On 2024-09-14 13:24, Tweed wrote:

> Something else I’ve just discovered - vendors will not be able to bundle a
> USB-C charger with the device, it must always be sold separately. So not
> the vendor trying to swizz you with an extra sale.

Countries like Brazil (IIRC) actually *require* the charger be sold with
the device.

Another country meddling in business decisions.

> There’s going to have to be some more user education though - I’ve seen
> otherwise very intelligent people complaining that their laptop isn’t
> charging properly from their phone charger….

Not everyone understands power.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

On 2024-09-14 17:15, Bill Powell wrote:
>
> So it shouldn't matter if nobody else uses Apple's connector.
> It's a free and openly competitive world market, isn't it?

The EU meddles in things it should leave well enough alone.

It's not like USB-C is guaranteed to be adequate in 5 years from now.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

On 2024-09-15 09:21, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> On 14.09.24 17:26, Alan Browne wrote:
>> The European USB-C fiasco just creates more e-waste.
>
> Brain dead idiot. And you do not understand the technicalities at all
> and the fiasco is a figment of your imagniation.

Proven in the past that I know far more technically than you'll ever know.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

On 2024-09-15 10:40, Chris wrote:

>
> Agree. Lightning should have died 3-4 years ago.

This is a product lifecycle decision that Apple make. EU should not be
involved in business decisions.

If Apple are wrong about it, the market will punish them.

The USB-C force did not reduce e-waste - it prematurely increases the
amount of Lightning compatible devices going to waste.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2024-09-14 17:15, Bill Powell wrote:
>>
>> So it shouldn't matter if nobody else uses Apple's connector.
>> It's a free and openly competitive world market, isn't it?
>
> The EU meddles in things it should leave well enough alone.
>
> It's not like USB-C is guaranteed to be adequate in 5 years from now.
>

Nothing is guaranteed in the world of electronics, but I think USB-C has
many more years life left in it. It can support up to 240W power delivery
and data rates up to 20 Gbits/sec. Beyond that speed you are probably
looking at some sort of optical transmission.

On 2024-09-15 16:19, Alan Browne wrote:
>
> On 2024-09-14 13:00, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> Alan Browne's false claim implied that Apple
>> were already complying at the time that the legislation made
>> compliance compulsory, but in fact they were not, which is exactly WHY
>> the legislation made compliance compulsory!
>
> That is *not* what I said.  Apple had no intention of putting USB-C on
> the iPhone 15 - but were forced by EU regs.  Result: more e-waste.

What you actually said was this:

On 2024-09-14 16:26, Alan Browne wrote:
>
> The European USB-C fiasco just creates more e-waste.

Nonsense, it is designed to do exactly the opposite by making the
charging arrangements of all portable devices sold in the EU the same.

> Apple, in its own good time, would have brought USB-C to iPhone, etc.
> Indeed, the newest iPhone would likely have been the launch USB-C
> iPhone. Instead the EU forced Apple to go a year early.

Again, nonsense. As previously linked, Apple had already had more than
10 years' worth of voluntary guidelines to bring their products into
compliance, yet still had not done so.

> All this "decision" does is create early e-waste of lightning
> connectors and some wall-warts.

No, the e-waste was created by manufacturers such as Apple refusing to
comply with the guidelines in a timely manner, thus forcing the EU to
make them compulsory.

> Government over regulating. EU!

Nonsense, this is just propaganda; examine again the link I provided
previously - the majority for the vote in the EU Parliament to enact
this legislation was overwhelming.

> Apple *was* already putting USB-C on various other products including an
> iPad I bought several years prior.

Some, yes, but even after more than a decade by no means all, and that
was the problem which persuaded the EU to act more decisively.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 2024-09-15 16:23, Alan Browne wrote:
>
> The EU meddles in things it should leave well enough alone.

The world needs standards so that items can be interoperable.

> It's not like USB-C is guaranteed to be adequate in 5 years from now.

The British have had regulations about the sort of plugs that should be
supplied in houses for many decades, yet nobody seems to think that they
are now obsolete just through being decades old.

> "It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
> the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
> Winston Churchill.

So why are you propagating baseless anti-EU propaganda of the sort hyped
by Russian disinformation trolls?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 2024-09-15 16:26, Alan Browne wrote:
>
> On 2024-09-15 10:40, Chris wrote:
>>
>> Agree. Lightning should have died 3-4 years ago.
>
> This is a product lifecycle decision that Apple make.  EU should not be
> involved in business decisions.

They gave Apple over a decade to make that decision, but Apple failed to
do so, so the EU had to make it for them.

> If Apple are wrong about it, the market will punish them.

Except there will always be fools who think that by paying more they
must be getting something better, when that doesn't necessarily follow.

> The USB-C force did not reduce e-waste - it prematurely increases the
> amount of Lightning compatible devices going to waste.

No, the EU gave Apple more than 10 years to adapt their production,
Apple, not the EU, created the e-waste by not complying with the
guidelines in a timely manner.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 2024-09-15 16:17, Alan Browne wrote:
>
> On 2024-09-14 12:30, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> On 2024-09-14 16:26, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>
>>> The European USB-C fiasco just creates more e-waste.
>>>
>>> Apple, in its own good time, would have brought USB-C to iPhone, etc.
>>> Indeed, the newest iPhone would likely have been the launch USB-C
>>> iPhone.  Instead the EU forced Apple to go a year early.
>>>
>>> All this "decision" does is create early e-waste of lightning
>>> connectors and some wall-warts.
>>>
>>> Government over regulating.  EU!
>>
>> BOLLOCKS!  The above is just yet another predictable example of Apple
>> propaganda & EU-bashing.  The simple truth is that nearly all the
>> other manufacturers had already adopted the USB-C standard while it
>> was still voluntary, but Apple had more or less refused point blank
>> [my caps to highlight the overwhelming majority]:

I note that you snipped the quote of the numbers of overwhelming
majority, how unsurprising given your posting record.

> Apple is a business and make business decisions.  Apple is one of the
> original companies that _defined_ USB-C.  But, they also jumped ahead of
> everyone with the Lightning connector quite a while before that - and
> therefore there was (is) a lot of Lightning based cables and accessories
> out there.

And, even worse, from memory there are at least two EU technical boards
giving advice to EU legislators over such matters, both of which Apple
contribute to, so you have to ask yourself why they didn't bring their
products into compliance sooner? They knew that stronger legislation
would very likely follow the bringing in of the voluntary guidelines,
they presumably must know how long their products last, so they could
have worked out by what future model they would likely have to become
compliant, but apparently they didn't bother to think through, or just
didn't care, what all this would mean for their customers, who would
have to ditch working equipment through their negligence on this issue.
Why not? Obviously I don't actually know, but it looks very much like
arrogance to me, but whatever the reason, any e-waste and inconvenience
caused to customers was caused by Apple, not the EU, who gave them more
than enough time to comply, as proven by the fact that nearly all other
manufacturers' products were compliant long before the requirement
became compulsory.

> From Apple and Apple's customers point of view, the adoption of USB-C
> just lessens the life of existing materiel.

As explained countless times in this thread, that is Apple's fault for
not complying to the guidelines in a timely manner.

> Various other Apple products had already transitioned (iPads,
> MacBooks...) so it was a matter of time before the iPhone would follow.
> Just not yet until the EU forced their hand - result: more e-waste - not
> less.

As above, Apple's fault, not the EU's

> And by the way, using 'bollocks' in upper case doesn't make your
> argument better.

But does emphasize the point that your argument was, indeed, bollocks,
and still is.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Bill Powell <bill@anarchists.org> wrote:
>>>> Apple should be able to make any connector it wants to make.
>>>> Even one which is designed specifically to prevent interaction.
>>>>
>>>> If people would just stick only to Apple products, they'd be fine
>>>> as there's no need for interoperability if you buy only Apple product.
>>>>
>>>> As Tim Cook openly said, "Buy your mom an iPhone" if you want your device
>>>> to work with another company's products. It's all Apple around here.
>>>>
>>>> So it shouldn't matter if nobody else uses Apple's connector.
>>>> It's a free and openly competitive world market, isn't it?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thing is, Apple didn’t even have inter operability between its own
>>> products.
>>
>> Agree. And I've said this before on here.
>>
>> Apple didn't transition to USB-C from USB-A well or consistently. When Macs
>> lost USB-A ports phones should have gone the same way shortly after.
>>
>> What happened instead is that Apple bundled phones with USB-A - lightning
>> charges for years without an ability to charge your phone with your Mac. In
>> all that time they sold billions of phones with USB-A chargers.
>>
>> Then, when they transitioned to USB-C, only at one end of the cable, they
>> also removed the charger (apart from ones model). So forced everyone to buy
>> chargers.
>>
>>> MacBooks have had USB-C for years (you can’t push enough power
>>> through a Lightning connector) So you couldn’t use your Mac charger to
>>> charge your Lightning connector iPhone or iPad or ear phones. Now you can.
>>> I’d understand reluctance to move to usb-c if there were any significant
>>> technical downsides, but I can’t see any. It supports a wider range of
>>> charge voltages than Lightning, has a more robust connector, (though some
>>> disagree about this) and supports a much wider range of protocols including
>>> high speed video. Lightning was a much better technical and mechanical
>>> solution than micro USB, but it is now technically and commercially
>>> obsolete.
>>
>> Agree. Lightning should have died 3-4 years ago.
>>
>>
> I wonder if Covid and the semi conductor shortage had anything to do with
> Lightning hanging on longer than it should? All manufacturers in all
> electronics sectors had supply problems, mainly with the dull low value
> devices - such as usb and power supervisory chips. As Apple had a monopoly
> with Lightning in phones perhaps they had fewer problems getting hold of
> these parts. Just speculating.

I guess that's possible. Not sure why lightning parts would be more
sourceable than the more ubiquitous USB, though?

Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Bill Powell <bill@anarchists.org> wrote:
>>>>> Apple should be able to make any connector it wants to make.
>>>>> Even one which is designed specifically to prevent interaction.
>>>>>
>>>>> If people would just stick only to Apple products, they'd be fine
>>>>> as there's no need for interoperability if you buy only Apple product.
>>>>>
>>>>> As Tim Cook openly said, "Buy your mom an iPhone" if you want your device
>>>>> to work with another company's products. It's all Apple around here.
>>>>>
>>>>> So it shouldn't matter if nobody else uses Apple's connector.
>>>>> It's a free and openly competitive world market, isn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thing is, Apple didn’t even have inter operability between its own
>>>> products.
>>>
>>> Agree. And I've said this before on here.
>>>
>>> Apple didn't transition to USB-C from USB-A well or consistently. When Macs
>>> lost USB-A ports phones should have gone the same way shortly after.
>>>
>>> What happened instead is that Apple bundled phones with USB-A - lightning
>>> charges for years without an ability to charge your phone with your Mac. In
>>> all that time they sold billions of phones with USB-A chargers.
>>>
>>> Then, when they transitioned to USB-C, only at one end of the cable, they
>>> also removed the charger (apart from ones model). So forced everyone to buy
>>> chargers.
>>>
>>>> MacBooks have had USB-C for years (you can’t push enough power
>>>> through a Lightning connector) So you couldn’t use your Mac charger to
>>>> charge your Lightning connector iPhone or iPad or ear phones. Now you can.
>>>> I’d understand reluctance to move to usb-c if there were any significant
>>>> technical downsides, but I can’t see any. It supports a wider range of
>>>> charge voltages than Lightning, has a more robust connector, (though some
>>>> disagree about this) and supports a much wider range of protocols including
>>>> high speed video. Lightning was a much better technical and mechanical
>>>> solution than micro USB, but it is now technically and commercially
>>>> obsolete.
>>>
>>> Agree. Lightning should have died 3-4 years ago.
>>>
>>>
>> I wonder if Covid and the semi conductor shortage had anything to do with
>> Lightning hanging on longer than it should? All manufacturers in all
>> electronics sectors had supply problems, mainly with the dull low value
>> devices - such as usb and power supervisory chips. As Apple had a monopoly
>> with Lightning in phones perhaps they had fewer problems getting hold of
>> these parts. Just speculating.
>
> I guess that's possible. Not sure why lightning parts would be more
> sourceable than the more ubiquitous USB, though?
>
>

Existing monopoly supply contracts and nobody else competing for those
parts?

Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2024-09-15 10:40, Chris wrote:
>
>>
>> Agree. Lightning should have died 3-4 years ago.
>
> This is a product lifecycle decision that Apple make. EU should not be
> involved in business decisions.

They are both equally entitled to make decisions within their sphere of
influence.

Apple chooses to sell into the EU market and so needs to comply to the
rules.

> If Apple are wrong about it, the market will punish them.

Ridiculous statement. lol.

> The USB-C force did not reduce e-waste - it prematurely increases the
> amount of Lightning compatible devices going to waste.

It should happened earlier to avoid selling more obsolete lightning
devices.

Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2024-09-14 13:24, Tweed wrote:
>
>> Something else I’ve just discovered - vendors will not be able to bundle a
>> USB-C charger with the device, it must always be sold separately. So not
>> the vendor trying to swizz you with an extra sale.
>
> Countries like Brazil (IIRC) actually *require* the charger be sold with
> the device.
>
> Another country meddling in business decisions.

"Business decisions" are not sacrosanct. They have to comply with all the
relevant laws and regulations in the territories they trade in.

US government is "meddling" relentlessly against Chinese companies and
products. That's OK, right?

On 2024-09-15 12:20, Java Jive wrote:
> On 2024-09-15 16:19, Alan Browne wrote:
>>
>> On 2024-09-14 13:00, Java Jive wrote:
>>>
>>> Alan Browne's false claim implied that Apple were already complying
>>> at the time that the legislation made compliance compulsory, but in
>>> fact they were not, which is exactly WHY the legislation made
>>> compliance compulsory!
>>
>> That is *not* what I said.  Apple had no intention of putting USB-C on
>> the iPhone 15 - but were forced by EU regs.  Result: more e-waste.
>
> What you actually said was this:
>
> On 2024-09-14 16:26, Alan Browne wrote:
> >
> > The European USB-C fiasco just creates more e-waste.
>
> Nonsense, it is designed to do exactly the opposite by making the
> charging arrangements of all portable devices sold in the EU the same.

Not the point, of course. Apple's path was clear - forcing the issue
had no effect on e-waste.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

On 2024-09-15 12:28, Java Jive wrote:
> On 2024-09-15 16:23, Alan Browne wrote:
>>
>> The EU meddles in things it should leave well enough alone.
>
> The world needs standards so that items can be interoperable.

For consumer appliances this should be a marketing choice, not a mandate.

>> It's not like USB-C is guaranteed to be adequate in 5 years from now.
>
> The British have had regulations about the sort of plugs that should be
> supplied in houses for many decades, yet nobody seems to think that they
> are now obsolete just through being decades old.

That is an electrical standard - as such is in the rest of the world.

>
>> "It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
>>   the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
>> Winston Churchill.
>
> So why are you propagating baseless anti-EU propaganda of the sort hyped
> by Russian disinformation trolls?

I wasn't. Do keep up.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

On 2024-09-15 12:35, Java Jive wrote:
> On 2024-09-15 16:26, Alan Browne wrote:
>>
>> On 2024-09-15 10:40, Chris wrote:
>>>
>>> Agree. Lightning should have died 3-4 years ago.
>>
>> This is a product lifecycle decision that Apple make.  EU should not
>> be involved in business decisions.
>
> They gave Apple over a decade to make that decision, but Apple failed to
> do so, so the EU had to make it for them.

HS. Apple would have gotten the iPhone to USB-C on iPhone 16. This was
their plan. Do not forget USB-C was defined by (amongst others) Apple.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

On 2024-09-15 12:59, Java Jive wrote:
> On 2024-09-15 16:17, Alan Browne wrote:
>>
>> On 2024-09-14 12:30, Java Jive wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2024-09-14 16:26, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The European USB-C fiasco just creates more e-waste.
>>>>
>>>> Apple, in its own good time, would have brought USB-C to iPhone,
>>>> etc. Indeed, the newest iPhone would likely have been the launch
>>>> USB-C iPhone.  Instead the EU forced Apple to go a year early.
>>>>
>>>> All this "decision" does is create early e-waste of lightning
>>>> connectors and some wall-warts.
>>>>
>>>> Government over regulating.  EU!
>>>
>>> BOLLOCKS!  The above is just yet another predictable example of Apple
>>> propaganda & EU-bashing.  The simple truth is that nearly all the
>>> other manufacturers had already adopted the USB-C standard while it
>>> was still voluntary, but Apple had more or less refused point blank
>>> [my caps to highlight the overwhelming majority]:
>
> I note that you snipped the quote of the numbers of overwhelming
> majority, how unsurprising given your posting record.

I'm not wasting time on your minutiae. This stuff has been covered ad
nauseum in the past.

You've just adapted a trolling attitude of which I'm getting quite bored.

>
>> Apple is a business and make business decisions.  Apple is one of the
>> original companies that _defined_ USB-C.  But, they also jumped ahead
>> of everyone with the Lightning connector quite a while before that -
>> and therefore there was (is) a lot of Lightning based cables and
>> accessories out there.
>
> And, even worse, from memory there are at least two EU technical boards
> giving advice to EU legislators over such matters, both of which Apple
> contribute to, so you have to ask yourself why they didn't bring their
> products into compliance sooner?

Business decision. Period. As stated.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

On 2024-09-15 15:30, Chris wrote:
> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

>> I wonder if Covid and the semi conductor shortage had anything to do with
>> Lightning hanging on longer than it should? All manufacturers in all
>> electronics sectors had supply problems, mainly with the dull low value
>> devices - such as usb and power supervisory chips. As Apple had a monopoly
>> with Lightning in phones perhaps they had fewer problems getting hold of
>> these parts. Just speculating.
>
> I guess that's possible. Not sure why lightning parts would be more
> sourceable than the more ubiquitous USB, though?

If they're unique to Apple then there is no competition for the resource.

It's a plausible point - but there are too many other factors to
consider as well.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

On 2024-09-16 10:06, Chris wrote:
> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-09-15 10:40, Chris wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Agree. Lightning should have died 3-4 years ago.
>>
>> This is a product lifecycle decision that Apple make. EU should not be
>> involved in business decisions.
>
> They are both equally entitled to make decisions within their sphere of
> influence.
>
> Apple chooses to sell into the EU market and so needs to comply to the
> rules.
>
>> If Apple are wrong about it, the market will punish them.
>
> Ridiculous statement. lol.
>
>> The USB-C force did not reduce e-waste - it prematurely increases the
>> amount of Lightning compatible devices going to waste.
>
> It should happened earlier to avoid selling more obsolete lightning
> devices.

By forcing it, it will cause the early demise of existing Lightning
accessories.

Trod all over. Again.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2024-09-15 15:30, Chris wrote:
>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> I wonder if Covid and the semi conductor shortage had anything to do with
>>> Lightning hanging on longer than it should? All manufacturers in all
>>> electronics sectors had supply problems, mainly with the dull low value
>>> devices - such as usb and power supervisory chips. As Apple had a monopoly
>>> with Lightning in phones perhaps they had fewer problems getting hold of
>>> these parts. Just speculating.
>>
>> I guess that's possible. Not sure why lightning parts would be more
>> sourceable than the more ubiquitous USB, though?
>
> If they're unique to Apple then there is no competition for the resource.
>
> It's a plausible point - but there are too many other factors to
> consider as well.
>
>

Another thought connected with the semi conductor shortage - they may have
felt that they couldn’t produce enough usb-c chargers. Lightning iPhone
purchasers would likely be using an existing charger, especially Apple had
stopped automatically supplying them with a new phone. Switching to usb-c
is very likely to cause an uptick in usb-c charger purchases at the time of
buying your first usb-c iPhone. It would not look good if Apple said their
chargers were in supply constraint. Not being able to buy semiconductors
freely was a real issue for two years post Covid, as shown by the car
manufacturers.

On 2024-09-16 17:07, Alan Browne wrote:
>
> On 2024-09-15 12:20, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> On 2024-09-14 16:26, Alan Browne wrote:
>>  >
>>  > The European USB-C fiasco just creates more e-waste.
>
> Not the point, of course.  Apple's path was clear - forcing the issue
> had no effect on e-waste.

Self-contradiction.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 2024-09-16 17:12, Alan Browne wrote:
>
> On 2024-09-15 12:59, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> On 2024-09-15 16:17, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2024-09-14 12:30, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>
>>>> BOLLOCKS!  The above is just yet another predictable example of
>>>> Apple propaganda & EU-bashing.  The simple truth is that nearly all
>>>> the other manufacturers had already adopted the USB-C standard while
>>>> it was still voluntary, but Apple had more or less refused point
>>>> blank [my caps to highlight the overwhelming majority]:
>>
>> I note that you snipped the quote of the numbers of overwhelming
>> majority, how unsurprising given your posting record.
>
> I'm not wasting time on your minutiae.  This stuff has been covered ad
> nauseum in the past.
>
> You've just adapted a trolling attitude of which I'm getting quite bored.

TRANSLATION: I realise that I've lost this argument, but am not man
enough to admit it.

>>> Apple is a business and make business decisions.  Apple is one of the
>>> original companies that _defined_ USB-C.  But, they also jumped ahead
>>> of everyone with the Lightning connector quite a while before that -
>>> and therefore there was (is) a lot of Lightning based cables and
>>> accessories out there.
>>
>> And, even worse, from memory there are at least two EU technical
>> boards giving advice to EU legislators over such matters, both of
>> which Apple contribute to, so you have to ask yourself why they didn't
>> bring their products into compliance sooner?
>
> Business decision.  Period.  As stated.

TRANSLATION: I realise that I've lost this argument, but am not man
enough to admit it, so simply restate my flawed opinion as though it has
the same statement as fact; of course, everyone else can see that it
does not.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 2024-09-16 17:10, Alan Browne wrote:
>
> On 2024-09-15 12:35, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> On 2024-09-15 16:26, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2024-09-15 10:40, Chris wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Agree. Lightning should have died 3-4 years ago.
>>>
>>> This is a product lifecycle decision that Apple make.  EU should not
>>> be involved in business decisions.
>>
>> They gave Apple over a decade to make that decision, but Apple failed
>> to do so, so the EU had to make it for them.
>
> HS.  Apple would have gotten the iPhone to USB-C on iPhone 16.  This was
> their plan.  Do not forget USB-C was defined by (amongst others) Apple.

HS here obviously applies to your claim, as I've just spent some time on
some Apple/Mac/i* follower sites looking at rumours and reports of
official statements about their intentions over the last two years or
so, and not one of them even mentioned this, let alone gives a credible
source, indeed it's not mentioned even in some reports of official
statements that might have been expected to mention it, such as this one:

https://www.macrumors.com/2022/10/25/greg-joswiak-usb-c-iphone/

Anyway, this is unsurprising, because a moment's thought shows that it's
contradicted by the known facts: Apple still has until December this
year before compliance becomes mandatory, so if they had indeed been
planning to introduce USB-C for the iPhone 16 this year but not for the
iPhone 15 last year, they still could have used Lightning for the iPhone
15, but they didn't, they used USB-C, thus disproving your claim!

So this is yet another example of: I've lost the argument but can't
bring myself to admit it, so I will invent 'facts' in an attempt to keep
up an appearance of having something worthwhile to argue about.

I note you are trolling from a transatlantic time zone, and obviously
know even less about the EU than the SFA you seem to know about Apple
products, and that you share a first name and a trolling style with
another well-known transatlantic Apple troll. It could be merely
co-incidence, but I doubt it.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 2024-09-16 17:09, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2024-09-15 12:28, Java Jive wrote:
>> On 2024-09-15 16:23, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>
>>> The EU meddles in things it should leave well enough alone.
>>
>> The world needs standards so that items can be interoperable.
>
> For consumer appliances this should be a marketing choice, not a mandate.

Opinion stated as if it were fact, and which is contradicted by the
known facts: there is nothing sacrosanct about consumer appliances, on
the contrary, the vast majority of, probably all, consumer appliances
available in any western nation need to comply with that nation's
relevant standards.

>>> It's not like USB-C is guaranteed to be adequate in 5 years from now.
>>
>> The British have had regulations about the sort of plugs that should
>> be supplied in houses for many decades, yet nobody seems to think that
>> they are now obsolete just through being decades old.
>
> That is an electrical standard - as such is in the rest of the world.

The USB-C is an electronic standard - as such as is to be found in the
rest of the world.

>>> "It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
>>>   the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
>>> Winston Churchill.
>>
>> So why are you propagating baseless anti-EU propaganda of the sort
>> hyped by Russian disinformation trolls?
>
> I wasn't.  Do keep up.

You are someone who lives far away from the EU and is therefore largely
unaffected by it but who nevertheless is propagating anti-EU propaganda
that has no basis in fact, just like a Russian troll.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On Mon, 16 Sep 2024 17:36:15 -0000 (UTC), Tweed wrote:

> Another thought connected with the semi conductor shortage - they may have
> felt that they couldn't produce enough usb-c chargers. Lightning iPhone
> purchasers would likely be using an existing charger, especially Apple had
> stopped automatically supplying them with a new phone. Switching to usb-c
> is very likely to cause an uptick in usb-c charger purchases at the time of
> buying your first usb-c iPhone. It would not look good if Apple said their
> chargers were in supply constraint. Not being able to buy semiconductors
> freely was a real issue for two years post Covid, as shown by the car
> manufacturers.

The real reason was stated in the business news at the time where Apple's
profits for wireless chargers & high-power wired chargers went up something
like five thousand percent year over year when Apple simply stopped
supplying the chargers and instead - sold them at the point of sale.