Hacker News Reader

Comment by blue_light_man | Hacker News Reader

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.

View on HN

> 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?

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?

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.

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.

> 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.

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.

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.

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.

>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.

> 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.

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

> 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."

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.

> 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.

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.

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.

> 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.

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 :-)

> 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.

> 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.

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?

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

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

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

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.

> 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? :)

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.

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.

> 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 :-/.

> 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.

> 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.

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?

>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?

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

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

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

Yes let's.

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!)

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.

> 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.

Magnetic breakaway USB-C cables are already a thing.

Remind us in 10 years.

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.

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.

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!

> 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.

> 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?

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

> 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.

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.

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.

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…

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

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

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.

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.

>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)

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

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.

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.

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.

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...

> 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?

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

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

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

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?

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

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.

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

> What just happened is, EU, a political organization

An unelected political organization

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

Reply on news.ycombinator.com