The EU is not saying “companies should use USB-C”, they are saying “the industry should agree on a connector, and all should use that”.
They went to the companies that are key players in the market and asked “what connectors do you think should be used right now?”, and the companies said “USB-C”, so that’s what it’s used.
If in the future a better connector appears and the industry wants to change to it, they have to tell the EU “Now we want to use connector XYZ”, and that will be what everybody use. The standard is set by the industry, not the EU.
The EU knows what it’s doing. They don’t claim to know better than the industry. They just want the industry to do things that favor the consumer, not screw them to favor themselves…
American consumers are used at being screwed by companies that only see for the benefit of their shareholders. It doesn’t matter if the consumer has to spend more, or produce more waste. That’s not how the EU want things. Consumers and the environment are a priority here, not only shareholders returns.
If the EU knows what it’s doing, why are they only using phone OSes from US based companies? I’d argue that they don’t know what they are doing at all considering they have made extremely little contribution to the space and yet want to regulate those products. Imagine the kind of trash they would have to use if the US companies pulled out of the EU.
You’re talking about technological advancements, I’m talking about market regulation and the environment. If the price for technological advances is to let companies pollute and destroy the Earth, I don’t want it, sorry. I prefer a slower pace, but not destroy the only planet we have. And I’m saying this from a record braking temperatures summer. And I’m not even mentioning other things we do differently in the EU, because if we start comparing, it becomes rather unfair, and i’m not looking to humiliate people.
And I’m not saying those changes are necessarily negative, I’m saying that the EU is overreaching when they contribute very little at this point. And if you really want to talk about how you “do things differently”, without the US you’d all be using PutinPhones in 2030 and have no environmental regulations at all lol.
If you’re worried about the environment you should be looking at industrial waste from China, not Apple phones.
That’s the difference. You think the EU is “overreaching”. I think the EU is putting necessary regulations to companies that are prone to cross the line again and again.
That Volkswagen cheats in the emission tests? Here comes the EU sanctions. That Meta spies on people without letting them know? Start paying the fines! That Google abuses its privilege position to eliminate competition? Behave or pay the price. The EU keeps companies in line, and as a result, we have a healthier market. That’s how things are done here…
And please, don’t mention Putin. Our tanks and weapons are used in Ukraine as well as the American ones. NATO is a thing, you know?
Because if it’s done right, a single USB-C charger and cable is all you’ll need, instead of 2 or three different chargers. You buy less things, less trash out there polluting the environment. And it’s not like Apple hasn’t made you throw charging cables before… remember the 30-pin connector?
I do remember the 30-pin connector and how up in arms people were about the change. As it’s not just the cables, it was also all the accessories. When they went from 30-pin to lightning they said they designed it to last a long time and it wasn’t going to be something they changed frequently, because they understood the impact. The EU is now trying to force their hand on that. 30-pin was made for the iPod. The iPhone does a lot more and has different needs. I’m not saying we never need change, just that it shouldn’t be up to the government of 1 little part of the world to dictate what that change is.
Also, not needing to buy any new stuff means less trash than forcing people to buy new stuff. I assume that’s why the iPhone seems to be going last in Apple’s move to USB-C. If they move their lower volume stuff over and give it some time, a good number of people will already have other USB-C stuff they can use the new iPhone with, rather than leading with their highest volume product and forcing everyone to buy new instead of reusing other stuff they may have gotten along the way from other stuff they were already buying. I still know people who don’t have any USB-C stuff.
The fact that you need to buy a special cable to connect an iPhone to a MacBook (for example) should be a motivation enough for the change.
Apple has moved most of their products to USB-C, except the iPhone, and the only explanation possible is that using Lighting is profitable for them, even if it’s not convenient for users. Not all iPhone users are Mac users, and as you said, there are more iPhone users than mac users. All those iPhone users (and Mac users that use iPhones) are forced to buy cables from Apple or an authorized MFi manufacturer) that money will be gone with USB-C, as you’ll be able to use any cable brand you want.
On my part, I’m glad they’re being forced to do it. They seem more worried on incrementing their pile on money than doing something that may benefit their customers, in this case. So, good riddance lightning cables! You won’t be missed. And thanks EU, for doing it.
the only explanation possible is that using Lighting is profitable for them
I gave you another possible explanation in the comment you replied to. They have a whole product line to move and the left iPhone for last, because it has the most impact, and if they leave it for last, it will have less consumer impact. Why not assume good intentions when there is a reasonable explanation?
If it was all about the money, why would they have used the Qi standard for their wireless charging? Why would they have gone all in on USB-C on MacBooks, facing a ton of backlash, to push that port when everyone else was hedging by just including 1 USB-C port at best? Sure they make money from Lightning, but it’s likely a rounding error on their bottom line.
It’s also not a bad thing to have some cable certifications. I’ve seen tear downs of cheap 3rd party charging bricks, or tests of cheap cables, and they’re all really bad and out of spec. They’re cheap for a reason. Maybe that will lead to device damage, maybe it won’t, but I’d rather not risk a $700 phone over saving $10 on a non-certified cable/charger that cuts corners. It happened to my sister, I went against my judgement and bought her a 3rd party cable she asked for instead of the Apple one I thought she should get. A few months later she called me crying because he phone wouldn’t charge anymore. I felt like shit, even though I technically just got her what she wanted.
Apple makes as much good and reasonable decisions as they make questionable ones.
But why could that be? Simple, they make what interest and benefits THEM first. And if it incidentally benefits the customers, fine. If not, people will go up in arms, but they don’t care because they know that in the end, they’re powerless and will keep buying their products.
They don’t care if customers have to change accessories (the move to Lightning is the proof), they change things, or use new standards as long as it benefits THEM in any way, or is in their interest. All those changes you mentioned benefited THEM, and in some cases, the customers too, but in others, they didn’t and then customers got upset.
And they simply don’t want to change to USB-C on the iPhone because it’s not beneficial for them, it just benefits the customers. And that’s, in my opinion, all that there’s to it. And again, I’m glad that, for a change, they’ll be forced to do something that benefits the customers and not them.
I don’t see why it’s them or us. If Apple (or any company) can make the customers happy, people will by more products and create more positive word of mouth, which is good for Apple. Generally the most successful companies aren’t the ones sacrificing their customers for a couple extra cents. That may work in the short term, but not over decades.
Lightning was better that the 30-pin one. Or maybe the first iterations of USB-C. These days, USB-C is way more capable, technically, than Lightning, and that’s why the industry use it so massively (even Apple for other products).
They don’t charge it because it will only benefit consumers, but not the company. And they only care for things that benefit them, irregardless of it benefiting the customers.
I don’t know what makes any company make the decisions they do, but it’s easy to see that lightning is a better connector for a phone.
You’re right that usbc supports more lanes and by extension a higher transfer speed and that usbc has a higher voltage power delivery standard.
The better physical port to have on a phone is lightning. It’s more durable, easier to clean, and the cable breaks instead of the port.
The environment phones live in makes those much more important than faster transfers and charging speed (every phone I’ve dealt with from any manufacturer actually throttles back the charging speed to save the battery!).
So while usbc has significant advantages over lightning, it’s physically a bad port to have on a device that’s hanging around in your pocket and that makes it worse.
Maybe you should try reading what’s proposed…
The EU is not saying “companies should use USB-C”, they are saying “the industry should agree on a connector, and all should use that”.
They went to the companies that are key players in the market and asked “what connectors do you think should be used right now?”, and the companies said “USB-C”, so that’s what it’s used.
If in the future a better connector appears and the industry wants to change to it, they have to tell the EU “Now we want to use connector XYZ”, and that will be what everybody use. The standard is set by the industry, not the EU.
The EU knows what it’s doing. They don’t claim to know better than the industry. They just want the industry to do things that favor the consumer, not screw them to favor themselves…
American consumers are used at being screwed by companies that only see for the benefit of their shareholders. It doesn’t matter if the consumer has to spend more, or produce more waste. That’s not how the EU want things. Consumers and the environment are a priority here, not only shareholders returns.
I do agree on this, the EU doesn’t just blindly fly out with a proposal, they actually do research before they plan on passing anything.
If the EU knows what it’s doing, why are they only using phone OSes from US based companies? I’d argue that they don’t know what they are doing at all considering they have made extremely little contribution to the space and yet want to regulate those products. Imagine the kind of trash they would have to use if the US companies pulled out of the EU.
You’re talking about technological advancements, I’m talking about market regulation and the environment. If the price for technological advances is to let companies pollute and destroy the Earth, I don’t want it, sorry. I prefer a slower pace, but not destroy the only planet we have. And I’m saying this from a record braking temperatures summer. And I’m not even mentioning other things we do differently in the EU, because if we start comparing, it becomes rather unfair, and i’m not looking to humiliate people.
And I’m not saying those changes are necessarily negative, I’m saying that the EU is overreaching when they contribute very little at this point. And if you really want to talk about how you “do things differently”, without the US you’d all be using PutinPhones in 2030 and have no environmental regulations at all lol.
If you’re worried about the environment you should be looking at industrial waste from China, not Apple phones.
That’s the difference. You think the EU is “overreaching”. I think the EU is putting necessary regulations to companies that are prone to cross the line again and again.
That Volkswagen cheats in the emission tests? Here comes the EU sanctions. That Meta spies on people without letting them know? Start paying the fines! That Google abuses its privilege position to eliminate competition? Behave or pay the price. The EU keeps companies in line, and as a result, we have a healthier market. That’s how things are done here…
And please, don’t mention Putin. Our tanks and weapons are used in Ukraine as well as the American ones. NATO is a thing, you know?
How is making me throw away all my old charging cables and buy a bunch of new ones better for the environment?
Because if it’s done right, a single USB-C charger and cable is all you’ll need, instead of 2 or three different chargers. You buy less things, less trash out there polluting the environment. And it’s not like Apple hasn’t made you throw charging cables before… remember the 30-pin connector?
I do remember the 30-pin connector and how up in arms people were about the change. As it’s not just the cables, it was also all the accessories. When they went from 30-pin to lightning they said they designed it to last a long time and it wasn’t going to be something they changed frequently, because they understood the impact. The EU is now trying to force their hand on that. 30-pin was made for the iPod. The iPhone does a lot more and has different needs. I’m not saying we never need change, just that it shouldn’t be up to the government of 1 little part of the world to dictate what that change is.
Also, not needing to buy any new stuff means less trash than forcing people to buy new stuff. I assume that’s why the iPhone seems to be going last in Apple’s move to USB-C. If they move their lower volume stuff over and give it some time, a good number of people will already have other USB-C stuff they can use the new iPhone with, rather than leading with their highest volume product and forcing everyone to buy new instead of reusing other stuff they may have gotten along the way from other stuff they were already buying. I still know people who don’t have any USB-C stuff.
The fact that you need to buy a special cable to connect an iPhone to a MacBook (for example) should be a motivation enough for the change.
Apple has moved most of their products to USB-C, except the iPhone, and the only explanation possible is that using Lighting is profitable for them, even if it’s not convenient for users. Not all iPhone users are Mac users, and as you said, there are more iPhone users than mac users. All those iPhone users (and Mac users that use iPhones) are forced to buy cables from Apple or an authorized MFi manufacturer) that money will be gone with USB-C, as you’ll be able to use any cable brand you want.
On my part, I’m glad they’re being forced to do it. They seem more worried on incrementing their pile on money than doing something that may benefit their customers, in this case. So, good riddance lightning cables! You won’t be missed. And thanks EU, for doing it.
I gave you another possible explanation in the comment you replied to. They have a whole product line to move and the left iPhone for last, because it has the most impact, and if they leave it for last, it will have less consumer impact. Why not assume good intentions when there is a reasonable explanation?
If it was all about the money, why would they have used the Qi standard for their wireless charging? Why would they have gone all in on USB-C on MacBooks, facing a ton of backlash, to push that port when everyone else was hedging by just including 1 USB-C port at best? Sure they make money from Lightning, but it’s likely a rounding error on their bottom line.
It’s also not a bad thing to have some cable certifications. I’ve seen tear downs of cheap 3rd party charging bricks, or tests of cheap cables, and they’re all really bad and out of spec. They’re cheap for a reason. Maybe that will lead to device damage, maybe it won’t, but I’d rather not risk a $700 phone over saving $10 on a non-certified cable/charger that cuts corners. It happened to my sister, I went against my judgement and bought her a 3rd party cable she asked for instead of the Apple one I thought she should get. A few months later she called me crying because he phone wouldn’t charge anymore. I felt like shit, even though I technically just got her what she wanted.
Apple makes as much good and reasonable decisions as they make questionable ones.
But why could that be? Simple, they make what interest and benefits THEM first. And if it incidentally benefits the customers, fine. If not, people will go up in arms, but they don’t care because they know that in the end, they’re powerless and will keep buying their products.
They don’t care if customers have to change accessories (the move to Lightning is the proof), they change things, or use new standards as long as it benefits THEM in any way, or is in their interest. All those changes you mentioned benefited THEM, and in some cases, the customers too, but in others, they didn’t and then customers got upset.
And they simply don’t want to change to USB-C on the iPhone because it’s not beneficial for them, it just benefits the customers. And that’s, in my opinion, all that there’s to it. And again, I’m glad that, for a change, they’ll be forced to do something that benefits the customers and not them.
Hope that clears the point.
I don’t see why it’s them or us. If Apple (or any company) can make the customers happy, people will by more products and create more positive word of mouth, which is good for Apple. Generally the most successful companies aren’t the ones sacrificing their customers for a couple extra cents. That may work in the short term, but not over decades.
I think Jobs said it pretty well…
Young Jobs - https://youtu.be/48j493tfO-o
Old Jobs - https://youtu.be/XmRNIGqzuRI
This is not Job’s company anymore, and it hasn’t been for a while…
While Cook is not a bad CEO at all, he comes from manufacturing, and it shows.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/48j493tfO-o
https://piped.video/XmRNIGqzuRI
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
The other explanation for lightning on the phone is that it’s a better connector for a phone.
It’s simpler, easier to clean, more durable and is designed to break the cable instead of the phone when twisted or bent.
Lightning was better that the 30-pin one. Or maybe the first iterations of USB-C. These days, USB-C is way more capable, technically, than Lightning, and that’s why the industry use it so massively (even Apple for other products).
They don’t charge it because it will only benefit consumers, but not the company. And they only care for things that benefit them, irregardless of it benefiting the customers.
I don’t know what makes any company make the decisions they do, but it’s easy to see that lightning is a better connector for a phone.
You’re right that usbc supports more lanes and by extension a higher transfer speed and that usbc has a higher voltage power delivery standard.
The better physical port to have on a phone is lightning. It’s more durable, easier to clean, and the cable breaks instead of the port.
The environment phones live in makes those much more important than faster transfers and charging speed (every phone I’ve dealt with from any manufacturer actually throttles back the charging speed to save the battery!).
So while usbc has significant advantages over lightning, it’s physically a bad port to have on a device that’s hanging around in your pocket and that makes it worse.
Citation on the durability claim?
I’ve been using USB-C since it was released, and none of them ever broke on me.