We’ve known that the iPhone is switching to USB-C for a while now, but there was always a possibility that Apple would stick with Lightning for one more year. Based on the latest leaked images, however, Apple is all-in on USB-C for the iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Pro models, with USB-C parts for the iPhone 15, iPhone 15 Plus, and iPhone 15 Pro Max all shown in a leaked image by X user fix Apple.
With the switch to USB-C, nearly all of Apple’s devices will have adopted the new standard, with only AirPods, Mac accessories, and the iPhone SE remaining aside from older iPhones and the 9th-gen iPad.
Government regulation works.
I think the jury is still out on this one imo. If Apple does what the rumors are saying and limit it to 500mA @ 5V and 480Mbps transfer speed unless you have a MFI chip in the cable, then I don’t think these regulations worked.
Also, if a hypothetical USB type D comes out some time in the future and blows USB type C out of the water in every category, but phones can’t use it because the EU said, then these regulations didn’t work. It’s my understanding that the EU protected against this possiblity, so I’m hopeful that this won’t happen. But I haven’t actually read the bill myself. I have only heard this from comments on the internet, so I don’t know for sure.
The EU requirement isn’t actually USB-C. It’s whatever USB-IF says is the standard connector. So if USB-C gen2x2 (or wherever they will call it) comes out, that will be what everyone has to implement.
The problem would arise when USB-IF stops being the de-facto innovation driver for peripheral interconnection.
It’s amazing how few people know this very basic fact about EU regulation yet are so quick to criticize it. Internet in a nutshell I guess…
It’s also worth pointing out that Apple is part of the USB-IF and was one of the early pioneers of the Type C connector, so it’s not like the EU is forcing them adopt some random foreign design.
This is not correct for devices being sold to the EU at least. Part of the amendment to the Radio Equipment Regulation outlines the exact standards for power delivery that must be used, and that interfaces which are capable of being charged @ > 15W must “ensure that any additional charging protocol allows for the full functionality of the USB Power Delivery…”.
For data transfer, I don’t see the point and future improvements to USB will come from industry in future.
The only way around this is with a wireless charging protocol, but manufacturers are moving away from that it appears.
Even if they limit the speed of other cables I think for the most part it’s still worked
Looking forward to the day a charger cable is a charger cable and no more of this “could I borrow your charger? Sorry only got an iPhone charger/micro USB” problem
Slow charging is infinitely better than no charging in an emergency
The power numbers I mentioned above would just cause modern phones to die slightly slower. But that’s the minimum required for USB 2.0, and that was the rumored amount that Apple was going to allow without an MFI chip. But other users seem pretty confident that it won’t matter because Apple won’t be able to find a loophole there.
Still potentially the difference between being stranded without a phone and managing to trickle charge it over a long period of time while it’s off
True. But I still think this would be a huge oversight, as it would completely go against the spirit of this regulation. It should be easy to keep this hole closed and a huge slam dunk if they can do it. If the EU whiffs on this, I definitely won’t consider it a win. All it will do is make Apple users upset that they can’t really use all the cables that they already own for non-apple devices. This will cause some families to purge every cable in their house and replace them with MFI cables, resulting in a ton of money for Apple, a ton of money spent by consumers, and a ton of e-waste. Is all that worth it when they could have just kept the loophole closed? An argument could be made, but I wouldn’t change my mind on it, especially when it would have been so easy for the EU to do it right in the first place.
But again this argument is kind of moot, because other users are confident that the alleged loophole doesn’t even exist.
We’ll see I suppose
Also my argument is not that it won’t suck if they find a loophole but it’s still better than what we’ve got right now
I’ll agree with that for sure.
Consumer-based regulation works better.
ie- when people stop spending billions on iphones that don’t use standardized hardware… Then, perhaps Apple will stop being anti-competitive assholes.
Right now, they can get away with being anti-competitive assholes, because everyone keeps buying their products.
Money speaks.
Just watch- apple will indeed release a phone that has a USB-Type C port. Then, disable data transfer to any non-apple certified USB cord, due to “security concerns” or “fire hazards”
It literally does not, as evidenced by the state of chargers in the 2000s and early 2010s, before the EU threatened to regulate if phone companies didn’t get their shit together. Back then you’d have a different charger design for virtually every phone, including new models of the same phone. USB only became ubiquitous because the EU told companies to stop fucking around and legislate themselves, or the EU would make formal legislation. Most companies got the memo, but Apple decided to be cunts for long enough that the EU decided they needed to finally step in.
Consumer-based regulation being the end-all is based off the classical- and neoliberal ideas that humans are rational actors and companies have a greater incentive to compete than to collude. Both of which are lies.
Be very careful with this, because this is also the very foundation of democracy. If we start saying humans can’t decide for themselves over insignificant phone charger, how could we trust them selecting the people who has much more power than that?
Who else is there to trust but us humans?
Individual humans don’t have the ability to choose their phone based on their preferred charger. Each purchase is made between one buyer with fairly limited funds and few large corporations with extensive funds.