EU Passes Law to Switch iPhone to USB-C by End of 2024

[deeddawg]

When there is a USB-D (if ever), then the USB standards body would push for that adoption and I'm sure the various hardware companies would follow along. Maybe Apple would stay out again but who knows. The regulation doesn't need to be static 10 years from now.

USB-IF is largely made up of the major hardware companies.

You have far more optimistic faith that companies would push for legislation that causes themselves changeover costs - with no competitive advantage benefit - than I do. Foxes guarding the chicken coop if you will. Tendency is to maintain status quo - particularly once they've successfully eliminated the possibility for one of the companies to get a competitive jump on the others with a new connector type.

You also have a far more optimistic view of how quickly standards and legislative bodies move. It took USB-IF twelve years to finally (maybe) fix the hot mess they made of USB3 branding. Imagine if they then had to push through legislation for it to reach consumers?

 

[dave070]

Correct. You had said the EU mandated minimum standards, but they just mandated a connector.


I disagree. There are more that a billion iPhone users. That's a lot of waste for what could prove to be a needless transition to a connector that is arguably inferior for what you acknowledge is the primary use case for most people (charging).

And we don't know how this will effect the development of a next-gen connector since deployment of a private solution would be limited.


Maybe, maybe not. I think Apple's decision to put USB-C in iPads was influenced by the inevitability of this directive.

The USB standard certainly is more capable. I can’t charge my MacBook Pro via Lightning. Data transfer isn’t close to USB 4 or Thunderbolt speeds.

If Apple had keep their plug update to date then maybe. It’s basically good at charging a phone or iPad and that’s about it.

The USB group should enforce tighter standards like Apple does. If you want to call something a USB C cable, it must be obvious what it supports.

 

[BaldiMac]

The USB standard certainly is more capable. I can’t charge my MacBook Pro via Lightning. Data transfer isn’t close to USB 4 or Thunderbolt speeds.

If Apple had keep their plug update to date then maybe. It’s basically good at charging a phone or iPad and that’s about it.

The USB group should enforce tighter standards like Apple does. If you want to call something a USB C cable, it must be obvious what it supports.

Again, you are confusing the connector with the standards it supports. (Part of the problem with USB.) Lightning can (and does) support USB standards. iPhones support USB2. Older iPads supported USB3 before moving to USB-C. Apple has simply chosen not to upgrade the ports to support faster speeds. Maybe because they knew that the would be forced to move to USB-C.

 

[deeddawg]

The USB standard certainly is more capable. I can’t charge my MacBook Pro via Lightning. Data transfer isn’t close to USB 4 or Thunderbolt speeds.

If Apple had keep their plug update to date then maybe. It’s basically good at charging a phone or iPad and that’s about it.

The USB group should enforce tighter standards like Apple does. If you want to call something a USB C cable, it must be obvious what it supports.

Just speculation, but I suspect the quantity of people performing wired data transfers to their iphones or Lightning-equipped ipads these days is a very low percentage of the general ownership base. Notice that Apple has done USB3 data transfer rates over Lightning in the past, and thus presumably could do so on current phones if they felt there was a need to do so.

I won't be at all surprised that any EU-compliant iphone equipped with USBC connector will remain at USB2 speeds.

 

[dave070]

Again, you are confusing the connector with the standards it supports. (Part of the problem with USB.) Lightning can (and does) support USB standards. iPhones support USB2. Older iPads supported USB3 before moving to USB-C. Apple has simply chosen not to upgrade the ports to support faster speeds. Maybe because they knew that the would be forced to move to USB-C.

I understand the plug is different than the standard. All the public sees and the regulators understand is what plugs into what. That’s the mandate here.

Apple choose to stick with the old plug and never advance. USB standard kept evolving and became far more useful.

I doubt Apple in 2015-2017 knew they’d be forced into USB C years later.

 

[dave070]

Again, you are confusing the connector with the standards it supports. (Part of the problem with USB.) Lightning can (and does) support USB standards. iPhones support USB2. Older iPads supported USB3 before moving to USB-C. Apple has simply chosen not to upgrade the ports to support faster speeds. Maybe because they knew that the would be forced to move to USB-C.

Can you charge at 100+W over Lightning connection?

 

[compwiz1202]

Should be required for even more stuff such as hair clippers, electric shavers and various other devices most people keep around.

Yea at the very least Micro-USB. Something you can easily go to the store or online to get. Not like Radio Shack is around to get literally any adapter for anything. Saw an empty one yesterday :'(

 

[compwiz1202]

Can you charge at 100+W over Lightning connection?

Good Question. For the iPhone, that is definitely the limiter. What is the highest Wattage charge an Apple device with lightning can accept right now?

 

[BaldiMac]

I understand the plug is different than the standard. All the public sees and the regulators understand is what plugs into what. That’s the mandate here.

Apple choose to stick with the old plug and never advanced. USB standard kept evolving and became far more useful.

If you understand it, why do you keep repeating the same wrong argument? Again, lightning supports USB standards. USB-C isn't faster than lightning because neither USB-C nor lightning are transfer protocols. They are simply the shape of the connector. Lightning came out less than 2 years before USB-C. They are both "old".

That said, as you yourself argued, most people just use it for charging, so for most people faster speeds are irrelevant.

 

[BaldiMac]

Can you charge at 100+W over Lightning connection?

I have no idea if lightning could support that because Apple hasn't chosen to release a product that does.

 

[dave070]

If you understand it, why do you keep repeating the same wrong argument? Again, lightning supports USB standards. USB-C isn't faster than lightning because neither USB-C nor lightning are transfer protocols. They are simply the shape of the connector. Lightning came out less than 2 years before USB-C. They are both "old".

That said, as you yourself argued, most people just use it for charging, so for most people faster speeds are irrelevant.

Again. I understand they are physical plugs.

But again, the EU wanted everyone to have the same plug type.

Charging speeds do matter for laptops. And for phones if you could charge faster too.

For most people data speeds don’t matter. But to have one plug for charging a phone and another for data is annoying.

 

[dave070]

Good Question. For the iPhone, that is definitely the limiter. What is the highest Wattage charge an Apple device with lightning can accept right now?

edit: i7guy found it below. It appears to be 27W.

 

[BaldiMac]

Again. I understand they are physical plugs.

But again, the EU wanted everyone to have the same plug type.

Yep. That's what we are discussing. I think the EU reasoning is faulty.

Charging speeds do matter for laptops. And for phones if you could charge faster too.

You keep coming back to this argument. Again, speeds have nothing to do with the connector. They have to do with the protocols supported by the port and cable. You can have a lightning port that's faster than a USB-C port and vice versa.

For most people data speeds don’t matter. But to have one plug for charging a phone and another for data is annoying.

I have no idea what that means. No one is suggesting two different plugs.

 

[deeddawg]

Can you charge at 100+W over Lightning connection?

Which USBC-equipped phone charges at 100+W?

On an iphone battery that'd be about 6C (C = capacity) charging rate, rather than the more sedate recommendation of 0.5 to 1C. Basically at 100W charge rate you'd cook the battery (and phone) with excess heat.

 

[I7guy]

Which USBC-equipped phone charges at 100+W?

On an iphone battery that'd be about 6C (C = capacity) charging rate, rather than the more sedate recommendation of 0.5 to 1C. Basically at 100W charge rate you'd cook the battery (and phone) with excess heat.

Fastest charging phones in 2024

Which are the fastest charging phones in 2023? We look at all the fast charging tech used and how it differs between phone makers...

www.phonearena.com

 

[dave070]

Yep. That's what we are discussing. I think the EU reasoning is faulty.


You keep coming back to this argument. Again, speeds have nothing to do with the connector. They have to do with the protocols supported by the port and cable. You can have a lightning port that's faster than a USB-C port and vice versa.


I have no idea what that means. No one is suggesting two different plugs.

Speeds to have something to do with the connector. Since Apple refused to go past USB 2 speeds for the most part. I realize Apple could have upped the speed for their plug. But never did. Other than apparently briefly on an iPad.

 

[dave070]

Which USBC-equipped phone charges at 100+W?

On an iphone battery that'd be about 6C (C = capacity) charging rate, rather than the more sedate recommendation of 0.5 to 1C. Basically at 100W charge rate you'd cook the battery (and phone) with excess heat.

No iPhone charges that fast. But it’s the same ‘plug’ from a phone to a laptop with USB C on others and there are a few as someone else pointed out that charge at 30+W. That’s the advantage.

Apple has had USB C for the charger end for a few years now. Just hasn’t moved the plug for the phone over yet.

So if I could carry one compact 30W charger to charge and iPad or phone with same cable, that would be nice.

 

[dave070]

Yep. That's what we are discussing. I think the EU reasoning is faulty.


You keep coming back to this argument. Again, speeds have nothing to do with the connector. They have to do with the protocols supported by the port and cable. You can have a lightning port that's faster than a USB-C port and vice versa.


I have no idea what that means. No one is suggesting two different plugs.

Two different plugs is two different plugs.

I can carry one 65-140W Anker USB charger and charge a laptop or a phone. But I have to have two separate cables to charge my iPhone.

If both accepted USB C , one cable would work. One that was rated for charging at the higher rate of course.

 

[deeddawg]

Fastest charging phones in 2024

Which are the fastest charging phones in 2023? We look at all the fast charging tech used and how it differs between phone makers...

www.phonearena.com

Be interesting to see what the real world battery longevity is for those devices.

 

[deeddawg]

No iPhone charges that fast.

So why'd you ask "Can you charge at 100+W over Lightning connection?"

So if I could carry one compact 30W charger to charge and iPad or phone with same cable, that would be nice.

I use an ipad mini (5th gen) so I'm already there.

As for your situation, here you go.

MJEMS Multi Fast Charging Cable PD 60W Nylon Braided Cord 4-in-1 3A USB/C to Type C/Phone Fast Sync Charger Adapter Compatible with Laptop/Tablet/Phone (4FT)

MJEMS Multi Fast Charging Cable PD 60W Nylon Braided Cord 4-in-1 3A USB/C to Type C/Phone Fast Sync Charger Adapter Compatible with Laptop/Tablet/Phone (4FT)

www.amazon.com

or https://www.amazon.com/Anker-Powerline-Lightning-Samsung-Smartphones/dp/B07215381G

 

[dave070]

I'm not concerned what plug is chosen. Getting away from USB micro plugs is nice though.

I'd love it if ben larger devices could one day be powered by the same plug type.

So why'd you ask "Can you charge at 100+W over Lightning connection?"


I use an ipad mini (5th gen) so I'm already there.

As for your situation, here you go.

MJEMS Multi Fast Charging Cable PD 60W Nylon Braided Cord 4-in-1 3A USB/C to Type C/Phone Fast Sync Charger Adapter Compatible with Laptop/Tablet/Phone (4FT)

MJEMS Multi Fast Charging Cable PD 60W Nylon Braided Cord 4-in-1 3A USB/C to Type C/Phone Fast Sync Charger Adapter Compatible with Laptop/Tablet/Phone (4FT)

www.amazon.com

or https://www.amazon.com/Anker-Powerline-Lightning-Samsung-Smartphones/dp/B07215381G

I asked to show that USB C (with various protocols) can carry charging speeds and data speeds across a wide range. So if you're going to force one plug type, it wouldn't be Lightning.

Apple has held Lightning back to 2.0 data speeds and charging speeds have improved but not enough to power a laptop at any decent rate.

 

[dave070]

Lightning was far better than what was out there when it came out. But Apple never really improved it.

No one else adopted it so at a certain point, it makes sense to move on.

 

[deeddawg]

Lightning was far better than what was out there when it came out. But Apple never really improved it.

No one else adopted it so at a certain point, it makes sense to move on.

Sure, and I think the view of many here is that it is better to let market forces drive that progress rather than governmental regulation - largely because regulation disallowing new an innovative technologies from reaching market without a group consensus from most of the major manufacturers inherently tends to prevent new and innovative technologies from being introduced.

Who will invest a bunch of R&D money into something just to have to give away the details to their competition in order to get a standards organization (made up largely of that competition) to adopt it?

Anyone with a significant faith in USB-IF go grab four random cables with USB-C connectors and accurately tell us which ones support what power and data rates just by looking at them?

 

[BaldiMac]

Speeds to have something to do with the connector. Since Apple refused to go past USB 2 speeds for the most part.

No, they don't. That's the whole point that you said you understood. Apple could have USB2 speeds with a USB-C connector or USB3 speeds with lightning. Changing connectors doesn't make the port faster.

Two different plugs is two different plugs.

I can carry one 65-140W Anker USB charger and charge a laptop or a phone. But I have to have two separate cables to charge my iPhone.

If both accepted USB C , one cable would work. One that was rated for charging at the higher rate of course.

You just moved the goalposts here. You originally said "one plug for charging a phone and another for data is annoying." Now you've switched to one for laptop and one for phone.

But this argument is certainly true. This will be an advantage of the EU rule. Unless you accidentally pick up the wrong cable and your laptop didn't charge. That would be a disadvantage.

Here is how I see it:

Advantages of new directive:
No more older USB connections!!! (This is where the EU gets it right!)
Single charging solution across more devices
Phones could be shipped without cable

Disadvantages of new directive:
Lightning is a better connector (Click when inserted; No pins that can be bent in female port)
Short term waste from transition
Discourages investment in next gen solution
USB-C cables have a variety of functionality with no standard for labeling
Phones could be shipped without cable

Lightning was far better than what was out there when it came out. But Apple never really improved it.

USB-C came out two years after lightning and hasn't been improved either.

 

[dave070]

Anyone with a significant faith in USB-IF go grab four random cables with USB-C connectors and accurately tell us which ones support what power and data rates just by looking at them?

That's where USB-IF needs to lock it down. With Apple, you know their cables always work at the max speed of the device. It's simple.