9 ms·

The joint motion points to adopting Directive 2014/53/EU which requires common _chargers_ but says nothing about the port that the phone uses. As far as I can t

The joint motion points to adopting Directive 2014/53/EU which requires common _chargers_ but says nothing about the port that the phone uses. As far as I can tell this is only for the back half of the charger / brick that connects to the wall. Yet the Apple statement, and most of the articles about this (including the linked one), are talking about the phone's connector and talks about lightning and usb-c. Most of the comments online are talking about how this forces Apple to use usb-c. So, which is it? Isn't this just regulating the power bricks / back half of the charging equation? I don't see anything in the joint motion or directive stating a connector on a device has to be uniform at all. Joint motion: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/RC-9-2020-0070_EN.html https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/RC-9-2020-0070... Directive: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:02014L0053-20180911 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:02...

pwinnski 7y ago
Apple is already using USB-C on the bit that plugs into the wall, so if that's all this is, it's nothing. Apple has protested this, so it seems like it must be more.
- akvadrako 7y ago
  It seems pretty clear at the current stage it’s completely vague. Probably Apple has no idea what actionable laws will result. Will they mandate all phones have usb-c ports? That’s absurd because who knows what’ll be the standard port in 5 years.
  - iSnow 7y ago
    The only thing the EU mandates is producers come up with a common standard. Whether that's USB-C or Lightning is of no interest to the EU.
    - greglindahl 7y ago
      Who could possibly criticize the EU for mandating something which has a history of being successfully used by some of the producers to fuck over the rest?
- joezydeco 7y ago
  What is Apple is heading toward completely sealed phones with only wireless charging / data xfer and they’re nervous that the EU is going to force them to keep the physical port on the device?
  - jakear 7y ago
    I wonder what that will do for security. It seems the publicly known exploits tend to use the wired connection to swipe data from the phone. It would likely be much more difficult to do that wirelessly. It would be a shame to lose the potential hardening benefits because of some lawmakers who may not have privacy as a core interest... or indeed quite the opposite.
    - gpm 7y ago
      You can always not connect the data wires to the port.
      - kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
        Then you can't use USB-PD protocol and only get the gimped resistor-based current negotiation.
        Kliment 7y ago
        USB-PD doesn't use the data wires (dp/dn or the two high speed diffpairs), it uses a sidechannel (CC). You can have a full PD implementation without a host controller or any data connection.
    - int_19h 7y ago
      This is strictly about charging, so a phone that uses USB for charging only, and does synchronization etc wirelessly, should still be compliant.
  - samatman 7y ago
    Well, not that it's relevant to the topic at hand, but if they do so, I'm leaving the ecosystem. Not being able to charge from a backpack or a car is a non-starter for me. I go weeks without plugging my phone into the wall, but when I need it, I really need it.
SiempreViernes 7y ago
Indeed, the text only speaks of a "common charger" without specifying further, so I'm somewhat surprised you make the claim the directive speaks only about one sub-part of the charger. To me things appear thus: the EP passed a directive that states mobile radio equipment should have a "common charger", sensibly letting manufacturers decide how to solve the interoperability problem. Apple then argued "well, it's not explicit that you should be able use the 'common charger' without an adapter" and continued making phones that can't be charged by equipment made by others. This join resolution isn't super clear about it, but does indicate that: "common charger" really ought to mean you can use the same charger for all similar devices.
- BinaryIdiot 7y ago
  Hmm. You make a good point. In my attempt at reading both of these there seems to be a clear distinction being made when it refers to cables and when it refers to chargers. It also never really mentions ports. Therefore, to me, it cares less about the port and cable on the phone half and more about the brick / part that plugs into the wall. Neither document provides a definition for "charger". So perhaps whoever is in charge of implementing this directive (I'm not sure how this works in EU law) can interpret it either way? I wish it was more clear.
  - SiempreViernes 7y ago
    I read "charger" to mean "the thing you use for charging", and not really bothering with the technical detail of exactly how this thing is made. I think reading the texts as if they spoke only of the transformer/brick itself is to narrow, and not in line with the common understanding of what a "charger" is. I will offer this suggestion of a precise definition for "charger": the complete technological assemblage required for transferring electrical power, suitable for storage, from a common wall socket onto the portable radio device. Basically, if you have a wall socket, a mobile radio device, and a third thing, and they cannot be assembled so that the mobile can be charger, the thing is not a "common charger".
    - BinaryIdiot 7y ago
paxys 7y ago
The thing that plugs into the wall is already regulated (for every electronic device, not just chargers). That is why you don't have to rewire your house when you buy a new phone. This directive is specifically for the bit that connects to your phone.
- greglindahl 7y ago
  And every single Apple phone I've owned so far uses a cable that plugs into USB A. Which is a standard. I'm still using the wall warts I got for my original iPhone. Which have international wall plug kits. Solid, long-lived electronics. Meanwhile, the burner phones I've bought for when I'm in the EU have these shitty all-in-one wall-to-micro-USB, and I ended up eventually throwing them out. So there's your e-waste.
  - viraptor 7y ago
    Compare the price of an Apple phone to a burner phone and you'll know why they're not great quality. Apple chargers at that price would also suck.
    - greglindahl 7y ago
      The problem with the burner chargers was that they were inflexible. The wall plug couldn't be changed for other countries, and there was no USB A between the wall wart and the cable so I couldn't use it to charge all of my other gadgets.
      - viraptor 7y ago
        Replaceable plug costs more money and I don't expect you spent a lot on your burner phones. My flagship Android did come with a replaceable plug. The fact you couldn't charge all your other gadgets is the point of the regulation though.
        greglindahl 7y ago
Freestyler_3 7y ago
What I thought they were going for was that phones would no longer come with cable+charger, instead you could buy the one type of charger + cable that exists. This would mean one connector for all devices. If they allow different connectors on phones then lots of different cables will be made, and when a person switches phones then their old cable ends up in the trash.
pergadad 7y ago
Also this motion is not deciding anything. The parliament is just asking the commission (the EU equivalent to a ministry/government) to publish a study on this and take a next step. Fixing to a specific standard would also not be something done in EU law - laws are meant to be slow-changing, this would be a barrier. You might have a law that specifies that a standard should be set and/or industry bodies ought to agree on a standard to use.

pwinnski 7y ago

Apple is already using USB-C on the bit that plugs into the wall, so if that's all this is, it's nothing. Apple has protested this, so it seems like it must be more.

akvadrako 7y ago
It seems pretty clear at the current stage it’s completely vague. Probably Apple has no idea what actionable laws will result. Will they mandate all phones have usb-c ports? That’s absurd because who knows what’ll be the standard port in 5 years.
- iSnow 7y ago
  The only thing the EU mandates is producers come up with a common standard. Whether that's USB-C or Lightning is of no interest to the EU.
  - greglindahl 7y ago
    Who could possibly criticize the EU for mandating something which has a history of being successfully used by some of the producers to fuck over the rest?
joezydeco 7y ago
What is Apple is heading toward completely sealed phones with only wireless charging / data xfer and they’re nervous that the EU is going to force them to keep the physical port on the device?
- jakear 7y ago
  I wonder what that will do for security. It seems the publicly known exploits tend to use the wired connection to swipe data from the phone. It would likely be much more difficult to do that wirelessly. It would be a shame to lose the potential hardening benefits because of some lawmakers who may not have privacy as a core interest... or indeed quite the opposite.
  - gpm 7y ago
    You can always not connect the data wires to the port.
    - kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
      Then you can't use USB-PD protocol and only get the gimped resistor-based current negotiation.
      - Kliment 7y ago
        USB-PD doesn't use the data wires (dp/dn or the two high speed diffpairs), it uses a sidechannel (CC). You can have a full PD implementation without a host controller or any data connection.
  - int_19h 7y ago
    This is strictly about charging, so a phone that uses USB for charging only, and does synchronization etc wirelessly, should still be compliant.
- samatman 7y ago
  Well, not that it's relevant to the topic at hand, but if they do so, I'm leaving the ecosystem. Not being able to charge from a backpack or a car is a non-starter for me. I go weeks without plugging my phone into the wall, but when I need it, I really need it.

SiempreViernes 7y ago

Indeed, the text only speaks of a "common charger" without specifying further, so I'm somewhat surprised you make the claim the directive speaks only about one sub-part of the charger. To me things appear thus: the EP passed a directive that states mobile radio equipment should have a "common charger", sensibly letting manufacturers decide how to solve the interoperability problem. Apple then argued "well, it's not explicit that you should be able use the 'common charger' without an adapter" and continued making phones that can't be charged by equipment made by others. This join resolution isn't super clear about it, but does indicate that: "common charger" really ought to mean you can use the same charger for all similar devices.

BinaryIdiot 7y ago
Hmm. You make a good point. In my attempt at reading both of these there seems to be a clear distinction being made when it refers to cables and when it refers to chargers. It also never really mentions ports. Therefore, to me, it cares less about the port and cable on the phone half and more about the brick / part that plugs into the wall. Neither document provides a definition for "charger". So perhaps whoever is in charge of implementing this directive (I'm not sure how this works in EU law) can interpret it either way? I wish it was more clear.
- SiempreViernes 7y ago
  I read "charger" to mean "the thing you use for charging", and not really bothering with the technical detail of exactly how this thing is made. I think reading the texts as if they spoke only of the transformer/brick itself is to narrow, and not in line with the common understanding of what a "charger" is. I will offer this suggestion of a precise definition for "charger": the complete technological assemblage required for transferring electrical power, suitable for storage, from a common wall socket onto the portable radio device. Basically, if you have a wall socket, a mobile radio device, and a third thing, and they cannot be assembled so that the mobile can be charger, the thing is not a "common charger".
  - BinaryIdiot 7y ago

paxys 7y ago

The thing that plugs into the wall is already regulated (for every electronic device, not just chargers). That is why you don't have to rewire your house when you buy a new phone. This directive is specifically for the bit that connects to your phone.

greglindahl 7y ago
And every single Apple phone I've owned so far uses a cable that plugs into USB A. Which is a standard. I'm still using the wall warts I got for my original iPhone. Which have international wall plug kits. Solid, long-lived electronics. Meanwhile, the burner phones I've bought for when I'm in the EU have these shitty all-in-one wall-to-micro-USB, and I ended up eventually throwing them out. So there's your e-waste.
- viraptor 7y ago
  Compare the price of an Apple phone to a burner phone and you'll know why they're not great quality. Apple chargers at that price would also suck.
  - greglindahl 7y ago
    The problem with the burner chargers was that they were inflexible. The wall plug couldn't be changed for other countries, and there was no USB A between the wall wart and the cable so I couldn't use it to charge all of my other gadgets.
    - viraptor 7y ago
      Replaceable plug costs more money and I don't expect you spent a lot on your burner phones. My flagship Android did come with a replaceable plug. The fact you couldn't charge all your other gadgets is the point of the regulation though.
      - greglindahl 7y ago

Freestyler_3 7y ago

What I thought they were going for was that phones would no longer come with cable+charger, instead you could buy the one type of charger + cable that exists. This would mean one connector for all devices. If they allow different connectors on phones then lots of different cables will be made, and when a person switches phones then their old cable ends up in the trash.

pergadad 7y ago

Also this motion is not deciding anything. The parliament is just asking the commission (the EU equivalent to a ministry/government) to publish a study on this and take a next step. Fixing to a specific standard would also not be something done in EU law - laws are meant to be slow-changing, this would be a barrier. You might have a law that specifies that a standard should be set and/or industry bodies ought to agree on a standard to use.