I like USB-C and would even be in favour of the iPhone using USB-C, but I really dislike the idea that EU regulators would know what's better for consumers than consumer electronics companies and the consumers themselves.
I do kind of get it though. It's probably better for a whole host of reasons if electronics all used the same cords, but I guess you could make that argument for a lot of things. There would be benefits if there was only one mobile operating system or if all mobiles used the same interchangeable batteries, for example.
When a standard makes sense companies will generally adopt it naturally. The fact so many manufacturers use USB-C today just proves that this probably doesn't need to be enforced. I suppose it's just strange to me this would even need to be a law or that there are people paid to pass laws like this.
Are you old enough to remember the early 2000s when every phone and portable media player had it's own charger, which often wasn't even transferable between devices by the same manufacturer? It led to lots of old chargers when devices were replaced, which were useless for anything else (I remember having bags of cables and chargers). And if you wanted a second charger for whatever reason (this was before you needed to charge your device every 3 hours), you needed to find the specific charger for your device. If it was a few years old, it might not even be possible to purchase one.
Then almost by magic everyone switched to micro USB. You could charge different devices from different manufacturers with the same cable. This wasn't some feat of magic, it was because the European Commission worked to bring manufacturers to an agreement on a common charging standard.
Well, everyone except Apple, who did actually sign the agreement. They just decided to bundle a dongle to be compliant.
Mini-USB was introduced in 2000, so manufactures had plenty of time to choose a common interface themselves, but decided not to.
Even amongst Apple's own devices it is a mess. To charge an Apple Pencil with an iPad Pro you need not one, but two adapters.
> Are you old enough to remember the early 2000s when every […]
One does not have to be that old enough.
Look no further than personal care and small home appliances (electric shavers – yes, Braun, I am looking at you; electric toothbrushes – and you, too, Philips! As well as household and kitchen appliances) the vast majority of which still come with incompatible proprietary chargers that are so hard, expensive or inconvenient (usually all of the above) to procure to replace that the entire gadget oftentimes gets disposed of because of the failed charger.
Governments ought to crack down on those ones as well, and crack down real, real hard.
It would be nice if those same EU regulations where applied to all industries and not some specifically designated ones. For example my German Braun Shaver Charger will not be impacted by this regulation ...
Why? I got a new shaver recently and it has a 5V 1A charger. The old one had a 5V 0.5A charger. A common interface would make perfect sense, and the power range is within what the USB standard can provide.
> When a standard makes sense companies will generally adopt it naturally.
My point was that manufacturers could have done so (with Mini-USB) if they wanted to, but chose not to. Until smart phones came around, most phones were more than thick enough to have a Mini-USB port (and a lot did).
Worse, the Pencil 1 didn't have a lightning port, it insanely had a lightning plug - it had to be charged precariously sticking out of the bottom of the iPad like this:
Not entirely true. It came with a little female-female lightning adapter so you could charge it with whatever other lightning cable you have. The pencil end of the adapter is deeper than the other end, I think so you can't plug a lightning cable into each end.
> I really dislike the idea that EU regulators would know what's better for consumers than consumer electronics companies and the consumers themselves
What proportion of phone consumers have an informed opinion on charging technology? Why would the electronics companies work in a way that benefits everyone/the environment instead of themselves.
> I guess you could make that argument for a lot of things
We do, we have standards for a ridiculous amount of things no one ever thinks about.
> There would be benefits if there was only one mobile operating system or if all mobiles used the same interchangeable batterie
Standardising the operating system would create a monopoly and have no obvious society wide benefits. Whereas cables can be made by anyone competent. It would be more prudent to mandate user replacable batteries before thinking about if such a specific battery standard could feasibly work. Something you can probably make a good argument for.
That point maybe sounds smart, but doesn't actually make any sense to have added, as I can respond with "yes!!" and it doesn't contradict anything about the argument you are ostensibly trying to undermine. That (importantly) said, the new statement isn't even a true thing to be trying to note anyway in this context: unlike USB-C, which is an industry standard, Apple owns lightning and so if one were to imagine forcing the world to standardize on it it would actually CREATE a monopoly.
I think it was pretty obvious from context clues that they were talking about USB since it's standardized. If lightning were standardized then other companies would be able to produce the cables. I don't see what your point is.
Electronics companies decide what's best for them. Competition in the smart phone market is done, so consumers no longer have a say. These kinds of interoperability standards are great and would love to see more of them internationally.
Consumers still don't have a say. Now instead of companies choosing what hardware & features are best for their product, and you then choosing products based on your preferences, EU regulators are now forcing companies (and therefore you) to use whatever they think is best.
I think in the case of USB-C it's not too bad just because USB-C is widely agreed to be a good connector that's already widely adopted, but there have been plenty of bad connectors in the past which in theory the EU could now be deciding consumer electronics companies are forced to use.
This also assumes USB-C is always the best option which I doubt. I'm sure there are products which given the application, size or price point might suite a different cable better. Technology also moves on and connectors change for a reason. Now we're going to be stuck with outdated hardware until EU regulators update laws. At which companies and you as the consumer will be forced to adopt that new connector regardless of your preferences.
The EU consulted with phone producers before standardizing on micro-USB, then again before standardizing on USB-C, and it will do again when something better comes up.
They have explicitly called out not regulating wireless charging for this reason.
Yours is a valid concern, but it's not grounded in reality.
I think the point is that there's no clear consensus on a "winner" right now. USB-C (back then micro-USB) had vast backing, had been in use for a while in many places and was "good enough" for everyone (except Apple-only-on-iphones). It's unclear what is the equivalent for wireless right now.
> The following companies have signed the MoU: Apple, LG, Motorola, NEC, Nokia, Qualcomm, Research in Motion (RIM), Samsung, Sony Ericsson, Texas Instruments.
That's when they moved to Micro-USB. This is the next step. But yeah, I'd imagine the same companies voiced their opinions this time around, along with others.
I can't find the exact names right now, but from the Impact Assessment report[1] they did stakeholder surveys, which included 121 stakeholders of which 23% were private companies. In addition to that they did targeted interviews with 7 manufacturers associations and 17 manufacturers.
The idea this somehow limits consumer choice is nonsense. It opens up choice because now I don't have to pay insane markups for proprietary items.
Printer ink, razor blades, and so on are other examples besides connector cables where companies' `innovations' tend to make things worse for the consumer. Even if the new cable is technically slightly better, the other factors of price, availability, and lack of inter-operability ultimately make things worse for the consumer.
Also, you'd likely have more luck getting elected officials to change EU policies than you would have with mega company board members changing profit-maximizing strategies.
Standardizing shit that doesn't need to be different, in order to let markets function better, is one of the oldest functions of the state as we know it, and a precursor to the development of capitalism.
Seeing the benefit to doing that kind of thing (which required developments in thought & practice in political economy) and being able to effectively enforce such decrees (which required various other developments in theory and technology, plus the right circumstances) on a large area is even seen as one of the hallmarks of the development of the nation-state, and a major stepping stone to our modern global economic system and the modern state.
Where are all the market players that sell phones with iOS with USB-C? I might have voted on them. Or, perhaps one that allows side-loading and has a removable battery and a fingerprint sensor?
Oh, capitalism makes all these choices possible for me, how wonderful!
> I really dislike the idea that EU regulators would know what's better for consumers than consumer electronics companies and the consumers themselves
This isn't something created by faceless bureaucrats behind closed doors.
The "regulators" are the EU Parliament, who are elected by residents in the various countries. The issue has been talked about for a few years, and was voted on 603 to 13, that's over 96% (including abstentions).
> I really dislike the idea that EU regulators would know what's better for consumers than consumer electronics companies and the consumers themselves.
It's not that, it's that companies know what's good for them and consumers are a secondary consideration, if that.
Consider EU mobile phone roaming regulation: it's an unalloyed good. We've gone from expensive and inconvenient roaming charges and roaming add-ons to free roaming at almost no increase in prices. There was initially some increase in very low priced plans yet I have a 2.65 euro a month 1GB data only plan (with full roaming) which is a blindingly good deal.
The very Adam Smith even have said that capitalism only work in well-defined markets. I don’t see how a more-or-less democratically elected entity would have a negative effect on competition by upholding some consumer-centric rules.
I agree. What happens if companies want to make something better or technology improves? The way the legislation is written, will help consumers in the short-term but could stifle innovation in the long-term. Imagine if the EU had mandated DC power ports or CD-ROM drives two decades ago.
It took this long for the EU to pass common standard legislation after talking about it for years. I can't imagine they will be any faster in updating it if USB-C becomes outdated.
How fast can charging ports evolve even in theory, given that they have to be somewhat backwards compatible to begin with? I think the law can keep up with all these iterations of lightning cables apple invented during its free reign over their port.
Companies are now disincentived to innovate because there is no guarantee money spent developing a new standard will result in something allowed to be sold.
No one can predict new technology. Ideally the law should have an end date or require regular renewal.
I do kind of get it though. It's probably better for a whole host of reasons if electronics all used the same cords, but I guess you could make that argument for a lot of things. There would be benefits if there was only one mobile operating system or if all mobiles used the same interchangeable batteries, for example.
When a standard makes sense companies will generally adopt it naturally. The fact so many manufacturers use USB-C today just proves that this probably doesn't need to be enforced. I suppose it's just strange to me this would even need to be a law or that there are people paid to pass laws like this.