News Is Apple getting pushed around by the EU really a good thing?

[AC News]

Smartphone features and even availability are already hindered by governments and lawsuits. Should we really be cheering when the EU forces Apple to do something?

Is Apple getting pushed around by the EU really a good thing? : Read more

 

[joeldf]

Yes. If those "features" are really choices the company makes so they can make more money from those features and not, as Apple fans love to parrot the company line, is somehow "innovative".

Nothing Apple has done in the past 10 years has been really "innovative". So nothing the EU has imposed has actually stifled anything.

 

[fuzzylumpkin]

If they don't like EU regulation, they are welcome to withdraw their products from the EU market.

 

[Mooncatt]

Government interference rarely results in progress. I get wanting a standard cable, but I've looked into that law and how it would affect things aside from smartphones. At best, "it's complicated." For example, there doesn't seem to be any clarification on if it applies to devices where a battery is charged externally, as is often the case with cameras. Cameras are included in the regulation, but the way it's written looks like they are assuming cameras have non-replaceable batteries as well (they don't).

 

[fuzzylumpkin]

Government interference rarely results in progress. I get wanting a standard cable, but I've looked into that law and how it would affect things aside from smartphones. At best, "it's complicated." For example, there doesn't seem to be any clarification on if it applies to devices where a battery is charged externally, as is often the case with cameras. Cameras are included in the regulation, but the way it's written looks like they are assuming cameras have non-replaceable batteries as well (they don't).

Cameras are a bit of a niche product these days,so forgive my ignorance. How is it a bad thing if they have a USB-C port?


It's been a while since I read through it, but from my memory it only covers devices that operate as a single unit, so a camera with a removable battery wouldn't be affected...It would only mean that a camera where the battery is designed to be charged within the camera would have to be chargeable via USB-C. Which again, I can't see how that's bad.

 

[bradavon]

Honestly I think all this EUphobia stems from Americans just not used to not getting their own way.

Yes it's a good thing, Not every country with view something like Americans do. Apple literally isn't being pushed around and I just don't think there'd be this response if the US government did the same.

Quit it with the unconscious bias. Literally only Americans view this as a bad thing. The USA isn't the world.

I'm probably being a bit too dramatic, but it definitely feels as though this is where the market is heading. Apple says no, companies can't convince them otherwise, so then the EU gets involved and says, "You have to by this date."

This is a twist on reality. The EU is enforcing fair practice on to a company known for not playing fair.

They literally did the same to Microsoft, and still are, in the 1990s.

 

[bradavon]

Nothing Apple has done in the past 10 years has been really "innovative". So nothing the EU has imposed has actually stifled anything.

Exactly. Apple largely stopped innovating when Jobs passed away.

Their ARM laptop architecture being the exception.

 

[Mooncatt]

Cameras are a bit of a niche product these days,so forgive my ignorance. How is it a bad thing if they have a USB-C port?


It's been a while since I read through it, but from my memory it only covers devices that operate as a single unit, so a camera with a removable battery wouldn't be affected...It would only mean that a camera where the battery is designed to be charged within the camera would have to be chargeable via USB-C. Which again, I can't see how that's bad.

I was discussing this in a camera forum and the concern was primarily over existing cameras and grandfathering. Pentax (What I shoot) currently sells several cameras that either do not use USB-C and/or don't have the ability to charge in camera. From my understanding, the way this law is written does not distinguish between cameras with sealed batteries (which is rare because battery changes are often needed in the field), and those that charge outside the camera. There is also no clear grandfather clause for existing devices still being sold. If not grandfathered, it can lead to a lot of e-waste.

Honestly I think all this EUphobia stems from Americans just not used to not getting their own way...

...and I just don't think there'd be this response if the US government did the same.

I'm guessing you're not from the U.S, because there would be just as much, if not more pushback against a law like this. For one, USB cables are weak compared to dedicated charging cables of the past. When I got my first phone prior to the days of smartphones, the charging cable would last almost forever. There was also universal standards back then so you could still buy aftermarket cables if need be. Now with USB-C, I'm replacing a cable 2 to 3 times a year because the wires break internally.

Aside from the camera problems, another is that this law will apply to laptops. Gaming laptops require more power than USB-C can provide. To get around this, they are giving laptops another couple years or so to comply, with the expectation that USB cables will just automatically be improved to handle that much power. That's a big assumption that is going to risk killing a decent segment of the laptop market if it doesn't happen.

I kind of eluded to this in my first post, but the law in general looks like the people that wrote it believe all electronic devices work the same as smartphones, with low powered sealed batteries. If this were in the U.S, there's a big chance it would wind up in the court system over these sorts of issues with it, and rightly so without changes in the language. Ambiguity in a law can make it unenforceable here.

 

[fuzzylumpkin]

I was discussing this in a camera forum and the concern was primarily over existing cameras and grandfathering. Pentax (What I shoot) currently sells several cameras that either do not use USB-C and/or don't have the ability to charge in camera. From my understanding, the way this law is written does not distinguish between cameras with sealed batteries (which is rare because battery changes are often needed in the field), and those that charge outside the camera. There is also no clear grandfather clause for existing devices still being sold. If not grandfathered, it can lead to a lot of e-waste.




I'm guessing you're not from the U.S, because there would be just as much, if not more pushback against a law like this. For one, USB cables are weak compared to dedicated charging cables of the past. When I got my first phone prior to the days of smartphones, the charging cable would last almost forever. There was also universal standards back then so you could still buy aftermarket cables if need be. Now with USB-C, I'm replacing a cable 2 to 3 times a year because the wires break internally.

Aside from the camera problems, another is that this law will apply to laptops. Gaming laptops require more power than USB-C can provide. To get around this, they are giving laptops another couple years or so to comply, with the expectation that USB cables will just automatically be improved to handle that much power. That's a big assumption that is going to risk killing a decent segment of the laptop market if it doesn't happen.

I kind of eluded to this in my first post, but the law in general looks like the people that wrote it believe all electronic devices work the same as smartphones, with low powered sealed batteries. If this were in the U.S, there's a big chance it would wind up in the court system over these sorts of issues with it, and rightly so without changes in the language. Ambiguity in a law can make it unenforceable here.

You may have misunderstood what's going on here, there is nothing in this law that says a proprietary connector cannot be used for charging, only that it must also be able to charge through USB-C. My current laptop has USB-C ports that it can charge through but it also has a 150 watt barrel connector charger. Most gaming laptops from the last four or five years have the same setup and are already compliant.


I know it may be a bit difficult for an American to understand that a government can do something to actually benefit its people, but in Europe that is actually fairly common practise.The sky is not falling..


Your point about old mobile phone chargers is specious. How long ago was it that you were able to use a proprietary cable to charge a mobile phone? 15 years ago? And there was no universality I could not charge my Nokia phone at a friend's house if they had a Sony Ericsson.

 

[Mooncatt]

You may have misunderstood what's going on here, there is nothing in this law that says a proprietary connector cannot be used for charging, only that it must also be able to charge through USB-C. My current laptop has USB-C ports that it can charge through but it also has a 150 watt barrel connector charger. Most gaming laptops from the last four or five years have the same setup and are already compliant.

When I was discussing this on the other forum, which included EU users questioning this, there was no mention of the possibility of dual charging options. From what I remember of reading the law, there was no mention of it as well, and the general consensus from all (including the EU members) was that USB-C was going to be the only allowable connection. After all, the purpose of the law was claimed to be aimed at reducing waste, and allowing a secondary connection would go against that. If you can point me to language suggesting otherwise, I'll take another look.

I know it may be a bit difficult for an American to understand that a government can do something to actually benefit its people, but in Europe that is actually fairly common practise.The sky is not falling.

I can't tell if this is meant to be a veiled insult or not, so let's just leave it at the fact that governments around the world are not known for being benevolent, and that the desire for power has corrupted many. All government actions should be looked at with a healthy dose of skepticism.

Your point about old mobile phone chargers is specious. How long ago was it that you were able to use a proprietary cable to charge a mobile phone? 15 years ago? And there was no universality I could not charge my Nokia phone at a friend's house if they had a Sony Ericsson.

The phone I had used a fairly standard barrel connector. Not every phone used the exact same size, but it's not like every phone had its own unique connector, and it wasn't hard to obtain one here even without regulating them. If the aim of such laws are to reduce e-waste, I would suggest going back to a dedicated power port like those. Like I said, the cables lasted much longer than any USB-C cable, which goes hand in hand with that ideology. Leave the USB cable for the occasional data transfer, where usage will be minimal and not require frequent replacements.

 

[bradavon]

For one, USB cables are weak compared to dedicated charging cables of the past. When I got my first phone prior to the days of smartphones, the charging cable would last almost forever. There was also universal standards back then so you could still buy aftermarket cables if need be. Now with USB-C, I'm replacing a cable 2 to 3 times a year because the wires break internally.

This just isn't reality for USB cables in general.

I've never had that and I've bought cheap and expensive cables, only time is when I've mistreated the cable.

Aside from the camera problems, another is that this law will apply to laptops. Gaming laptops require more power than USB-C can provide. To get around this, they are giving laptops another couple years or so to comply, with the expectation that USB cables will just automatically be improved to handle that much power. That's a big assumption that is going to risk killing a decent segment of the laptop market if it doesn't happen.

It won't come in until the tech is ready.

 

[Village_Idiot]

Is the EU really pushing Apple around?

For the common charger, requiring Apple to change over to USB-C for the iPhone is reasonable, especially since it had switched to USB-C on all of its other devices (i.e. iPad and MacBooks).

In regard to iMessage, then Apple will fight back as needed (which it should). Just like it should against the U.S. Department of Justice.

 

[Windroid 2483]

Unfathomable amounts of money are thrown into the R&D departments of these tech companies in an effort to try and bring new things to users every year. There might be something that's in the works right now that we've been wanting, and all it takes is one decision by a governing body acting as an "overlord" to throw it all away.

Yes. Remember then the government banned headphone jacks, SD cards, replaceable batteries, etc. Cell phones took a huge turn for the worse after that. Wait, that wasn't the government. That was the smartphone manufacturers themselves!

In all seriousness: Those unfathomable amounts of money are being wasted. If I hired a janitor, and he put a bunch of manure onto the floor instead of cleaning the floor: He'd be fired. I'd have no reason to waste money on a "janitor" who makes the building dirtier instead of cleaner. The same should go for "R&D departments" who think that the removal of the headphone jacks is "innovation".