I’m not saying it’s a bad thing— just that it’s not without consequences.
Imagine you didnt have law on shape and voltage of ordinsry power plugs in a house, and if you buy a samsung power socket to ibstall in your house, you mist buy samsung fridge and samsung washing machine and samsung hair dryer
And then there is the voltage conversion, which traditionally happened on the AC side (inexpensive and simple AC transformers are generally why the transmission and distribution systems are AC). Modern power supplies allow for buck/boost on the DC side.
USB-C power supplies are above 90% efficient. [1]
[0] https://eepower.com/new-industry-products/huawei-claims-most... [1] https://www.ti.com/lit/ug/tidudw2c/tidudw2c.pdf?ts=168350042...
That's a really strange thing to see here on HN. Where did you get this idea?
BTW Europe having 3-phase AC to the home is brilliant. Wish we had that in the U.S.
Are there three phase sockets available? I'd think you could build things like high power audio amplifiers or power supplies at radically better price points, if this were actually usable from the wall in places.
3 phase is 120 degrees out of phase. Wall power only has a single phase, 360 degrees. Via +/- rectification the situation gets more complex. The key thing, as the other commenter points out, is that there is always always power available. Where-as with wall-power you literally drop to zero voltage as you go + to - & back.
Why is this strange? I see this kind of ignorant nonsense here all the time.
This site is absolutely full of software people who, because of Dunning-Kruger, think they're experts at everything technical. Electrical engineering isn't that far from the software world (computers are electrical, and their design is within the EE world), so software people frequently think they're experts at anything EE when in fact they don't even understand Kirchoff's Laws, much less the realities of modern-day AC and DC power transmission.
There's been multiple discussions here in recent months with these people advocating absolutely idiotic stuff like a whole-house 5V DC supply, showing they don't even understand Ohm's Law.
On a side note, it's very frequent that I see posts here from people who apparently have never heard of an ad-blocker, yet are complaining about ads.
Theres a reason why china is spinning up DC power grids while posts like mine get bashed on.
If you're AC all the way, there's never a need to rectify your generator, either.
However it's not uncommon for this to be enforced by law, for example it is a legal requirement that in the UK all goods sold must adhere to the BS 1363-1 standard.
Every few years the National Fire Protection Agency (NFPA)--which is a non-governmental nonprofit--publishes an updated standard and then it's up to all the state legislatures to update the laws to require the new standard.
The problem is that the NFPA doesn't just post the NEC for free on the Internet. You have to pay for it (which is ridiculous) and it's copyrighted and as such, illegal to just give away. There was a lawsuit in Georgia that was supposed to determine whether or not that situation was OK (having laws that require expensive fees to view may be unconstitutional since that's like having secret laws). I don't know what the outcome was of that though.
The Supreme Court in 2020 ruled that OGCA is not copyrightable, this in 2022 indicates that it has been made available to the public for free.
There are four states who have not adopted the NEC on a statewide basis, leaving any such decision to the local authorities having jurisdiction: Arizona, Illinois, Mississippi, and Missouri.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_external_power_supply
The current authoritarian power play for pushing usb-c on Apple is completely unwarranted by the market conditions. It's pure politics.
Therefore, regulation is actually only impacting one player, and is extremely likely to reduce electronics waste, which makes it quite a nice political move. The claim of "authoritarianism" makes no sense, because governments are regulatory bodies and this regulatory move has clear motivations and positive expected outcomes, plus is incredibly easy to enforce.
Nice try though.
And yet, actually ever improving the power plug design is probably never going to happen.
Generally, something larger like a microwave or TV would come with an alternative power cord. Something smaller comes with a 2-prong European plug and a semi-permanent UK/Ireland adapter.
(Incidentally, the EU considered changing to a single mains plug, but wisely decided it wasn't worth the hassle.)
The EU seriously considered unifying wall sockets, but in the end it turned out to not really be worth the effort. Most devices have either a Europlug or CEE 7/7 plug, which are compatible with virtually all wall sockets in the EU.
Italy and Denmark are slowly switching their proprietary wall sockets to the more common Schuko variant, if I recall correctly, so improving it isn't impossible!
You seem to be conflating the wall socket with the on-device socket.
I have several devices that use the same wall socket plug but have different on-device sockets - some with very different shapes. Each one requires a different power cable.
As I understand it, every iPhone already comes with a charging cable in the box that plugs into a standard USB C port.
And the intent of the law is to bring the uniformity that exists in wall sockets to the on-device sockets.
1. There are currently several kinds of wall power voltages and plugs/receptacles commonly in use the US. Notable examples are the various 220-240V NEMA receptacles and the various 110-120V receptacles such as polarized 2-prong, unpolarized 2-prong, and 3-prong/grounded.
2. Although there are code requirements (e.g requiring that new outlets be grounded and polarized, or requiring ground fault protection in bathrooms) it doesn't appear that they mandate a particular plug or receptacle design (?) Though the NEMA (trade association) developed plugs can and do conform to the code requirements.
3. Power cords and on-device sockets aren't entirely standardized, but it's not nearly as big a deal as if there were dozens of 110-120V wall socket types rather than the three in common use.
> Sure, I don't think we see the same reality.
Possibly exposure to different governments acting different ways.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture#:~:text=Reg......
You’ll also need the various players on the other side to invest in development for something new with absolutely no guarantee that the EU will approve it. Honestly, if they wanted to mandate this they should have at least just said it’s in effect for ___ number of years and no longer.
I'd really hope that if something new is proposed it will be only once every player have decided to put their weight behind it to propose and push for a change.
On the topic of whether they will or not, I don't see a point in speculating: we'll find out soon enough.
In my opinion, this actually promotes the development of technology to be shared for the benefit of everyone, not just to help with vendor lock-in.
Granted, the latest episode was more than 5 years ago, but at 75USD for a local (i.e. non-cloud) licence I prefer not to take any chances.
Maybe "wasted" is too harsh a word, but I cannot say that in more than 30 years of work I ever found any real use case for non-MS documents.
If I am writing personal letters or putting together a few slides for, I dunno, my TTRPG campaign, everything goes, even Google or Apple stuff (both are free, the latter is free because it comes with the HW itself, if you use a Mac).
But when I know that there is a chance to get money for my document, the expectation on the customer's side is to get something that works with their Microsoft stuff, and I will comply.
YMMV of course, and I have surely missed any advance in Libre/Free Office for years. But as I said, I prefer to play it safe, and the cost of a licence is not really low.
Sure, if your employer or client expects you to use a particular piece of software, you're more than likely going to use that software to meet their expectations whether it's Microsoft Office or LibreOffice. However, many people use office suites outside of these specific business arrangements and LibreOffice is there for them if they don't want to pay that $75 to $150.
Tying this back to the original discussion about device connectors, if Microsoft ever neglects Microsoft Office like it once did with Internet Explorer, I can see alternatives eventually overtaking Microsoft Office in the office suite market just as Chrome overtook Internet Explorer in the web browser market. In the USB-C vs. Lightning situation, Lightning is the Internet Explorer of connectors, the proprietary connector that has a much lower maximum data transfer speed and much more limited device compatibility than USB-C. Although USB-C is now the de facto standard for device connectors, just as Microsoft Office is for certain business use cases, neither is guaranteed to stay that way forever. If the design of the USB-C connector is unable to incorporate some important technological advancement, it will certainly be replaced by an alternative just like Internet Explorer was replaced by Chrome and just like Lightning is being replaced by USB-C now.
I do not really disagree with the points that were posted in response, anyway.
I just stated that "working in a country where MS Office is the de facto standard", all the other free alternatives (including Apple products - so it's not a dig against non-commercial products) are "not viable alternatives FOR ME" (special emphasis on the last two words).
The amount of waste produced because companies are incentivized to produce incompatible devices like charger cables is staggering. The additional cost burden on users is unnecessary. The theoretical benefit of a better cable is not worth it.
1) Companies are not incentivized to produce incompatible cables, the industry has done a remarkably good job of settling on basically a single standard, so the incentives seem to run counter to what you say. The major hold out introduced their own cable standard 2 years _before_ USB-C even existed, and even they were rumored to be moving to USB-C anyways. (I'm sure people will credit the law with this even if it had nothing to do with it.) Would it have been good if they had switched to USB-C earlier? Sure, but that would mean... people throwing out their old cables that worked perfectly fine.
2.) Would the amount of charging cables you have purchased in your lifetime even fill up one regular-sized (13 gallon-ish) trash bag? I don't know how many charging cables you are buying or what your uses are, but I'm struggling to see how it's a "staggering" amount of waste. I'm a somewhat avid electronic geek, I own multiple Raspberry Pis and other hobbyist electronics. No way would I even come close. When I do buy new cables, 90% of the time it's for reasons like the old ones have worn out, or I have a new device that needs to be permanently plugged in.
~~~Edited to add~~~ All my consumer electronics devices have stopped needing their own charger for years now. I use the same charger and swap out a cord.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_external_power_supply
Lightning is a more durable design (in terms of plug/unplug cycles), had higher power capacity originally, and was reversible.
Hope you don't do anything involving tiny particles like sand or wood or cloth (like is found inside of pocket in the form of lint)!
The port can't directly drive all the weird miscellaneous pins that USB-C because it only has 16 pins, but it does have four high speed lanes, the same as USB-C. On a physical level it can reach the same speeds.
Before that, everyone had their own variant of the barrel plug. A few crappy low price vendors just used micro usb instead, since they couldn't possibly have a proprietary moat to speak of anyway.
It's one of the examples where consumer legislation worked.
You will note everyone except Apple did what the EU wanted early in this process.
There is no way to combine Micro USB, USBC, Thunderbolt and whatever Microsoft was doing with Surface devices into one adapter without separate electronics for each port.
> 1) Companies are not incentivized to produce incompatible cables
They absolutely are. I figure, it's not even greed (most of the adapters were included with the devices) but simply "designer convenience". It's certainly easier to design a device if you can choose an arbitrary input voltage and max power for your device.
It'll also certainly make your life as a manufacturer easier if you only have to provide warranty for devices that are run with your own power adapter.
Also, Apple in particular seems to have an aversion to follow any kind of standard not set by themselves if they can in any way avoid it. See Lightning, Thunderbolt, MagSafe, etc.
Doesn't mean this is better for anyone else except from the manufacturer.
> 2.) Would the amount of charging cables you have purchased in your lifetime even fill up one regular-sized (13 gallon-ish) trash bag?
I haven't measured but this isn't the point for me. But it used to be that the amount of adapters that you had to take with you were increasing: I.e. if laptop, phone and ipod all had different adapers and you were travelling, you had to take three of them with you.
> All my consumer electronics devices have stopped needing their own charger for years now.
Yes, so have mine, thanks to the EU regulation.
Right now I can design a product that uses one of the USB standards and pick from literally thousands of different pre-made parts that handle all the silly things for me. If I'm fine with 5v/2a power, I can just drop a $.0292 (that's the prototype price, it drops drastically at higher volumes) piece into the design and know that any cable and charger will work with it.
If I need more power than 10 watts I can spend $.50 on a usb-c plug and PD controller.
I truly don't understand why companies would fight this for most devices.
The one thing I'm worried about is what happens when someone comes up with something truly innovative (say, a phone battery that can charge at faster than 100 watts). Does that mean they will be penalized if they have to use a proprietary connector since usb-c is unable to meet that?
We already have, though, a glut of the pre-made components you talk about that cut every corner as close as they can-hopefully not so far as to start a fire, because you can’t sell to dead customers, but up to then? Go for it.
The number of implementations of PD has been a mess, with various chunks of a particular profile unavailable, inconsistently, along with no meaningful distinction between various versions of PD on most devices. Cables are often trash, and there is no certification for them required at all, until you get up to the point that Intel will smack you with a folder of lawyers if you try to call something a Thunderbolt cable without getting it certified. So we can all go out and buy just Thunderbolt cables and be sure it’ll work with everything else, and it’s all well and good until our wallet notices the hit.
Surely it can’t be that hard to just … check that stuff meets the standard, as in cGMP-style adapted to electronics (to the extent it isn’t already). Right?
If constrained to cell phones and tablets only I might sort-of agree with you, but right now the rest of the industry is fragmented to the point that it's not advantageous for any vendor to have its own weird cable except for Apple.
Even still, laptops can charge and dock via USB-C but they still often have their own weird-ass connectors and chargers.
But this also ignores the pre-Android years of every cell phone manufacturer having their own chargers, etc.
"Would the amount of charging cables you have purchased in your lifetime even fill up one regular-sized (13 gallon-ish) trash bag?"
If we're only talking about cell phones, close but no. But if we include similar devices that have used similar chargers and now use USB-C (ebook readers, MP3 players, tablets, handheld gaming devices) then yes. Easily.
Starting in the late 90s, I've owned something like 15 cell phones, and I think ~10 of them had unique chargers. Several MP3 players starting with the Creative Nomad and ending with a Fiio X5 (I think? I lost it on a plane). Three or four handheld gaming devices including a Sony PSP, IIRC.
And that doesn't include things like smart speakers (Amazon Echo devices now use USB-C I think? But the first few didn't), and a slew of other devices that could've used the prevailing standard (USB micro or mini or now USB-C) but didn't.
And that doesn't even include the parade of assorted data connection cables...
And, finally, that is only my personal use. I have a family, so when I say a "staggering" amount of waste I'm taking into account all of the various unique and now dead-end devices/connectors/cables that my wife and kids have churned through.
So - would I trade the potential for innovation on the off chance someone is going to come up with a super-duper nifty new cable vs. having a legislated standard? Yep. Happily.
Event if they double the speed, it can wait ten years and who knows in the speed may have quadruple by that next window.
I notice my phone getting hot on normal qi chargers, but not on a MagSafe charger.
Where are you getting the manufacturing carbon savings to offset the loss of efficiency?
Phones don't use much power.
Or the other way around, that will mandate it’s adoption.
Also to keep in mind that this regulation is a consequence of how the market developed in the last 20 years. The EU gave the industry a chance to sort out the situation before regulation, to which it mostly did with USB-C, but Apple refused to play along, also, cables haven't improved since USB-C, 9 years ago. So with a lack of substantial progress both in terms of standardization and technical improvement, the EU took the decision to regulate.
Not to distract from your point, which I agree with, but that is just plainly untrue. A USB-C cable from 9 years ago almost certainly doesn’t support current standards for power delivery and data transfer.
Neither do most of the current chargers or devices :-(
Actually, the only incentive left is to make significantly better cables; the incentive to make marginal "improvements" in order to achieve vendor lock-in is removed.
E.g. USB power delivery has already been ramped up several times to the point where it can deliver up to 240W (USDB PD 3.1)
That doesn't require any regulatory body to agree, just the USB Implementers Forum.
While there may well eventually be a reason to upgrade the actual plug, there should be resistance to that to encourage people to try to find ways to make it work that's backwards compatible with current equipment first.
But under these rules, wouldn’t that necessitate that a new standard develops and becomes the more popular one despite not being used because it can’t be sold in all the places that ban non USB C? How would you imagine that happening? It seems like in order for a new standard to catch on you can’t ban non USB C.
The more places that implement this non usb c ban the less a new standard can emerge. The regulation scales poorly in that regard.
The same way it happened for microusb->usb-C. Think of the law as more of a "get along shirt" applied to misbehaving kids/companies than a specific ban/enforcement. The big players can still decide on a new standard and start using it.
The process would be something like this: someone has a need that usb-C connector can't solve, some working group makes a new connector, large phone producers agree to start using it, they start using it.
Also, just like with usb-C, we'd most likely see the new connector on the laptops before the phones. If some new capability is needed, phones are unlikely to be the initial devices to need it (given low power / small size)
> What if Apple now comes out with a new standard much better than usb-c for their newest iPhone?
Then they go to other manufacturers and say "we have a new, much better idea. we should collaborate on it, so that it's standardised and we can all use it next year". Then they all ship it in Europe and we all have a much better connector. Win win win unless you want very proprietary connectors.
Reality check: this approach means the rest of the world will have better tech whilst what's sold in the EU remains frozen in time.
So the reasons are:
1. We want everyone to do the same, no exceptions. In particular, we don't like Apple and the lightning standard.
2. It's better for the environment.
Now, 2. is clearly wrong, as now just all the people already in the Apple ecosystem need to switch their lightning equipment to USB-C equipment, adding tons of waste.
And 1., well, is no reason at all. It's how you successfully stop innovation.
As opposed to now, when I buy twice as many cables on their own wear lifecycles because my phone doesn't connect to the same thing as my Switch or my Laptop?
This is literal FUD.
They brought back MagSafe because customers weren’t satisfied with USB-C charging.
They’re supporting both standard and proprietary. My MacBook Pro is connected to a multi port USB-C charger 99% of the time, which also charges my phone and my headset. MagSafe sits in the backpack when I need to work somewhere else than my desk, which doesn’t happen much. I’d argue it’s the best of both worlds.
If it only supported MagSafe I’d be seriously annoyed.
The problem with nonstandard connectors is when they get in the way of standard operation, not merely existing.
Magsafe delivers 140 watts compared to 100 watts for usb-c. That difference is not insignificant for people who aren't plugged in all day.
"Companies won't invest R&D into making freely available standards because if it's freely available it's not a competitive advantage" is clearly not something which bears out in the real world.
You somehow smoothly glossed over the part where Apple (and friends) have to convince a bureaucrat to allow them to do any of this. Where political imperatives ('we're gonna crack down on [foreign] big tech companies!') might incentivise a regulator to say no. Where the new cable no longer uses metal X, and all the manufacturers of metal X successfully lobby to 'save jobs' by protecting the old standard. And so on and so forth.
And no, innovation usually does not come from a bunch of companies sitting down to cooperate on a new version. First there is individual innovation, then there is consolidation, even if these come with changes from the original.
There's still an incentive to be the company that replaces the technology.
FUD.
That may be the case. But the innovation won't be deployed to Europe first.
Technologies and standards need adoption first before they'll be taken seriously by bureaucrats. And you're going to have a hard time getting adoption if it's literally against the law to do so.
This has been enforced since late 2012 (in draft since 2008) and is the reason why Apple had to include the micro-USB adapter in order to sell in the EU.
There is no reason for speculation since facts are available on your friendly neighborhood wiki. What we're seeing now is that the law is updated to enforce USB-C, which has been accommodated for a while.
The intent is not to standardize on an implementation forever, but to make the industry agree on a standard.
Obviously HN readers are the exception.
Anyways, USB-C is obviously technically more advanced - but it doesn't really matter for phones much, does it? Most people only ever transfer data on their phones from/to the cloud.
Maybe because it takes an eternity to do so?
I assumed the directive had some "go with the flow" upgrade path, but after reading the directive I can't see any wording to that effect.
If the USB-IF depreciated USB-C in favor of a USB-X the EU's directive wouldn't change, the only "upgrade path" appears to be that the commission will "asses" whether the directive should be changed every 5 years, starting in 2025.
1. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%...
It's easy to do if there are regions in the world that aren't so tightly regulated. Then they can just look at what works elsewhere. If USB-D comes out and the rest of the world moves to it, it's a no-brainer for bureaucrats to get behind the switch.
It's much more complicated if the rest of the world fragments into say... 3 different standards that are all better than USB-3, but are mutually incompatible.
The law would then have been reassessed in 2020, at which point some EU bureaucrats would have had to weigh "reversible connector" etc. on one hand, and "take the career fall for forcing half a billion people to buy new chargers" on the other.
Actually, I think (but I'm no lawyer) that if the USB-IF wants to standardize a new connector, they'd want to call it USB-C v2.0.
The law seems to implicitly defer to them to define "USB-C". If the consortium wants a new standard they could either reuse the name, or wait 2.5 years on average for EU approval or rejection.
On a handheld device with limited space? Come on now.
How long until wireless charging is the default? Particularly combined with the iPhone's magsafe that allows charging to occur while the device is at any orientation?
No manufacturer is going to waste space that could be use for battery and further compromise water/dust proofing to add another port, for a total of 2, even if it's better than USB-C because the opportunity cost is too high.
The EU will supposedly upgrade the mandate when a better standard comes along … but who gets to determine if the new standard is “better” enough to trigger a replacement.
Some will want it replaced while some will demand that we keep the current standard. Can the EU really speak for everyone when people can have conflicting needs and wants?
Ever thought what would happen if there are competing standards next round that are quite close in capability but are nonetheless significantly different - with pros and cons that are important to various people.
I wonder how that’s going to play out in the EU and how ugly things could get - especially with lots of money on the line.
Also who watches the watchmen? The EU is clearly not immune to corruption given recent scandals.
None of these would be issues if there wasn’t a stupid mandate. People will just use what they want and what is best for their needs.
I am not sure if this other issue would be better: https://www.amazon.com/Universal-Mobile-Charger/dp/B00D1759A...
Given how inefficient wireless charging inherently is... ideally never, by legal force if required.
How a better alternative will created if you can't put it on any device to make it popular.
If micro-USB was mandated, it would have prevent the use of the Lightning connector that I have quite enjoyed for the last 10 years or so, instead I would be stuck with the IMHO inferior micro-USB.
The fear for a "lock-in" is completely unfounded, as the EU previously quasi-mandated Micro USB and switching to USB-C was no issue whatsoever. Besides, nothing is stopping manufacturers from including both USB-C and another charging connector.