people are allowed to do with their phones.

All the USB data specs are irrelevant for this legislation. All it says is: Use a USB-C connector and support the USB PD charging standard. In fact many cheaper android phones use USB2 since the port is purely for charging.

>Hell, in all likelihood, Apple is likely to ditch a charging connection altogether in favor of wireless charging in the near future.

Lol. Literally not possible.

Why? I can definitely see Apple rolling this out to the Pro line first, then the regular iPhones, and then the SE. It could be like the home button, which disappeared on the X and then rolled through the 11s, and the SE will be the last to go.

The benefit will be better water/dust-proofing, and slightly more internal room for battery or whatever else. I have only just started charging wirelessly, but I find it works great for me. I know wired charging is faster, but only a handful of times a year do I care about that.

For one, you can’t use the phone during wireless charging.

I know, ”akshually, you can use it, you just can’t hold it in your hand!”. Anyway, you can’t use it normally - it must be kept on the mat to charge.

Also, there are a bunch of accessories that require physical connection. Search for “iphone pendrive” for instance.

Bluetooth headphones still have laughable latency for music production, and decent quality full-duplex audio isn’t there either.

iOS developers will also tell you how reliable wireless debugging is. (Hint: it’s abysmal)

You're right, that is an important caveat! I've not run into an issue, since I mostly charge at night, and rarely is my battery in perilous territory (even though it's the diminutive 13 Mini). On the few occasions where I was using the phone and needed to charge it, I just switched to using my computer, which I usually have with me.

And if I were charging at a Starbucks or something, I could use the phone while charging, just flat on the table.

There's the magsafe wireless charging now though right so you could slap that on and hold the phone maybe? I don't have an iPhone so I'm not aware how thick those pucks are off the top of my head but seems doable.

Those other two use cases of music creation and thumb drives are a tiny market on iPhone I could see Apple abandoning them entirely.

> The EU is mandating technological stagnation. They will always be behind the market.

Well said!

EU is doing pretty much what Apple does all the time - forcing standards.

Apple gives you the option to adopt or not. EU thugs, not.

Not a fan of metric screw threads? Mandates were needed in some countries to change from imperial to metric because the market can't make such a non-incremental move on its own even if it's good for everyone.

I'd like to see Apple remove the port completely and rely on wireless charging and communication, only in the EU, just to spite the EU.

What an odd thing to say.

If Apple could use their own proprietary wifi/bluetooth etc too, then they would. Imagine the _profit_.

>in favor of wireless charging

So, force people to have more stuff and use the less power efficent option. As well as the glued-in non-replaceable batteries that were such a wonderful futuristic idea before.

Thank the flying spaghetti monster that the EU is "behind the market", because the market is consumer-hostile garbage.

Hilarious that I got downvoted for that, don't people realize that having usb-c doesn't exclude wireless charging?

My current phone has both usb-c and wireless charging. Removing the port is undeniably a downgrade, how can anyone not understand that?

It's not for all that reason. But to make companies follow standard. So it's a great decision.

These companies have been doing what they want for far too long like removing headphone jack, removable battery etc.

> especially for things that change as fast as phones

USB-C is forward looking. It will be quite a while before it will no longer be useful.

USB-C is just a connector.

If we follow this logic, the EU should also mandate which aspects of USB-C PD are required to be supported and enforce that. Otherwise we'll end up with a slew of devices without even the required 5.1k resistors, which can't charge from PD-compliant adapters, but can be charged using a USB-A to USB-C cable.

As an EU citizen, while I do agree that regulation is often required (it did wonders for our roaming charges!), I do not like this development.

I'd argue this is actually great. It's extremely unlikely that type-C connectors would charge from anything other than the in-built charging standard (if for no other reason than physical compatibility) but all the extra pins make it extremely flexible. The Lightning pins can just be routed out of the USB-C connector in a compliant way via alt-mode.

USB-PD is mandated in this directive! The EU press release specifically states any device will be able to charge at the same speed if cable/charger support it. See https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20220930IP...

They do mandate USB PD, actually!

The law [0] reads:

> In so far as they are capable of being recharged by means of wired charging at voltages higher than 5 Volts, currents higher than 3 Amperes or powers higher than 15 Watts, the categories or classes of radio equipment referred to in point 1 of this Part shall:

> 3.1. incorporate the USB Power Delivery, as described in the standard EN IEC 62680-1-2:2021 “Universal serial bus interfaces for data and power - Part 1-2: Common components - USB Power Delivery specification”;

> 3.2. ensure that any additional charging protocol allows for the full functionality of the USB Power Delivery referred to in point 3.1., irrespective of the charging device used.

As to devices supplying less than 15 Watts: the 5.1k resistors are already mandatory in the USB-C connector spec.

[0]: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2022-0338... , page 35

I stand corrected! In that case, I am much more happy about this.

Lightning is a better connector for small devices and it's more durable in my experience. USB-C is way better than micro as a connector but you end up with the issue of many kinds of cables that look similar but are not interchangeable. What speed? PD support? Power only? Who knows!

Maybe switching to a less durable connector or no connector is fine given that Qi support has gotten pretty good. Most of the Lightning cables I've purchased are still in circulation, I'd prefer not to replace them.

If the EU really cared about solving a problem they'd ban micro, that connector is really fragile and totally superseded by type C.

They are interchangeable but may not charge as fast or transfer data as fast. So they are still useful.

They're not interchangeable, of the C cables I have now some will drive my monitor and some won't, and some don't even carry data. The type C connector is a big step up vs the older micro and A+B connectors, it just doesn't really make using USB simpler or easier to figure out.

> Lightning is a better connector for small devices it's more durable in my experience

It's less durable in my experience. I can do this all day.

I don't see how USB-C can be more durable considering there's a plastic post on the female side holding the pins. That's an obvious failure point.

The large hole in the lightning female port traps lint, I have to clean it out with a toothpick every couple of weeks. USB-C's gaps are too small for lint to collect.

> USB-C's gaps are too small for lint to collect.

That's not true, as my phone would be happy to attest. However, I think I cleaned it in the 12-18 month range, when charging stopped working and the cable no longer clicked. There's almost certainly lint back in there, but not enough to necessitate cleaning.

Black 4th pin seems like a somewhat common failure mode: https://ioshacker.com/iphone/why-the-fourth-pin-on-your-ligh...

Is there reason to believe it's not an issue on usb-c? On usb-c the terminals aren't exposed, so even if it did occur you wouldn't notice it.

The cable stops working in one orientation, so I'd expect it to be quite noticeable. There's a few posts in that regard, so I suspect it has the same or similar problems.

Certainly doesn't seem in favor of Lightning cables being any more durable.

There is no such thing as a C to C cable that is "power only" or doesn't support PD, unless it is grossly spec incompliant.

The minimal spec C to C cable is USB 2 data and supports power delivery with currents up to 3 amps (i.e. 60 W at 20V 3A)

This is enough for most phones, and almost all of the exceptions use proprietary charging that isn't going to work on a C to C cable anyway.

The labeling issue of all these cheap shit cables is a serious problem, but it is a nonissue in the phone charging context.

I already have three kinds of C to C cables, some that will work with my laptop+monitor and some that won't, then some power-only ones for random accessories. We can no-true-Scotsman all day but so far type C hasn't simplified my life and as far as I can tell it won't in the near future. iPhones switching for me will just mean throwing out a decade of Lightning cables and buying USB-C cables.

Are these "power only" C to C cables something you're explicitly going out and buying or something that comes with these random accessories?

They are charge cables that come with random accessories, I think I bought some long ones as well. Also A to C cables. As long as they're only used for low-draw devices it should be safe but requires keeping track.

The vast majority of C to C "charge" cables are USB 2 cables. I don't believe I have ever received or even seen a "charge only" non-captive C to C cable. A to C cables are a lot more common.

Do you have reason to believe that the C to C cables you got/bought don't support USB 2?

It doesn't make sense for a random accessory to come with a charge only C to C cable because USB 2 C to C cables are a dime a dozen. They're almost certainly paying more money to produce a spec violating cable.

They could have data support, I've never actually checked. The wires are pretty thin so I only trust them for charging the lights they came with. I have a bundle of similar looking A to mini or micro B cables of which I know many are charge-only. As long as they're super short I only rely on them being useful for charging.

In that case they almost certainly do have data support.

Keep in mind that power dissipation scales with the square of the current. That means that, as a first order approximation, relative to household 15 amp wiring, a 3 amp cable can be 1/25 of the size. You can get away with really thin wires for that.

The reason why you end up with thick USB C cables is because of either 5 amp support (requiring 2.8x bigger wires) and/or USB 3 support (requiring a bunch of extra higher spec wires). It is quite normal for plain old 3 amp USB 2 USB C cables to be thin.

I'm curious, next time I'm charging devices I'll check. Either way they're still not useful for anything beyond accessory charging, they're short and won't carry the power+signal necessary for my laptop (which, sigh, has two kinds of cables because the one Apple provided with their charger won't do Thunderbolt).

This is such a short sighted view.

What just happened is, EU, a political organization enforcing the use of a technology on a company which operates on free market. It's Apples best interest to make technology that the consumers want so that they can sell more units of that. A political organization like EU has no say in this. EU citizens already make this decision for themselves by voting with money and choosing to buy/not buy an iPhone.

Today is one of the dark days of EU. In short sight it's a victory. But in long sight it's a hinderence to progress by enforcing a technology on the market instead of letting the free market decide the technology.

> A political organization like EU has no say in this.

EU and most people living within it would disagree with this statement.

> and most people living within it

without a referendum on such issues these kinds of statements are moot.

i'm also an EU citizen and this thing (along with many other EU decisions) are in the same dystopian vein as the covid fiasco in europe.

It's not that different than saying what the power plug need to look like.

we do not have the same power plug in all of the countries as every country has it's own requirements, sets of rules etc.

in any case, power plug type G is by far the safest and best. the EU should probably force everyone to adopt it, no? :)

Given the state of the world it’s never going to happen but I honestly think that there should be an attempt at standardising plug sockets across the world. It is kind of ridiculous that that there are 15 different types of socket. What is anyone gaining from this madness?

A one-to-one mapping between standard plugs and standard wall power makes a lot of sense. But different standards of wall power should not share a single plug; that's just asking for trouble.

As for global standardization of wall power; maybe in an ideal world. But in reality, it would cost a ton (way more than merely replacing plugs and outlets) and doesn't seem worth it.

While entire countries will keep the imperial system versus the metric system, I'll never believe in global standardisation. Even if it's strictly better, there will always be a cost to changing, and therefore not everyone will agree.

I live in US and all SAE measurements are expressed in metric measurements. I am studying structural engineering.

Even 3/4 plywood is always 18mm, not 19.05mm.

The European Union looked into unifying Europe's plugs. They decided that the cost was not worth it.

I would have been happy to switch to a unified European plug. Iirc, the proposal was actually quite decent.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-6-2005-1731-...

Each country still mandates specific plugs.

And yes, if power delivery was still a relatively new industry, EU absolutely should have mandated a single universal outlet that's "good enough". But existing designs predate EU by decades and are already so well-entrenched that changing them all to standardize on a single plug is too much effort to justify the gains.

But it ain't so with USB-C. Mobile rechargeable devices are a relatively recent tech, and the market has already largely converged on a single design. At this point, making it into a real standard, with the result that it's guaranteed to work everywhere, is a no-brainer.

> in any case, power plug type G is by far the safest and best.

That's utter crap. We had this argument multiple times, and somehow people without proof call it "best and safest"... when facts state that it is just not the case.

What was the Covid fiasco? Are you on novax positions?

Not the OP, but the current high inflation is partially caused by Covid-related measures.

The people who were saying early on during the pandemic (me included) that we have to put into balance the number of covid casualties with the longer term economic consequences of imposing harsh and long lockdowns were treated as assasins of our collective grandmas, and worse. If it matters I’m triple vaccinated.

Because surely you were an expert on covid and its consequences early on during the pandemic, and surely you have proven (and published) that the measures taken (given the knowledge at the time where they were taken) were counter-productive in the long run, right?

Didn't need to be an expert to see where all of this was going. Again, there were many calls of "you're locking us down -> very shitty economy going forward -> things will be shitty for everyone in terms of their physical existence, not only for grandma".

If anything, this should have put another big dent in experts' expertise, meaning if they knew what they were getting us into with their decisions (after all, they're experts) and they choose this high inflation route nonetheless.

> Didn't need to be an expert to see where all of this was going.

Sure, there is never a need to be an expert to claim knowing more than them.

Also, I'm not completely convinced that it's exclusively related to the Covid lockdowns in Europe. For instance, many companies were very quick to restart (or were not even stopped) in Europe, but struggle with the IC shortage... which is not coming from Europe, is it?

As far as I can tell it’s mostly related to the increase in the money supply that was generated/caused by the strict Covid measures, I’m talking both about the US, through the Fed policies, and Europe, through the ECB policies.

That increased money supply was at first not really felt because of the decreased money velocity caused by lockdowns and restrictions, but once things started getting back to “normal” in terms of lockdowns and travel restrictions and all that then money velocity got back closer to its pre-covid levels, and coupled with that increased money supply left us in the current situation.

Of course, the increased money supply is not the only explanation, there’s also the war in Ukraine which has put a tremendous pressure on energy prices, plus the supply crisis, but imo it’s still one of the main causes of what we’re going right now.

Right. Yeah it seems to make sense that a pandemic followed by a war would have an impact on the economy :-/.

Exactly, which means the political system is doing its job. Politics was invented to most efficiently express the desires of the people. If the people want more political control, then it is the job of politics to do so. If they don't, then politics should avoid it.

The only reason this is muddled in America is because the people don't agree on to what degree the politics should control things.

> What just happened is, EU, a political organization enforcing the use of a technology on a company which operates on free market.

Where are you living that your free market isn't regulated for the benefit of the consumer?

> benefit of the consumer

Says who? USB type-XYZ will be even more beneficial to the consumer in 5 years and the EU governing body is going to what... ? update the books with that? Force all consumer electronics companies to switch? Will they be the new guiding light for all things tech deciding what is "good" for the consumer?

This is a bad take and others who might find it convenient for Apple to forced to do this are looking at this too short-sightedly.

> USB type-XYZ will be even more beneficial to the consumer in 5 years and the EU governing body is going to what... ? update the books with that? Force all consumer electronics companies to switch?

Sure! Why not?

More practically, it wouldn't be hard to designate a list of standardized form factors. The average smartphone also has plenty of real estate on its edges to ship multiple connectors (especially now that so many phones are dropping 3.5mm jacks), so if some fancy-shmancy USB-D or USB-J or whatever comes out it wouldn't be the end of the world to ship both until the EU updates its legislation to allow the fancy-shmancy one as an acceptable single port.

As it stands, the EU's decision represents a strict improvement from the consumer's perspective. That's worth celebrating, even before the longer-term kinks have been ironed out.

> Says who?

Who cares? Seriously, the OP made a claim that

> What just happened is, EU, a political organization enforcing the use of a technology on a company which operates on free market.

said claim being almost completely incorrect and devoid of fact. The reality is that in Free Markets, there is still heavy regulations.

I want to know, just what sort of Free Market you are living under that doesn't have regulations on consumer devices.

What is the injury to the consumer they are really solving for? To buy a 3rd party USB-C or Lightning cable is comparable. They both charge your phone. They both allow for USB-A,B,C, MP3 adapters ad-infinitum. Is the injury that someone has to carry, wait..., 2 DIFFERENT CABLES!

Yes. Plus the environmental cost of all those extra cables. And the mental overhead of keeping track of extra cables, or losing them. The time and effort expended when you don't have your cable around and can't use your friend's or co-workers.

And accessories. Headsets. Flir cameras. Docking stations. Jack adapters, etc.

There are only three numbers: 0, 1, n. We want one charging cable standard. USB-C is objectively better than lighting - if it wasn’t, MacBooks would have a lighting charging port…

To say that "because consumer devices are already regulated" is not a defensive position to say that gov't "should regulate this new thing." That is merely an argument for precedent. In my view the gov't should demonstrate that the injury is overwhelming enough to necessitate intervention. This is not. It is a mere inconvenience to have two connector types. The EU should err on the side of conservative intervention so as not to cool innovation or even signal the cooling of innovation. This does not overcome that burden of proof for me.

Can't speak for the person you are commenting to. But I live in the US and there are many industries that are not regulated for the benefit of the consumer. Telecom being a big one. Companies get away with a lot of anti-competitive practices here. Starbucks snuffing out ma and pa stores, eating loses just to become the only game in town.

> Can't speak for the person you are commenting to. But I live in the US and there are many industries that are not regulated for the benefit of the consumer. Telecom being a big one.

That's a poor example, telecoms are heavily regulated for the consumer. That's the reason why different operators are able to place consumer's calls to other operators - that is regulated.

I think he was being sarcastic

Respectfully, I would claim it's short-sighted to believe that the individual consumer has any real say in what they want, need or get with respect to offerings by trillion-dollar international conglomerates.

There is no such thing as a free and unregulated market. Well, it exists but we call it the law of the jungle.

This is not to say that any regulation is sensible, but this kind of standardization to avoid vendor lock-in and waste is one of the prime examples of sensible stuff.

> Respectfully, I would claim it's short-sighted to believe that the individual consumer has any real say in what they want, need or get with respect to offerings by trillion-dollar international conglomerates.

Whole heartedly agreed. If I, as a consumer, had my say then my flagship phone would still have a headphone jack, an SD card slot, and a replaceable battery. Yet here we are.

"Having a say" is not the same as "Your opinion winning out".

If there weren't such anticompetitive behavior by monopolistic behemoths, one could "have a say" by choosing to buy or produce the product which offers demanded features. These specific customer demands are common and well-known, yet their effectively "not having a say" has indeed occurred, given the fact these options are not made available anywhere in the behemoth-controlled market.

> and a replaceable battery

And with that EU will help out also, they are already working on a legislation for that.

The market is not free. Apple already enjoys the fruits of lobbying and market consolidation. Users are not free.

You think Apple is dragging its feet on iPhone USB-C adoption because it's in the best interest of consumers to do so?

It's a phone charging port. It's not that serious. It's better for consumers if we all have the same one for everything, if possible. Unless you can tell me why not?

Imagine this happened a few years ago, and the EU had instead demanded micro-USB. Then we would still be flipping plugs twice, and I wouldn't be able to use my laptop charger to charge my phone. It's not clear to me that USB-C is good enough to be the "final" connector, especially with the mess around USB versions, Thunderbolt, Displayport, etc. Unlike e.g. power sockets, where I am pretty confident that the current design can last another 15 years. (But which is not standard across EU countries!)

> Imagine

But it didn't, and it may very well be because those people are not as incompetent as betting on making something a standard prematurely. They id it only now.

Be careful with hypotheticals as basis of an argument.

In this case the counterfactual is a stronger argument than you saying "they did it only now" with appeal to authority. Unless there's a well reasoned approach to this policy, we are practically stuck with the current standard until the EU bureaucrats decide everyone needs an upgrade.

> with appeal to authority.

What???

It's an appeal to reality! It's what actually happened!

What do you prefer? Imagination and "I can say whatever and who cares about facts"?

> counterfactual

There was not a trace of "fact" in that argument, it was 100% imagination.

Pretty good chance that the USB-C plug-design will be with us for decades to come. Even if new protocols emerge, they're likely to use the same plug.

When it comes to charging and slow transfers of data, today's USB-C sockets will probably still work.

The next realm of standardization will probably be in the wireless-charging market (where standards are already maturing).

A magnetic attachment and break/away connector would be welcomed over the current usb-c connector. Now you can't have it.

Remind us in 10 years.

Magnetic breakaway USB-C cables are already a thing.

They did mandate micro-usb, actually.

I believe the exact wording was that the industry was required to standardize on a connector, which at the time turned out to be micro-usb. Now the industry is shifting to usb-c, which is objectively better.

The current law already includes provisions to switch to a potential superior connector in the future. If the industry comes up with something better, the EU is not going to demand they stick with usb-c forever.

I don't really see how this is any worse than the current "do whatever you want regardless of what everyone else is attempting" that manufacturers currently go by.

But as other commenters point out, provisions exist to assist with this.

I am pretty sure something similar hapenned a few years back, and they mandated USB-A on the brick/cable? My recollection is fuzzy.

To me this is a really good proposal. USB is already the winner here. Apple is making life harder for consumers. To me the real short-sidedness of this is that wired charging might be completely irrelevant by 2024!

USB-C only exists because Apple proved to everyone how nice a reversible connector is, and USB caught up years later. Lightning has some other advantages like being thinner and less difficult to break. If Apple caves and moves to USB-C everywhere it’s very unlikely that future innovation in connectors will happen.

I'm highly certain that a reversible connector would've come regardless of what Apple did.

Apple released a reversible connector in 2003: the original 30-pin connector.

USB went through mini, and micro, and USB-B, and...

I very much doubt the consortium would ever arrive at a reversible connector without Apple (who contributed heavily to USB-C)

Dock wasn't reversible

Fairly sure the USB-IF was already working on that. They don't move fast.

> by voting with money

"voting with money" or "voting with your wallet" is a complete non-sense. There is no -absolutely no- way for anyone in the industry to attribute a lost sale to a "missing" feature.

I think this also a symptoms on how Americans view the world through means of consumption. Everything HAS TO be consumed one way or another.

There are countless examples of companies that made a product people didn't want and subsequently went out of business.

So what ?

So voting with my wallet not only works, but it is an order of magnitude more powerful than "regular" voting - where I am not even represented on the political spectrum.

This is just completely delusional

Every time somebody says to "vote with your wallet", there is an implicit command to shut up and stop complaining about the product. The argument goes that the only legitimate way to respond to a product you don't like is to "vote with your wallet" (not buy it), implying that voting against the corporation's practices at the ballot box or on a soap box aren't legitimate. "vote with your wallet" is a fundamentally anti-democratic utterance that attempts to de-legitimize dissenters' participation in government and public discussion.

> There is no -absolutely no- way for anyone in the industry to attribute a lost sale to a "missing" feature.

There's a whole idea around it called market research. It goes as far as... surveying people post-purchase to find out what features became the deciding factors. So yes, it is possible, just with very small sampling rate.

Yes.

Finding out how to attribute a sale to specific features or marketing is definitively possible and common usage.

Finding out why customers churn and what levers could prevent that is also a very common practice.

But finding out why someone _didn't_ buy something in the first place because of a _missing_ feature is just plain and simply impossible.

If you disagree and can prove that I'm wrong, please send me the maths.

It's not math. I've been asked about a purchase while exiting a shop. If they wanted to know why I didn't buy X, they would find out. (or specifically why I bought Y and not X, which covers the missing feature)

I'm happy to give those out for free: I didn't buy oneplus 6t, because it's missing the audio back. <- that wasn't impossible.

Look at it this way. If you enter an Apple Store, see that iPhone doesn't have a audiojack - you leave. There's no record or way of asking you anything.

"Big Box" stores will not question you for the reasons why you bought a Nokia over a OnePlus. Their market research doesn't focus on that. They also don't share customer data with Apple, Nokia or OnePlus.

Neither does Apple have it in their culture to ask, what people want.

How long did it take for Apple to get on contactless payments?

Political organizations like the FCC already control parts of what an iPhone is and isn't allowed to do. Apple's never been in a position where they can offer exactly what the consumer wants without any political regulation, they've always had to follow some rules.

I don't think this will go down as an important or sector-changing decision. I remember hearing the same thing online about the 2009 common external power supply law and if anything it feels like the consumer is better off.

As others have said much more eloquently than I could, the answer for a happy market probably isn't total unregulated capitalism _or_ full government control, but likely somewhere in the middle. I've been an iPhone user since the 3GS and I'm pleased with this decision.

> on a company which operates on free market.

You probably shouldn't have based your argument on this statement, which is generally regarded as a myth. It is a myth in the sense that Apple exists in a free market: it is a near monopoly but is savvy enough not to wade into the area other companies did in the 90's and were penalized.

Second, governments have the right to enforce environmental protection acts to protect the health and safety of its people. Technology companies are subject to this from day one at many levels (e.g., fabs have limits on how much toxic waste they can pump into the air).

The EU is leading the way for cracking down on trillion-dollar companies who choose to treat you as a product rather than a person. I hope the rest of the world follows.

I'm not arguing that the EU shouldn't be able to pass these laws, but which markets does Apple monopolize?

In the market of mobile phones for consumers who actually buy apps. That’s why everyone wants Apple to lose that monopoly. The problem of course is that exactly that monopoly is a large part of the reason why it’s the market for consumers who actually buy apps.

How can Apple have a "near monopoly" when Samsung sells 50% more phones than them?

Apple make billions every quarter and at this point no one can realistically unseat them.

They collect pretty much all the profit in the phone market.

They don’t technically have a monopoly, but they are in an incredibly strong position which is close to being guaranteed for the short and medium term.

"fine, they don't have a monopoly - which I stated as fact - but they are too successful for my liking and I get a high off of forcing compliance"

To be clear, I'm a massive fan of Apple.

Was just trying to explain that although they don't technically have a monopoly in the phone market, they do hold a huge amount of power.

In a basic sense, monopolies were outlawed to try to keep markets fair, but Apple are in such a strong position now that they have pretty much the same level of influence that a company with an actual monopoly would have.

Being highly profitable isn't illegal, monopolies are.

Sure. But what was the whole reason for making monopolies illegal?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act - You can read about it here and branch out to other resources and articles.

It's not about profit, directly at least. A company making twice the profit while selling half the product of their competitor is not in any violation of anti-monopoly/trust/whatever laws.

Because Samsung doesn't run an app store on iOS.

And Apple doesn't run an app store on Android. Does that mean Android is also a monopoly? Heck, Sony doesn't run an app store on the Nintendo Switch. Does that mean Nintendo is a monopoly? We could play a similar game with streaming services. Yes, you can give money to people in different ways and get software that works on different systems. That's how it has always been. Nobody is being deceived or coerced. Well until now, since the EU is coercing everyone to use USB-C.

Apple should be coerced into adopting USB-C on iPhone. Their refusal to do so has been an explicit, repeated failure on Apple's behalf. The iPhone is one of the only remaining Apple products that does not use USB-C, and it's exclusion is entirely unnecessary since USB-C's base-spec was designed by Apple and well-exceeds the capabilities of Lightning.

At the end of the day, it's a serial port. People should stop acting like Apple is being asked to re-engineer the Death Star, and recognize that this is a change so rudimentary that people on YouTube do it for a fun weekend project. It's the textbook definition of a failure, and the EU has every right to hold Apple accountable for the insane things they call 'innovation' in the US.

Apple could, though.

Oh? When did I become able to carry my Apple software, purchases, addresses, backups, pictures, etc. over to Android? When did I become able to buy a phone that functions in the Apple ecosystem that isn't made by Apple?

Oh, right, I can't.

A Pixel and a Galaxy are direct competitors. An iPhone and a Galaxy are not direct competitors because of lock-in effects.

Now, if you are saying that the EU should mandate that I be able to switch my purchases between those ecosystems, that would change. However, even as much of a fan as I am about anti-trust, I believe that would be a bridge too far.

Furthermore, from what we have seen in the past 36 months with respect to supplier consolidation, I would argue that ANY market with less than 5 real competitors should get broken up recursively until that gets fixed. That should apply to phones, food, toilet paper, disinfectants, etc.--everything.

Part of what is allowing all the economic price hikes to stick is that even in markets where there is "competition", there is some single upstream supplier that can't (mostly) or won't (rarely) increase production. This prevents any of the "competitors" from being able to gain significant market share since they can't increase their production since everybody is blocked.

A lot of businesses figured this out through Covid. So, they raised prices. What are you gonna do? Go to a competitor? He can't absorb your order and you'll be at the back of his queue. Good luck.

So because iOS apps can't run on Android phones, Apple is a monopoly and should be forced to use USB-C? I'm very confused by what you're trying to say. If apps not running on other OSes is enough to count as lock-in, then every OS creates lock-in. I've bought many Windows apps over the years, but they don't run on my linux laptop, and vice-versa. Does that mean both linux and windows should be regulated as monopolies? I don't think so. What you call "lock-in" are just software incompatibilities. Or do you think Apple should be forced to write drivers for every Android phone out there, and sell and support their OS on those platforms?

> A political organization like EU has no say in this.

This is the short-sighted view. The unguided free market very often makes "decisions" that are detrimental to society as a whole, and it is absolutely necessary for political organisations to correct for this.

This is a false dichotomy. The government and politicians makes and mandates decisions that are detrimental to society. Often to their own benefit.

And they have no competition. It would be too political to list these. But, I am sure both sides of the political spectrum can come up with innumerable examples.

Firstly, with your government, you get a vote. But just about competition: the competition is that you can move to a different jurisdiction (i.e. country). And there's a lot more competition there than there is with phone makers or phone OSes.

If a Frenchman doesn't like French laws he can move to Germany and haul all his stuff there (and his pension, etc). But if you don't like the Apple ecosystem anymore, Apple will make it as difficult as possible to move.

The free market isn't the utopia libertarians think it is. You don't get to protest inside Apple, you can't petition for redress of grievances, if Apple terminates your account, you don't get a judge or jury of your Apple peers to rule if it was right or wrong.

> If a Frenchman doesn't like French laws he can move to Germany and haul all his stuff there (and his pension, etc).

A bit offtopic but this is still something I find very lacking in the EU.

For all the good it's brought us, we still have extremely different social security in each country and if you've lived in many EU countries throughout your life it's a complete PITA to reconcile things like pensions. Some countries have state pensions, others only voluntary corp plans.. I have no idea how this will turn out when I retire.

IMO these different systems should at the very least be talking together.

At least between Finland and Sweden it seems to work fine. My mother is from Finland and lives in Sweden now. She got a phonecall from Finland when it was time for her pension. Just confirmed with her and set it up so she gets her pension transfered to her account every month. She had just about forgotten about it since it was 40+ years ago she moved to Sweden.

As is stated below countries with similar systems cooperate easier, Scandinavia, Germany, Netherlands are more or less automatic. This is slowly getting better, EU is working on it. Some key words: EESSI with RINA (stands for reference implementation..), and more generally "single digital gateway eu". The pessimist in me says that it will not be done for all countries with in 20 years, unless we give some countries lots of infrastructure for free.

Ah ok I've not seen the benefits of this. I'm from the Netherlands but lived in Ireland and Spain. I don't think they have these setups.

But I think this needs much more priority than the 'one market' benefits for big business they're working on. It's really a mess if you move around in the EU now, it's not at all like in America.

They should fix the voting too: Right now as an expat I can only vote for my home country which has zero bearing on the country I live in :/ And changing nationalities takes 10+ years.

For other stuff like health I don't mind as much (especially as Spain has a much better state health system than the Netherlands' privatised crap :) )

These are the rules for elections in Sweden; one year until you can vote in local elections, five years for national elections. You should always research this when entering a new country for work, applying for citizenship is usually a very rigid process, and it will depend on the time you send in you application. I do not know if these rules are the same all over EU.

About cooperation between countries; At least the gears are turning, even if it is not somethings that is high on the political agenda. The biggest issue is to have a central database that maps one identity in one country to another. We have not even figured out Inter-country Electronic IDs (via EIDAS) yet, there is no way to even do a manual match of identities between countries using eID. That makes it impossible for you to log on and check your pensions if you work in the wrong country.

> The government and politicians makes and mandates decisions that are detrimental to society.

Thats a RELIGIOUS statement. The government and politicans are elected by their people. They take decisions that were mandated by their people. If the people mandate something, that's that.

In Anglosphere, where FPTP system prevents the people's will from being reflected in actual politics may be causing such an environment in which what the politicians do and what the people want have little to do with each other. And it does seem to be so.

But in any country with proportional representation, its as it should be: Its the democratic will of the people that something happens.

"The people" does not need to have 'competition'. The people are, well, the society. Proposing that they need 'competition' or their power to be curbed is reactionary.

Society and legislators should only forbid harmful action. Not doing something helpful is very different than doing something hurtful.

Compelling helpful action leads to all kinds of absurd conclusions.

For example, that we should we compel doctors to work more hours because anytime they spend at home is to the detriment of their patients.

Obviously not. If doctors can't take care of their patients within a normal working day, the answer is to have more doctors rather than make the existing ones work unsustainably long hours.

I wasn't suggesting that we do so, I was pointing out the absurdity of saying that not doing something for social benefit is the same as harming Society

You stated categorically that "society and legislators should only forbid harmful action" rather than "compelling helpful action" and then chose a particularly nonsensical example of "compelling helpful action" to prove your point. There are plenty of (much more realistic) examples of "compelling helpful action" which don't lead to "absurd conclusions."

Yes, I think it is a categorical truth.

Yes, I chose an extreme and absurd example to illustrate the point. I said as much in the post.

I agree that there are many realistic examples of compelling action. If you provide some I would probably disagree that the government should be doing them.

It seems to me like the EU considers companies making their own proprietary phone charger connectors as “harmful”. So I’m having trouble understanding what you take issue with here.

I'm saying that it isn't harmful and they shouldn't be making that law.

Claims that apple chargers are harmful are logically bankrupt.

If I like tuna sandwiches, am I harmed if a restaurant doesn't have it on the menu? Of course not! They are literally doing nothing to me.

I don't have to eat there any more than I have to buy an iPhone.

> I'm saying that it isn't harmful and they shouldn't be making that law.

It appears the legislators in question disagree with you. I guess you’re free to contact them and try to convince them of your beliefs.

Yes, this is how free democracies work. People can disagree, criticize, and convince.

Plenty of folks in this thread disagree with you, not only the EU legislative branch. You seem to be missing the fact that we have a society here and it demands concessions and compromises to be part of one.

>You seem to be missing the fact that we have a society here and it demands concessions and compromises to be part of one.

No reason that society has to demand this concession. Society will not crumble if Apple has unique connectors. Apple isn't hurting anyone.

I prefer live and let live, over trying to squeeze ever concession I can out of people.

Please don't refer to the "legislative branch" of the EU. The EU doesn't implement separation of powers like most governments do. Laws like this originate with, are passed by and are enforced by the Commission.

There is a so-called Parliament. It's more like the US House of Lords power-wise. It can slow down legislation or tweak it a bit. It can't actually change the law, which means it's not a Parliament.

There is a set of courts. You can appeal to them against the decisions of the Commission after the punishment is enacted. Unlike in normal democratic systems of government, the government doesn't have to prove guilt in a neutral court of law. They assert guilt, fine you a few billion dollars and then if you have enough money left over you can appeal in the courts. Years will pass and if you eventually win, you might get the money back. Of course the Commission might then just fine you again - the rules are vague and being in compliance essentially political. The courts also have a history of activism and 'discovering' new laws in the texts of existing laws.

The EU is structurally and philosophically a Soviet-style system, which makes sense given its origins in the Ventotene Manifesto. Like all such systems it has institutions that use the names as western democratic institutions, but on close inspection the rules are sufficiently different that they aren't effective.

"we have a society here and it demands concessions"

"Society" doesn't care about phone connectors or make demands. Governments do that. Survey the populations in EU countries and their top priorities are nowhere even close to this. They mostly care about the economy, immigration and climate change.

I can't wait for the EU to become a federation. I don't see it happening in my lifetime but who knows what the next crisis will bring. But I digress...

> "Society" doesn't care about phone connectors or make demands. Governments do that. Survey the populations in EU countries and their top priorities are nowhere even close to this. They mostly care about the economy, immigration and climate change.

If you asked me what the top issues in the EU are, my top 3 answers would be:

1. energy policy

2. energy policy

3. idiots at the helm of ECB (how is the new hermes scarf, mrs Lagarde?) who can't comprehend energy policy

but! if you asked me specifically if I want to see phone charging cables standardized by legislation, I'd say yes, why now and not 10 years ago. Call me a Soviet for that, I don't care.

Thank you for articulating my point at greater length.

>It's more like the US House of Lords power-wise.

> Compelling helpful action leads to all kinds of absurd conclusions.

No it doesn't. Besides, "not doing something helpful" vs "doing something hurtful" is often simply a matter of perspective.

> For example, that we should we compel doctors to work more hours because anytime they spend at home is to the detriment of their patients.

To use your own language, this example is completely absurd. Here is your logic applied to forbidding harmful actions: "Setting speed limits on roads leads to all kinds of absurd conclusions, for example that we should forbid people to walk too fast in their homes."

Cool. As soon as Apple relinquishes all monopoly on IP, then we can talk about if governments can interfere here.

These companies hold a craptonne of legal power to force me and you. I'm sorry that I have zero regrets when it comes to just a common standard... Just like I have zero regrets that all power outlets in EU are 220v/50Hz

Actually the only thing that EU is interesting is for standardizing stuff

You seem to be placing a lot of doom and gloom onto the proscription of a given physical port.

Its not as if the EU mandated flawed encryption, or silicon manufactured only within the bloc.

Phone’s already aren’t a free market.

Do you, or any consumer, have perfect information about the phone market? No. Does your phone comply with FCC and EU rules? Yes. Does it contain mercury? No. Are there any taxes or tariffs on them? Probably. All of those and more mean we don’t have a free market.

Corporations exist because we let them, and they play by the rules we decide.

Sorry, but can't agree here. Lightning is USB2. The only thing Apple uses it for, is thei cable business

> It's Apples best interest to make technology that the consumers want so that they can sell more units of that.

This is so hilariously wrong. It's in Apple's best interest to do whatever makes them the most money. Sometimes that happens to coincide with what customers want, but it often doesn't, _especially_ in a market with a duopoly with an incredibly high affinity for lock-in.

> It's Apples best interest to make technology that the consumers want so that they can sell more units of that.

And in the absence of a competitive advantage, you create a captive market. Apple was smart in quietly creating a captive market as they built out their ecosystem because they saw this eventuality. One of the ways they created it was by making the ecosystem both expensive to enter and leave. You're heavily invested in proprietary hardware and all of your digital assets are locked to the ecosystem and cannot be utilized outside it.

The Lightning port was innovative at the time it was introduced but it has been eclipsed in most ways by USB-C. Now it's just a DRM'd lock-in mechanism.

My partner recently switched to an iPhone. I bought a USB-C Charger, and some *certified* Lightning to USB-A cables in various lengths from various manufacturers to enabled the device to be charged all over the home and in the cars. Suddenly after 3 months the iPhone refuses to charge from any of the cables or using the USB-C cable that came with the phone plugged into the USB-C Charger. The cables work however when I use an old iPhone 6 or if I plug the new iPhone into a computer using one of the cables. No errors, no warnings, just nothing; the iPhone just refuses to charge from them.

Apple says the DRM exists to protect users from dodgy or counterfeit cables that might pose a risk to the users. Unsurprisingly [this official Apple cable](https://i.imgur.com/icsPxJx.jpg) will charge the iPhone just fine at full speed.

I for one welcome this regulation though I'm sure Apple will find a way to nerf it.

>But in long sight it's a hinderence to progress by enforcing a technology on the market instead of letting the free market decide the technology.

No, it's not in any way a hindrance to the market, merely one player who desires rent seeking. What it is doing is enforcing standards on manufacturers instead of the other way around.

Maybe we can have an internet standard for messaging apps next?

Yes let's.

The EU is working on it... Unless that's what you meant?

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/04/eu-digital-markets-act...

Isn't that covered by the recently-passed Digital Services Act? It mandates messaging platform interoperability.

Oh please - Apple had more than a decade to improve on the lightning cable - you somehow infer that progress will be hindered now because of this ruling? You do realise why standards actually exist?

> It's Apples best interest to make technology that the consumers want so that they can sell more units of that.

It's Apple's best interest to do what makes them money, and it often aligns with what customers want.

> A political organization like EU has no say in this.

Standards bodies in the EU have be defining things like this for decades.

> EU citizens already make this decision for themselves by voting with money and choosing to buy/not buy an iPhone.

As an Apple customer I might be voting with my money, but not on the connector specifically -- just on whether the product's collective pros outweigh their cons (and whether it's better than the competitor's, ofc). If I could vote, I would've voted for USB-C a long time ago, but I just get to choose between a set of products with varying compromises. Don't know why you try to make it seem like a democratic choice.

> Today is one of the dark days of EU. In short sight it's a victory. But in long sight it's a hinderence to progress by enforcing a technology on the market instead of letting the free market decide the technology.

If the free market had its say, it'd be choosing profits over the environment, consumer safety and worker rights every time. Or..? Why hasn't the US, with much laxer regulations free-marketed itself to utopia?

> This is such a short sighted view.

It's not. The EU tried to do it the easy way, where companies would agree amongst themselves. This was finally accomplished in 2009[1] by every one except Apple.

[1]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2009/06/10-companies-agree-t...

After 13 years, the EU is finally forcing Apple.

> EU citizens already make this decision for themselves by voting with money

We're also voting with our votes and most of us agree with that the EU is doing here.

> We're also voting with our votes and most of us agree with that the EU is doing here.

Never voted for crap like this or the GDPR. I voted for strong leadership against Russian aggression or not becoming energy dependent of an evil regime, but I guess mandating trivialities is so much easier.

Yes, we don't have a direct democracy (although you can vote for parties advocating it), but it's a lot more than you get with Apple. You don't get a vote on anything. "Voting with your wallet" isn't a vote at all. You can just choose to leave, but Apple makes it every difficult.

The interesting thing there is, the connector discussed in 2009 was the micro-USB connector. Had the EU forced tech companies in 2009 to use a micro-USB connector, would that mean they would still be on it now, and not using the (far better) USB-C connector?

I think I'm for this decision overall, but otoh I'm really glad that the EU didn't force everyone onto micro-USB back in 2009. If they EU hadn't done this now, I wonder how I would feel about the possibility when 2035 rolls around?

> Had the EU forced tech companies in 2009 to use a micro-USB connector, would that mean they would still be on it now, and not using the (far better) USB-C connector?

They did exactly that, force micro-usb, but in 2010: https://www.engadget.com/2010-12-29-european-standardization...

And now it's upgrading to usb-c, so they do seem to be able to change with technology.

> And now it's upgrading to usb-c, so they do seem to be able to change with technology.

That definitely makes me feel better about that process then, so thanks :-)

> A political organization like EU has no say in this. EU citizens already make this decision for themselves by voting with money and choosing to buy/not buy an iPhone.

I think it's important to point out that most EU countries do not subscribe to the exact same free-market vision that the US does. And the biggest country that did has recently left it.

Most of Europe is totally happy with a much more restricted free market than the US would ever allow. This is not something imposed on us people. It's what the majority wants, aka democracy.

Yup this is huge government overreach and the EU increasingly looks hostile to tech companies which produce most of the value in modern economies.

Don’t like the lightning cable? Buy a different phone, it’s really that simple

If we had a true free market, without that IP monopoly crap, I would be able to buy a 100% compatible iPhone clone with USB-C.

But since Apple gets the benefit of IP monopoly - I can't.

yeah I mean companies have IP which is reasonable, but you can buy a different phone that is USB-C compatible

Out of curiosity: You are from the US, own lots of Aple appliances and hold APPL stock? Which one of my bets is wrong?

If only Apple appliances all used lighting!

It's hilarious, if you have an iphone, an apple watch and an ipad you need 3! different cables. You can't even get around 2 of them with wireless because the apple watch doesn't support qi charging, so you need 2 different pads for iphone and watch. I will never understand how apple let it come to this...

If it is a free market, let me install a different app store than the apple one.

EU is not trying to impose regulation or standardization on highly innovative areas of hardware or chipset design or software design or anything of that matter. They are imposing it for something that has largely been understood and comoditized (electric charging of phones via cable and data transfer using open communication protocol) where there is little room for getting any kind of competitive advantage or differentiation or some significant innovation. Speaking about hindrance of progress is largely far fetched and not based on reality. Things like this are really not blocking any meaningful progress but they indeed are largely abused by enterprises to push proprietary things to consumer so that it can be monetized and consumer locked in the vendor ecosystem.

Then what about EU enforcing more energy efficient buildings and home appliances, electric vehicles and more?

EU is not a political organization, it is a political and economical union. If companies are left alone, they will never make a decision that does not benefit themselves. This is why we need EU, to make the decisions that benefit the planet and the people, thus leveling the field, so companies can compete within sane limits.

depending on your definition of "free market", if you're looking for the benefits of a free market, apple's monopolistic behavior is also a source of market failure

> A political organization like EU has no say in this. EU citizens already make this decision for themselves by voting with money and choosing to buy/not buy an iPhone.

Surely this goes both ways - if you don’t want to play by the rules you can vote with your business and not sell in to that market?

>It's Apples best interest to make technology that the consumers want so that they can sell more units of that Consumers wants? More like Apple wants to use one of the few proprietary technologies that they can get away with, so they can sell you cables, whilst fostering an almost cult-like adulation of their company & what they do so that any time Apple's decisions are questioned, legions of people defend them for no reason.

The lightning connector is outmoded. The cables Apple makes are designed to fail, mostly around the heatshrink area. The digital standards that lightning supports are outdated: 0.480Gbps vs 20-40Gbps for USB C/+TB.

> any time Apple's decisions are questioned, legions of people defend them for no reason.

Maybe because your arguments are very one-sided and border on cult-like anti-Apple beliefs, like

> The cables Apple makes are designed to fail

All cables will fail with use eventually, there's no question to that. But suggesting somewhere inside Apple is an evil mastermind that's trying to get me to buy stuff that's deliberately engineered to be bad to get me to buy more is an accusation of which I've yet to see convincing proof. I respect your decision not to shop Apple, but I really don't like that fact you're spreading false or unverifiable claims.

(n=1, I've had 1 lightning cable break in the last 10 years)

> What just happened is, EU, a political organization

An unelected political organization

European Parliament voted on this. It is quite literally elected.

I don't care about private companies, if they want to operate with people they must follow a standard and so the news is good. All the time these companies do whatever they want like ditching headphone jack, fixed batteries, even if people don't want it. They force the change and we have to comply.

So yeah it's great for long term.

> "the regular charging cable"

This is the problem I have with this choice. USB-C isn't one cable. It's a big variety of poorly-labelled possible cables, complying with a ton of different standards.

USB-C can be just USB2.0 capable, 3.1 Gen1, 3.1 Gen2, Thunderbolt 3 capable, etc. Some cables can carry 3A. Some 5A.

When your 'universal' charging cable doesn't provide fast charging, is it because your charger doesn't provide the right voltages/wattage? Is it a broken USB-PD implementation (eg the Nintendo Switch)? is it that the cable is underspecced (and a lot of USB-C cables on the market don't actually meet the spec)?

I think the intention is good but USB-C carries so much complexity that I don't think this helps consumers as much as everyone is making out.

USB-A had a similar problem (but on a much smaller scale). There also was heterogeneity in build quality. But over time features and quality converged. I think we should expect something similar here.

I didn't have to keep separate sets of visually identical cables for USB-A to do different things - that's already a reality with USB-C -> USB-C cables.

I can tell at a glance if a USB-A cable supports USB3.0 for instance.

I can't tell that for a USB-C -> USB-C cable.

The new labeling requirements will hopefully help with that

> I am an iPhone user, but having an iPhone is not ubiquitous here, almost all of my friends/special other, use an Android phone with USB-C.

yes, this is an interesting statement. and it's true.

basically in the countries that form the European Union Android has a higher market share than iOS. in some big countries like Germany, Spain, France and Italy Android has between 60% to 70% of the market.

but what's more interesting is this: in the UK, Canada, Australia and the US the iPhone has more market share (and in NZ it's very close).

anecdotally, in the UK pretty much everyone in big cities have iPhones. i very rarely see an Android device.

i do wonder why. it could have to do with cheaper prices for Android and a general lower penetration of technology in those countries, but i think this seems too facile.

I have a feeling the iPhone market penetration, in the named countries (Central EU vs Common Wealth) has a strong correlation with other aspects of the daily life in said markets (for example Facebook use, MSN Messanger --ok, some 10 years ago-- use of cash in daily purchase) At least that is my feeling, which of course can be completely biased. I would find really interesting a study in that.

Not only that Android is cheaper but also the mean income in countries where Android is prevalent is lower than those where iOS is, with exceptions like Germany, France (I'd need to see market share data from these exceptions)

iOS popularity correlates more with the use of English as a first language than mean income: Germany and France are huge "exceptions" for income.

In all likelihood, iPhone popularity is cultural (i.e. popular in the Anglosphere), which has an incestuous media/advertising landscape where Apple is seen as cool/hip.

Going wireless charging only is probably not gonna happen anytime soon. Wireless charging is significantly less efficient than wired. The difference might not matter much if you are using power from the wall*, but if you are charging off a battery bank you want as much efficiency as you can--you don't want to waste power!

*(being less efficient while charging from wall might not matter to you as an individual but consider if everybody was charging with such an inefficient means... that might add up to a lot of waste)

> The difference might not matter much if you are using power from the wall, but if you are charging off a battery bank you want as much efficiency as you can--you don't want to waste power!

Wireless power banks are already a thing, and they're great because you don't have to mess around with cables. For those of you not using iPhones, they support standard Qi charging as well as faster and more efficient MagSafe charging.

I care about wireless charging efficiency as much as I care about plug-in USB charging efficiency, which is not a lot. If wireless charging is half as efficient, it's costing me a couple bucks extra per year.

For wireless power bank, the problem isn't cost but efficiency. Half transferring efficiency compared to wired means that you need double capacity power bank to charge same amount of energy. I want small and wired. Wired is also useful because power bank can be separated so I put it on pocket or bag while I have a phone on my hand.

The main problem I have with USB-C is that it is not a particularly good standard for power delivery. For one, USB-C is not "IP rated" for use in the kitchen or the bathroom, so you still need separate chargers there. Also the USB-C connector supports fast data delivery, which makes it a lot more expensive than a connector that focusses on power only.

A standard that would do just power delivery <100W and works in damp environments, so it could cheap and universal, would have been so much better.

> A standard that would do just power delivery <100W and works in damp environments, so it could cheap and universal, would have been so much better.

Don't you just have a RCD/GFCI on your outlet / breaker for this purpose?

The breaker box is a last line of defence if things have gone wrong. Plugs designed for use in a bathroom will not short out if they get a bit damp, etc.

Agree on the IP rating, that is definitely not ideal - although excusable in practice.

Regarding cost: the fast data is optional. Charging-only usb-c receptables are available for $0.025 / each. To be fair, a micro-b can be found for $0.015 so it is more expensive, but it's not exactly going to bankrupt anyone.

> e-waste

The irony of, e.g., Brazil, passing laws that Apple can't leave the cable and charger out of the box.

Meanwhile, who with a current phone uses a cable to charge any more? Even before MagSafe the wireless is far more convenient, now with MagSafe and a zillion brands of stands that do phone + watch + AirPods all wireless, not to mention even MagSafe for cars that charge and don't drop the phone on bad roads, cables are redundant. And while they won't all do the same top speed, in general the coasters charge both Android and iPhone happily.

But, speaking of docks, that's the real issue -- lightning works beautifully when docking a phone into a stereo or alarm clock or etc, USB-C not so much. Basically, on lightning if the tab breaks you get a new cheap cable, on USB-C if the tab breaks, you need a new dock.

Raises hand. I don't have an iPhone, but I find wireless charging to just be kinda annoying. The only place I use it is in my car, which has a built-in charging pad, with good mechanical design that keeps the phone from moving around (and possibly losing the wireless charging "connection"). Otherwise, everywhere else, I'm always wired when I charge, and I kinda don't care about wireless charging.

> But, speaking of docks, that's the real issue -- lightning works beautifully when docking a phone into a stereo or alarm clock or etc, USB-C not so much.

I mean, there are still docks out there that have the old 30-pin Apple iPod/iPhone/iPad connector (not many; I think I saw one in an old hotel last year, but that's it). If USB-C is the primary connector used, then that's what dock manufacturers will use. And, bonus, manufacturers that actually support more than one connector can eventually drop Lightning as an option, and save on costs.

> Basically, on lightning if the tab breaks you get a new cheap cable, on USB-C if the tab breaks, you need a new dock.

Er, what? If the tab in a dock breaks, you need to get a new dock with either connector. The Lighting connector tab is just as breakable (if not more so, as it's thinner) than a USB-C plug, and if the one in your dock breaks, you're just as out of luck.

> Er, what? If the tab in a dock breaks, you need to get a new dock with either connector.

To be clear: iPhones do not have a tab, so iPhones don't break, the lightning cable does. iPads now have a tab. Hopefully it won't break.

A USB-C standing phone dock effectively has a tab on both dock (to insert into a phone's socket) and in the phone (the tab that sits inside the USB-C socket), so that's 2 tabs for one docking experience.

> who with a current phone uses a cable to charge any more?

I think you may be living in a bubble.

You're living in a bubble. Cable based charging is still far more common than wireless. There are still people who refuse to use bluetooth headphones. I am not carrying around another device that requires charging

> I am not carrying around another device that requires charging

I mean ... the device requires charging either way. Unless you only use wired phones.

> Cable based charging is still far more common than wireless.

All old things are more common than new things until they're not.

I narrowed the audience to "current" phone, whatever the most recent model is. Folks carrying those tend to be the early adopters and tend to be using the new capabilities.

tbh it's kind of ridiculous that I need a different dongle for my ipad and my iphone. I know that Apples makes money selling dongles, but that's a crap UX.

As a Turk living in EU, I second the comment above.

Technology is still changing fairly rapidly. Regulation is not.

There will come a time when flashy new tech that everyone is drooling over will not be available in the EU due to this law.

This whole discussion is only a thing because Apple's tech isn't changing rapidly enough for regulation, the exact opposite of your scenario. Also good luck producing a functioning smartphone that's too thin for the USB-C connector before the EU can react (the new iPhone 14 has exactly 3 times the thickness, so it'll take a while).

The much more realistic reason for a new phone not being released here is the new proposal to enforce 5 years of replacement parts for all phones among other things.

Serious question, why is is it a problem to put a tiny cable in a landfill? The amount they leach is essentially zero. The EU would have done more for the environment by spending $20k cleaning up an extra few car batteries. This is so obviously pandering and protectionism and it's surprising to me people believe the "e-waste" justification.

Seriously, is there an accounting of the environmental damage caused by cell phone cables (not power converters)? Everything I've seen points to the damage being substantially less globally than a single digit number of cars or batteries.

The problem is that it is a lot of tiny cables, and a lot of chargers with them.

Additionally, it also protects the consumer by preventing companies from locking consumers into buying device-specific chargers at greatly inflated prices. It might even become common for devices to come without chargers: why have 10 chargers lying around when all your devices use the same charging connector?

But no, this is not true. The iphone charger is already USB. I use them with my Android phone all the time, and iphone users charge with my pixel charger. Those already interoperate.

I understand the e-waste and consumer protection argument for the charger (power converter), but why the cable?

This isn't really the case in practice, though.

Up until recently everyone used USB-A on the charger end, with a dozen different competing fast charge protocols. Chargers had the same connector, but they weren't fully interoperable. USB-C is slowly trying to fix this.

I completely agree that the cables aren't a massive deal. But on the other hand, if you are already standardizing chargers, why not do the cables too? Personally, I see no overwhelmingly good reason not to do it.

Because the connectors still suck and there's a ton of room for innovation. Imagine if we were stuck with USB-C forever, that would be bad. It's already worse than lightning as a connector for cell phones.

The default shouldn't be to place arbitrary restrictions unless there's a good reason not to. Governments should restrict behavior when the restriction is justified. It should be the EU government's responsibility to demonstrate that banning lightning cables is good, not the other way around.

How exactly is it worse that Lightning?

iPhones already come with a USB-C -> Lightning cable. They already don't come with chargers.

> It is also ironic how Apple markets heavily on how you can take great RAW photos or videos but somehow you have to use lightning USB2 speeds to transfer them. Lightning is barely smaller than USB-C, and clearly my iPhone thickness will not change if it switches to USB-C.

There is nothing about a USB-C cable or port that mandates SuperSpeed (err, 5GB or higher) data transfer rates. Most compliant charging cables are still Hi-Speed (480 mbps), and capped at 30W (higher requires an active component in the cable).

Similarly, there is nothing about Lightning that restricts the transfer speed to Hi-Speed. There were iPad Pro models with lightning that supported a USB 3 adapter, which had (I believe) 5 Gbps transfer speed. However, the decision was made to switch the subsequent generations of Pro models to USB-C, leaving that part as a bit of a curiosity.

I suspect because of the sheer volume of lightning cables out there, Apple simply doesn't want to cause confusion by creating 'tiers' of certified cables that have the same set of plugs on the ends and which thus look identical, but which have different properties. If only the USB-IF considered such things.

> If we want to really be more environmentally friendly, wouldn't it make more sense to have no cable at all with the devices we buy, force the sellers to clearly tell the consumers about it and offer the cable on the side only if needed?

One could hope! This should also shrink the packaging down further, having a measurable cost reduction on shipping as well as packaging waste.

I go through a lot of phones, but have relatives who are on a 3-4 year upgrade cycle. Thus, I've been able to find good homes for any excess USB-C to lightning cables (and they've been ecstatic when I've given them powerful multi-port USB-C chargers as gifts as well).

Hopefully we'll see countries continue to change their laws so that you don't need to bundle cables, chargers and/or headsets with purchases. France I believe finally changed their laws requiring a bundled headset, and it went into effect this year.

> I would also add that all lightning cables won't suddenly go to the landfill in 2024. Many people will keep their iPhones/AirPods for a while after that date. Many would probably donate their old lightning cables to whoever needs them

I'd expect the vast majority to be trashed by 2029, along with the majority of USB-A chargers. I've had support issues where family has thought their devices had bad software or failing batteries, but it turns out they had accidentally switched to some cheap, low wattage USB-A charger.

I somewhat expect the wide array of differences between USB-A, USB-C power delivery support, and active vs passive cables will mean that devices may start to give troubleshooting guidance for slow charging. At this point, I would expect quite a few USB-A chargers and cabling to go to the trash.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com