EU Expands USB-C Mandate To Chargers (heise.de) 123
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Heise: The European Commission has revised the Ecodesign requirements for external power supplies (EPS). The new rules aim to increase consumer convenience, resource efficiency, and energy efficiency. Manufacturers have three years to prepare for the changes. The new regulations apply to external power supplies that charge or power devices such as laptops, smartphones, Wi-Fi routers, and computer monitors. Starting in 2028, these products must meet higher energy efficiency standards and become more interoperable. Specifically, USB chargers on the EU market must have at least one USB Type-C port and function with detachable cables.
With the regulation, the EU is also establishing minimum requirements for the efficiency of power supplies with an output power of up to 240 watts that charge via USB Power Delivery (USB-PD), among other things, under other things, minimum requirements. Power supplies with an output power exceeding 10 watts will also have to meet minimum energy efficiency values in partial load operation (10 percent of rated power) in the future, which is intended to reduce unnecessary energy losses. The EU Commission says the new requirements are expected to save around 3% of energy consumption over the lifecycle of external chargers by 2035. Additionally, greenhouse gas emissions are expected to decrease by 9% and pollutant emissions by about 13%.
"The EU also calculates that consumer spending could decrease by around 100 million euros per year by 2035," reports Heise.
With the regulation, the EU is also establishing minimum requirements for the efficiency of power supplies with an output power of up to 240 watts that charge via USB Power Delivery (USB-PD), among other things, under other things, minimum requirements. Power supplies with an output power exceeding 10 watts will also have to meet minimum energy efficiency values in partial load operation (10 percent of rated power) in the future, which is intended to reduce unnecessary energy losses. The EU Commission says the new requirements are expected to save around 3% of energy consumption over the lifecycle of external chargers by 2035. Additionally, greenhouse gas emissions are expected to decrease by 9% and pollutant emissions by about 13%.
"The EU also calculates that consumer spending could decrease by around 100 million euros per year by 2035," reports Heise.
Excellent (Score:5, Insightful)
Even though the UK stupidly left the EU, we will benefit from this because nobody will bother making worse products for our market.
I look forward to everything being powered from USB C, with my own choice of cable length and jack (right angle in either direction, or straight), and the ability to replace them if I damage them.
Re: Excellent (Score:2)
Unfortunately, they're not stopping these wall warts which can be a pita. Some have changeable mains pins for most markets, but I've only ever seen one (Apple, ironically, since they're usually the worst offenders in this sort of thing) that has an attachable cable, which enables you to use a plug of your choosing (which they don't supply).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Excellent (Score:5, Informative)
MacBooks do comply with the EU standard because you can charge them via the USB-C port. The fact that there is an additional option for charging isn't a problem.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah... is it just me, or does the new Magsafe connector on your Macbook go unused?
Now that most of my stuff charges via USB-C, I have zero interest in using yet another cable type in my charge cable collection. Just standardize on USB-C and be done with it.
Re: Excellent (Score:2)
I use the magsafe on my laptop. I almost always use the laptop in the same place and only charge it there, so it's not getting mixed into my collection and picked back out, and the magsafe is somewhat easier to fumble into place than USB-C. If I was using it long enough somewhere different to need to charge it, I'd grab a USB-C (probably already nearby), rather than collecting the magsafe from where it's set up.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a thunderbolt cable with a magnetically attaching end. It charges my laptop and connects external displays, etc. All problems solved.
The MagSafe cable is still in it's OEM packaging because I don't need to carry around a single-purpose cable when I can use a USB-C cable with the charger Apple supplied, and that same cable can be used for data connectivity as well.
Re:MagSafe goes unused? (Re: Excellent) (Score:5, Informative)
No, there are two power ratings for USB-C cables. 3A and 5A.
All USB C cables must be rated for 3A by default. 5A cables have the "e-marker" chip that indicate they can handle 5A of current.
That's it.
To get 240W, you increase the voltage - 240W is 48V at 5A. You cannot increase the current because wire ampacity depends on the cross-sectional area and it's expensive. Voltage is easy to increase by adding cheap insulation, but at 48V it's pretty much already covered by the standard PVC insulation on the wire.
(the other voltages are 20V for 100W, and it goes down from there).
240W is however the max for USB-C because once you go over 50V you get into electrical code issues as you stop being a "low voltage" device.
IIR losses are the big factor - the more current you carry, the loss of power int he wire goes up by the square of the current - going from 1A to 2A means you increase your losses by 4 times which is why it's always preferable to increase voltages over current - notice IIR losses do not depend on voltage - so a line carrying 10V at 1A has the same loss as one carrying 20V at 1A even when the latter is carrying double the power.
Re:MagSafe goes unused? (Re: Excellent) (Score:4, Informative)
No, there are two power ratings for USB-C cables. 3A and 5A.
No there are three. The e-marker will also indicate if the cable supports greater than 20V or 48V extended.
You have the following situation:
3A 20V non-marked cables for 60W max
5A 20V e-marker for 100W max
5A 48V e-marker for 240W max.
Those are the three ratings you get according to the USB PD 3.1 spec.
No you can't just boost the voltage. The minimum safe spacing in the 240W cables is double that of 100W cables, the cables are of significantly different construction.
Re: (Score:2)
That makes sense. I'm wondering if this was a recent rule change since the choice of limiting USB-PD to 20 VDC earlier seemed a bit arbitrary, and this 20 VDC limit seemed to exist on laptop chargers and display power supplies before USB-C was a thing.
It's actually nothing of the sort, you're allowed any arbitrary voltage providing you apply the correct standard to it. You're more than happy to go 100V DC with the appropriate insulation. And insulation is key. The IPC standards specify double the conductor distance in assembly for 30-60V as they do for 16-30V. It's not arbitrary, it's was literally the limit of the cable assembly of the 3.0 standard. The 3.1 standard included higher voltages for bigger cables and the addition of 240W rating for the e-mar
Re: (Score:2)
Apple do supply the attachable cables. I've got the UK, Euro, Swiss, and Italian ones for my charger, but I did have to visit the Apple shops in the respective countries to buy them.
Re: Excellent (Score:2)
The old Mag Safe and Mag Safe 2 power adapters that came with MacBook Pros did not have a detachable cable. Of course, it was always the cable that broke and that required replacing the whole lot. When Apple switched the MBPs to USB-C, they also switched the power supplies to detachable cables too.
Re: (Score:2)
There are lots of USB C chargers that have a detachable mains cable. Anker make a few models, but there are lots of others. They tend to be in the higher power ranges.
It's great being able to travel with only one small charger now.
Re: (Score:2)
The old apple ones I have do that. This is good because the cables have started to fall apart.
Re: (Score:2)
My Framework laptop power supply/charger is a neat little cuboid that has a USB-C outlet socket and a "Mickey Mouse" type standard mains inlet socket. It so far works with ANY device that I've tried that needs charge via a USB-C cable.
Anyone who wants one, as far as I know you can just order one from Framework without buying a laptop although those are also excellent.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple, ironically, since they're usually the worst offenders in this sort of thing
There's a chance I might have accidentally caused that. Way back, when the original MagSafe chargers were around — probably about 2008 or 2009 — I filed a Radar asking for removable MagSafe cables, pointing out that I kept having to throw away $80 chargers over a $10 cable, and that this had been a problem with every Mac charger I had ever owned from the PowerBook 145 all the way up to the MagSafe stuff. And I pointed out that having removable MagSafe cables would also provide a permanent solu
Re: Excellent (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No making you buy a new charger instead of just a cable was by design and a feature not a bug. The change is because the EU has made it clear this kind of thing will be legislated against.
Apple made that change in March of 2015. The EU didn't even *start* talking about standardizing on USB-C until roughly January of 2020. So I can't say for sure what made them start using separate cables, but I can say with near absolute certainty that the reason was *not* regulatory pressure from the EU.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple made that change in March of 2015. The EU didn't even *start* talking about standardizing on USB-C until roughly January of 2020.
While the standardization on USB-C arrived later, the EU started campaigning for standardization and regulation of chargers much earlier, first trying an approach based on voluntary industry adherence, then moving to more strict regulation and first targeting some devices before broadening the scope.
The EU asked the industry to standardize chargers for mobile phones in 2009 and released a corresponding standard in 2010. In 2014 they published a review of the impact of the change, which led to moving towards
Re: (Score:2)
Apple made that change in March of 2015. The EU didn't even *start* talking about standardizing on USB-C until roughly January of 2020.
While the standardization on USB-C arrived later, the EU started campaigning for standardization and regulation of chargers much earlier, first trying an approach based on voluntary industry adherence, then moving to more strict regulation and first targeting some devices before broadening the scope.
The EU asked the industry to standardize chargers for mobile phones in 2009 and released a corresponding standard in 2010. In 2014 they published a review of the impact of the change, which led to moving towards a mandatory regulation as opposed to voluntary industry commitment.
So I'm not sure whether Apple did the change in 2015 due to EU regulatory pressure, but the EU was definitely already involved in the matter.
The EU was pushing for micro-USB. Apple ignored them almost completely, doing the absolute minimum required to technically comply with the law. Apple is fond of malicious compliance, and has been for a long time.
Re:Excellent (Score:4, Informative)
"Even though the UK stupidly left the EU"
The EU isn't exactly demonstrating stellar economic performance right now:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news... [bloomberg.com]
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/art... [bbc.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, I wonder who is fucking up the world markets.
Re: (Score:2)
Must be the new Pope!
Re: Excellent (Score:2)
Re:Excellent (Score:4, Informative)
The EU isn't exactly demonstrating stellar economic performance right now
Neither is the UK, and our trade with Europe has dropped a lot.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, turns out a country removing itself from a massive free trade block it's been a part of for years isn't without economic consequences.
It's why I always roll my eyes at people when they throw out the idea of California (where I live) becoming it's own country. Not only is that not allowed for in the US constitution but it would be absolutely devastating to our economy which is heavily intertwined with the rest of the country
Re: (Score:2)
Seems to me that the American Constitution doesn't really say whether a State can leave the voluntary union, so that part depends on the Supreme Court, with this one quite willing to interpret the Constitution any which way. If nothing else, your Constitution does allow amendments such as Amendment XX, the State of California is no longer part of the USA. Does mean a large majority of the country has to agree.
You're right about the economic consequences, though could go like Quebec where every time they tal
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, ignore that last post by me. I wasnt replying to the right post.
Re: Excellent (Score:2)
Which western country is doing well at the moment, and why?
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, reddit, that famous source of reliable economic data.
Re: (Score:2)
When you can't find a flaw in the argument or the supporting data, attack the messenger!
Re: (Score:2)
Ad hominem, no sources. Nice job. I posted 2 articles in my OP showing the decline of france and germany. Perhaps try reading them.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps google what "ad hominem" means you cretinous mouth breather.
Re: (Score:2)
I prefer the market over bureaucrats for this sort of thing.
Re: (Score:2)
The only reason every Android phone came with micro USB was because the EU made them do it.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, really, are you brainwashed enough to believe that "dose dem dam evil capitalist pigdogs" changed their technological strategy just because ummmmm... EU asked them nicely? LOL.
Apparently Apple did.
Re:Excellent (Score:4, Insightful)
Eventually it will, not for a very long time. But when that happens, so what? The EU will have prevented massive amounts of e-waste being generated in the meantime. I'd rather deal with two standards than 20.
Re: (Score:2)
I prefer the market over bureaucrats for this sort of thing.
Why? This is a very obvious place where the market failed, with multiple proprietary connectors. There was blatant lock-in and rent-seeking.
I guess you liked carrying around 14 chargers?
Re: (Score:2)
And you know what? It's not a big enough deal for government to have gotten involved in the first place. How you charge your phone is something the EU needs to be involved with? Why? Well, they say it was to reduce waste. How much is it actually reduced by? What drop was removed from that 2.3 billion tonne bucket?
Re: (Score:2)
The EU made micro USB standard for all phone chargers.
Re: (Score:2)
> That didn't happen because of EU regulation.
That is a good question. Why did Apple switch to USB-C? "A primary driver behind Apple's move to USB-C was the European Union's legislation."
https://www.benq.com/en-us/bus... [benq.com]
> How much is it actually reduced by?
"Discarded and unused chargers account for about 11 000 tonnes of e-waste annually."
https://commission.europa.eu/n... [europa.eu]
Personally I am really happy about the mandatory USB-C. Now my work-laptop, 2 school-laptops, tablet and phones of all family member
Re: (Score:2)
I buy a router, it comes with a power supply, I plug it in, and then I pretty much forget about it until it dies years later.
That's exactly the point. The EU aims to give consumers the choice to buy electronic devices without having to also buy an included charger. By mandating compatibility, most consumers at some point would simply not need any additional charger on top of those they already possess.
Re: (Score:3)
We had the market deciding for decades and a zoo of incompatible chargers. Then the EU stepped in and mandated micro USB and things improved a lot. After almost a decade the EU changed the mandate to USB C.
Long story short, the distant commitee of people who are answering to the general population is far better than dozen even more distant committees of people who answer to a bunch of enshittificating CEOs.
Re: (Score:2)
Because laws can never be amended to include new standards, right?
And in the meantime, we don't have an explosion of proprietary garbage that doesn't enter landfills. On balance, I think we're still better off than we were before the EU enacted these laws.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless of course you have a BT router which takes 12V into a stupidly different barrel connector with a thicker centre pin than anything else. I have a "BT Home Hub 5 Type A" which has been hardware hacked to take a STANDARD 12V barrel plug and firmware hacked with OpenWRT installed so now it actually works properly.
Of course the Xaiomi router which also takes 12V but has a stupidly tiny little barrel connector socket needs an adaptor from eBay to take the same standard power plug as the Linksys router and
Re: Why not a barrel connector? (Re:Excellent) (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I look forward to everything being powered from USB C, with my own choice of cable length and jack (right angle in either direction, or straight), and the ability to replace them if I damage them.
USB C is an unnecessary expense, complexity, inefficiency and all around clusterfuck for high power (100-300 watts) applications.
Conductors are too small requiring unnecessary buck stages inside of the device to provide usable energy vs simply having larger sized conductors from the EPS. From my take of the EU text they are not addressing end to end efficiency just the efficiency of the power supply which is highly misleading and counterproductive if your end goal is saving energy.
Imagine a device with a p
Re: (Score:2)
Eh, nobody wants a chunky cable and connector to handle 240W (maximum USB C can supply), and these days it is certainly not cheaper that a buck regulator.
Copper isn't cheap and the conversion losses are going to be less than the losses to heat from lower voltages. The industry has responded with very high efficiency 50V capable converters.
Another advantage of USB PD is that with the PPS mode the device can be even smaller, featuring a lower power charger for non-PPS supplies, and using the PPS mode when ava
Re: (Score:2)
Eh, nobody wants a chunky cable and connector to handle 240W (maximum USB C can supply), and these days it is certainly not cheaper that a buck regulator.
I certainly do, they are cheaper, more reliable, more energy efficient and anything up to 12 AWG will be less chunky than your typical braided USB-C cable.
Copper isn't cheap and the conversion losses are going to be less than the losses to heat from lower voltages.
This is not true. With USB-C you are limited to 5 amps max. A 14 AWG conductor can carry 6x more current and 9x for 12 AWG than your typical 22 AWG USB-C cable with the same resistive losses. This means providing roughly an order of magnitude lower voltage to the device without exceeding resistive losses of the USB-C cable.
Another advantage of USB PD is that with the PPS mode the device can be even smaller, featuring a lower power charger for non-PPS supplies, and using the PPS mode when available for higher power charging. None of these phones that charge at 50W+ have a 50W variable mode buck regulator in them.
The heck they don't. Chargin
Re: (Score:2)
If you get a half decent USB cable it will have thicker wire. They aren't expensive either.
I have a precision low ohm meter, I check cables I buy.
Re: (Score:2)
If you get a half decent USB cable it will have thicker wire. They aren't expensive either.
Are you saying there are USB cables with thicker conductors than 22 AWG? If so where can I get one of those? More importantly why would I want one given nothing is going to push more than 5 amps over it anyway?
I have a precision low ohm meter, I check cables I buy.
Good for you I guess? I don't understand the relevance.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry about the thickness, worry about the resistance. There are people who measure cables and post the information online. AllThingsOnePlace is a good resource.
https://www.allthingsoneplace.... [allthingsoneplace.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry about the thickness, worry about the resistance. There are people who measure cables and post the information online. AllThingsOnePlace is a good resource.
This is not the case. Resistance is a function of mostly wire thickness and length. While one can always manufacture crummy wires and connectors with higher resistance there is no way to create a copper cable that carriers more current over the same wire gauge than pure copper without commensurate resistive losses. To achieve lower resistance you need thicker and or shorter conductors.
Your statements also seem to be completely irrelevant. First and foremost there is also no way to push more than 5 amps
Re: (Score:2)
While true, if you actually compare wires with the same size conductors you will find that there is in fact huge variation.
It's due to thinks like the number and size of strands, how they are wound, the type of conductor and its purity, and of course the USB connectors and the soldering play a huge part in it too.
Re: (Score:2)
While true, if you actually compare wires with the same size conductors you will find that there is in fact huge variation.
It's due to thinks like the number and size of strands, how they are wound, the type of conductor and its purity
This is total nonsense. The same gauge of wire has the same resistance regardless of whether it is solid copper or stranded copper. Purity is relevant which is why there are common standards dating back over a century for copper wiring.
Re: (Score:2)
Stranded has higher resistance because the strands are longer due to being twisted, compared to the solid wire.
If you think the connectors don't matter... I don't know what to tell you. They are one of the main reasons why crap cables are crap.
Re: (Score:2)
Stranded has higher resistance because the strands are longer due to being twisted, compared to the solid wire.
If you think the connectors don't matter... I don't know what to tell you. They are one of the main reasons why crap cables are crap.
I don't follow how wires turns into connectors. I've said nothing about connectors. What I think is wire is wire and you can expect nearly identical resistance between wires for the same wire gauge. If you disagree and you can provide relevant data speaking to "huge variation" in copper wires of the same gauge based on stranding configurations or absence of stranding then I would be most interested in learning more otherwise I think it likely you may be drawing unwarranted conclusions based on your char
Re: (Score:2)
They won't make worse products specifically for the UK, but they will make worse products for the rest of the world which will also be sold in the UK.
Even down to the plugs - UK plugs are used in Malaysia and Singapore too.
China makes a range of products, but what's sold in western countries has to comply with relevant local safety standards. They make much cheaper (and often far more dangerous) products which are sold in countries with lax regulations like Myanmar, Laos etc.
At this rate (Score:4, Funny)
We'll be seeing EVs with USB-C charging ports.
Re:At this rate (Score:5, Informative)
They mandated CCS2 for electric vehicles.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously the next step is CCS2 over USB-C, duh.
Re: (Score:2)
But you'll have to buy the wall wart separately, it won't come with the car.
Barrel Jacks (Score:3)
I am a little torn here; there are far too many products that use barrel jacks unnecessarily, but converting a barrel jack to hard wired terminals is much easier than a USB-C connector for things that are fixed installations. (Things like spotlights and CCTV accessories come to mind.)
But I do wonder what will happen to all of the new barrel connectors that are 0.2MM difference in diameter or length for various "reasons".
Re: (Score:3)
But I do wonder what will happen to all of the new barrel connectors that are 0.2MM difference in diameter or length for various "reasons".
The EIAJ standard barrel jacks (usually yellow tipped) are designed to fit only in the corresponding size socket and in none of the other sizes. Each size is for a specific voltage range, the different plugs are supposed to save you from accidentally over-volting your devices.
Re: (Score:2)
but converting a barrel jack to hard wired terminals is much easier than a USB-C connector for things that are fixed installations.
https://thepihut.com/products/... [thepihut.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, there are ones that have terminal connections too... but it is another connection you need to waterproof vs crimping or soldering the cable and having terminals at the power source.
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure I follow to be honest. Barrel jacks aren't usually waterproof, so not much difference from usbc. They're still allowed to do stuff with screw terminalis inside designed to be hard wired. Anything external you can always pot in construction adhesive, epoxy or hot melt for some ad hoc waterproofing.
Re: (Score:2)
Think the point is going beyond external. If you are converting to hardwire, I'm picturing removing the power connector and putting some screw terminals down.
A barrel connector is going to be a couple of rather large solder points. A USB-C connector is... not going to be that.
Re: (Score:3)
Barrel jacks are a terrible idea from the dawn of technology. Plug the wrong one in and fry something. Drop it in a puddle and fry something. And if you're dumb enough to put 200 Watts over it the thing you fry might be your house.
The inability to connect always live no matter what power directly into a device is a feature.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, they were still terrible. But they were all there was.
Perhaps you've never had or don't remember the experience of carefully checking the polarity and voltage on a wall wart barrel jack and then holding your breath as you plugged it into your expensive gizmo.
Re: (Score:2)
That would be in the firm "yes and no" category. [US] Electrical Code essentially dictates that you need a disconnecting mechanism between the power supply and the equipment which is what got us here. Not everything really needs to negotiate power connection prior to being energized, and if a power-limited 90% of use cases for sure. It is the remaining 10%, 1%, and even 0.1% cases though that make standardizing trickier though.
EU regulations and regulators: (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't say they can't be useful. I like this. I generally also like laws like the GDPR that enable EU regulators to fine megacorps for 50 bazillion Euros if they choose to get pissy with the rules and ignore them. Good stuff. Gotta hand it to the EU.
Good and bad (Score:2)
I like standardization and USB-C works well
I'm skeptical when governments control technology
How does this help? (Score:3)
So instead of having a bunch of chargers with varying voltages, currents, and connectors, I'll have a bunch of USB C chargers with varying voltages, currents, and capabilities.
Tried using a mainline USB charger with a Raspberry Pi 4? (Nobody supports the 5V/4A that it needs)
Here's a charger that came with my phone, will it work for my laptop? (No)
How come this device won't work with that USB brick? (because it expects the brick to put out 5V without negotiation, and the brick refuses to do that).
This device needs a USB-PD PPS brick; does this brick support PPS? (No)
So have we really solved anything other than reducing the unemployment rate among EU regulation writers?
And by the way, good luck reading the capabilities printed on the USB brick - putting all of those along with all of the symbols from all of the national regulatory agencies on a 15mmx20mm label isn't conducive to reading.
Re: (Score:3)
It sounds like you buy a lot of shady stuff that doesn't meet the USB certification.
Lack of information.... (Score:3)
Well, see, that's part of the problem.
USB has chosen to include many, many different features and make them "optional". So a 65W USB PD power supply can be fully USB certified, and a Raspberry Pi 4 can be fully USB certified, and yet they won't work together. A device that uses USB PPS can be fully certified, and not work with that same 65W USB PD power supply.
And don't get me started on USB cables....
Re: (Score:2)
Many cell phone chargers will charge a laptop. You can charge a Macbook pro using an iPhone charger.
But sure, you might have one of the old 15 W phone chargers. So chargers state their power output and the USB spec limits the current so any up to spec charger that advertises 36 W (12 V @ 3A) or more should charge any laptop, unless you've got something super weird.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll have a bunch of USB C chargers with varying voltages, currents, and capabilities.
Huh? Why? Just get a couple of decent ones and call it a day. Also yes you have a bunch of devices with varying capabilities. So what? You can plug your slow arse phone into your super charger if you want. It works. You can plug your power hungry laptop into your phone charger too. It also works.
This is a good thing.
Tried using a mainline USB charger with a Raspberry Pi 4? (Nobody supports the 5V/4A that it needs)
*Stares at my Pis plugged into a Samsung charger wondering WTF you are on about*
Here's a charger that came with my phone, will it work for my laptop? (No)
Why not? Does your laptop or charger not comply with the EU rules? Mine does. It brings a warnings saying charging
USB-C Outlets Will Gain Popularity (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
As I recall, you can do wireless charging, and even exclusively so if you want no charging port at all. Also, plenty of devices still do non-USB-c power (e.g. if it takes AC power in, that's not required to do USB-C, and if it's a car, then it's CCS2).
There's no sign of a successor to USB-C form factor in the space that EU mandates its use. IIRC, they even wrote the standard to leave some wiggle room to adopt such a successor should it arrive, but the industry seems to have settled into USB-C as an DC pow
Re: (Score:2)
And for what benefit? We're talking about tiny marginal returns here. Trivial savings, trivial impacts, non-trivial costs to the exposed businesses and consumers, trivial costs to the people who thought up the regulations.
Re: (Score:3)
It can save me boxes of crap. I have so many power adaptors with weird connectors in boxes, that I can't bring myself to throw away as I don't even recall which device they're for. I'm not overly worried if it saves me money.
I rather like being able to connect all my devices with a single cable. Phone, laptop, headphones, fan, battery, drone, raspberry pi... e-bike! And the fact I can make do with lower powered power supplies, so I can run my laptop off the car's USB ports is ace.
I'd much rather this th
Re: (Score:2)
Was that really an appropriate place for the EU to insert itself? Was that really a pressing social need that could only be resolved by government droppi
Re: (Score:2)
Who wasn't using USB or USB-C when this regulation was developed? Apple.
No, it's not just Apple. Just off the top of my head...
- Amazon Kindles were micro-USB until recently
- I have several rechargeable lanterns, purchased within the past five years, which are micro-USB
Re: (Score:2)
Was that really an appropriate place for the EU to insert itself? Was that really a pressing social need that could only be resolved by government dropping its fat ass on the situation?
It's definitely not the most urgent thing in need of government regulation to me but that won't change the fact that I will happily take advantage of this regulation as I imagine the benefits will spill over to the US as well. USB charging (while being more widespread then it used to be) being hardly as universal as you make out.
I do like the reduction in e-waste as well since responsibly disposing of all these shitty oddball charging formats isn't as easy as just dumping them in the trash.
Re: (Score:3)
There will be a successor. When cannot be predicted. What can be predicted is that having laws in place that dictate what has to be used will make a damn mess when that happens.
And for what benefit? We're talking about tiny marginal returns here. Trivial savings, trivial impacts, non-trivial costs to the exposed businesses and consumers, trivial costs to the people who thought up the regulations.
Let me tell you about the "old days" - the late 90's and early 2000's. Every brand of portable device (cellphone, MP3 player, etc) had a different charging port. Very often different devices within brands would require different chargers. Since USB was still catching on, all of the wall-warts and car chargers were specific to each device.
There were brands (iGo) that made changeable "tips" for their chargers... But for the most part, chargers weren't interchangeable. Buying a new device required a new charge
Re: (Score:2)
And let's not pretend that the motive had anything to do with making it convenient to find or keep a charger. This was sold as way to reduce waste. By how much do you think this rule will reduce the 2.3 billion metric tons of trash the EU
Re: (Score:2)
And do you recall how those practices changed with technology and the industry gradually moved towards a set of standards without any government intervention? The EU didn't get them to move to USB, why should anyone think the EU needs to tell people to move to USB-C?
Which standard? In 25 years, Apple had four different standards (Firewire, 40 pin, Lightning, and now USB-C)... the latter of which was only by EU rules.
Prior to that, the only standardization was the EU's micro-USB guidelines.
And let's not pretend that the motive had anything to do with making it convenient to find or keep a charger. This was sold as way to reduce waste. By how much do you think this rule will reduce the 2.3 billion metric tons of trash the EU produces every year?
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.
Re: (Score:2)
Let me tell you about the "old days" - the late 90's and early 2000's. Every brand of portable device (cellphone, MP3 player, etc) had a different charging port. Very often different devices within brands would require different chargers. Since USB was still catching on, all of the wall-warts and car chargers were specific to each device.
Is -that- what you're pining for?
I don't understand the argument you are trying to make given the picture you paint simply isn't a thing anymore. It is hard to find any sort of low energy device these days not powered and or recharged by USB which begs the question what is the real world impact?
The more relevant issue seems to be around higher power devices in the range of 30 to 250 watts being supplied by USB-C. This I believe is counterproductive and will only serve to increase costs and waste rather than save power.
Re: (Score:2)
The person I was responding to had a straw man of "let the market decide".
Re: (Score:2)
And remember that the EU didn't mandate usb c: they told the tech industry to figure out some standards on their own or else... . It wasn't until AFTER the Samsungs, Amazon's, LGs and Sonys of the world a
Re: (Score:2)
Just think if there were no AC socket standard, how would it have been. Obviously something new comes up in the future, the standard may adopt it. Standards are not meant for remaining still for the life of the universe. Just see where we are on WiFi standards.
Re:Saving consumers a whole 4.5 Euros (Score:5, Informative)
every year! Totally worth the inevitable negative consequences of trying to mandate the use and design of rapidly changing technology.
The reason for the new regulation is exactly to keep it up-to-date in regards of current technology: it's actually going to replace the already-existing regulation from 2019 after the 5-year period review. The review requirement in 5 years was part of the original regulation and will be part of the new regulation too.
Just wait, everything will go to wireless charging (or some newer thing), but consumers in the EU will have to keep buying USB adapters.
There is nothing in the regulation requiring to buy USB adapters: the opposite is true. The regulation mandates compatibility, which means a product has to be able to be charged with a different charger as long as said charger is powerful enough. Furthermore, the EU is moving towards requiring vendors to offer the option to purchase products without an included charger as that might be redundant.
In regards of wireless charging, they were explicitly excluded from the 2019 regulation but they might be included in the new regulation.
Re: (Score:3)
trying to mandate the use and design of rapidly changing technology.
Rapidly changing WTF are your talking about. USB-C is 11 years old now and is still on the rise.
Just wait, everything will go to wireless charging
So? If you even remotely understood how the regulation worked you'd know this was not a problem. But ignorance and "herp derp teh EWWW" is good too.
Also... no they won't.
or some newer thing
This is a new one! The EU shouldn't stop e-waste and incompatible chargers because new physics might exist.
bu
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re:Saving consumers a whole 4.5 Euros (Score:4, Insightful)
Why in God's name would you want Brussels telling you how to plug your computer in?
Firstly: you're begging the question here. Is it bad for Brussels to say this?
Secondly, Brussels ain't telling me shit, because I'm not in the EU. Brexit, fuck yeah etc. I do nonetheless reap the benefits of what Brussels are saying here.
Thirdly, Brussels aren't telling me how to plug my computer in. Even if I were in the EU, I could basically do what I want. I could open it up and attach a barrel jack. I could cut the cable and splice in a 48V supply. I can even buy a dodgy shit USB-C to barrel jack and power my ancient laptop from any of the many supplies I have. I can do any of those things and no one is telling me I can't.
What Brussels IS doing is telling manufacturers that they have to make devices that accept and emit power according to a particular set of standards. I'm guessing your government already does this with AC powered devices, specifying voltages, frequency, current, plug mechanical design, thermals, tolerances on those and of course a whole other bunch of shit, so people can buy a device from any vendor and safely plug it into power from any supplier in any part of the country.
What makes you think they have any idea what the right answer is,
1. What makes you think they don't? Face it, you don't have a better idea.
2. We know they do because the charging standardised on USB-C is infinitely better than the utter mess of proprietary shite we had to deal with before.
or that their answer will continue to be right for as long as the rule is in place?
Well USB-C has so far held up for 11 years and is only becoming more common, so I don't think it's going away any time soon. But if it is... gosh if only the law was written in such a way that the specifics are subject to review from time to time...
Re: (Score:2)
Totally worth the inevitable negative consequences of trying to mandate the use and design of rapidly changing technology.
There's nothing rapidly changing about this technology other than adoption of it. The standard mandated by the EU has existed for 13 years now and the EU requirements have allowed both forward and backward compatibility with it. And as of USB 3.1 there's no devices covered under EU rules that need to exceed the limits the standard provides.
Re: (Score:2)
If wireless charging is the new standard, why would anyone still be buying USB adapters?
It's not like wireless charging is banned in the EU. You just also have to include a USB port that has the capability to charge the device *as well*. You know, like every phone sold on the market with wireless charging already does.
What a ridiculous argument.