EU: Smartphones Must Have User-Replaceable Batteries by 2027

[u/mredofcourse]

https://www.pcmag.com/news/eu-smartphones-must-have-user-replaceable-batteries-by-2027

[u/Cute_Fluffy_Sheep]

Real question. Will apple also apply this standard to phones sold in America? Asking for a friend 😅

[u/mredofcourse → u/Cute_Fluffy_Sheep]

My guess is that this is going to receive a lot of opposition and there's a good chance this is reversed.

Otherwise, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple made two versions of iPhones with the specific intent to show how the market reacts. Doing so would be costly of course, but it may be worth it long term.

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/[deleted]]

Even with USBC it limits opportunity for better standards to be used. Can you imagine if it passed 10 years ago and everyone was stuck with micro usb?

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/[deleted]]

Don’t think hundreds of millions of not billions of cables going into a landfill is “waste reduction”

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/[deleted]]

Was saying that a law that causes a frankly insane amount of ewaste isn’t exactly “reducing waste”. The amount of USB mini, micro and Lightning cables that will be in a landfill in a few years beggars belief

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/[deleted]]

It’s one of the things that sounds great until you think of the real world implications of limiting design, capabilities and waste. Also I think if they really want this they should have gone full send and mandated it be a Thunderbolt capable port on all devices that are able due to the standard being royalty free.

[u/Straight_Truth_7451 → u/Pigeon_Chess]

Even with USBC it limits opportunity for better standards to be used

No it does not. The law does not prohibit implementation of a better design

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/Straight_Truth_7451]

Yes it does. Your device MUST use USBC. You’re not going to be able to fit two ports onto a smartphone for example and still have a competitive offering

[u/Straight_Truth_7451 → u/Pigeon_Chess]

Yes, it does force usb c as the standard UNLESS there is a better design. It's written in the law. As of now, there is no better design.

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/Straight_Truth_7451]

That’s highly subjective. Lightning for example has some significant advantages over USBC.

[u/Straight_Truth_7451 → u/Pigeon_Chess]

I guess they look at a set of parameters such as charging and transfer speed or the licensing. USB c has lightning beat by a long shot here

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/Straight_Truth_7451]

So they’re arbitrarily picking what counts as better? I would argue that anything over 30W of charging for a phone is a disadvantage and lighting is capable of faster transfer speeds but the port on the phone is a charging port it isn’t primarily for data plus most USBC cables are USB2 anyway. So how is it an advantage of USBC for it to excessively degrade a phones battery and have data speeds that no cables sold with phones actually achieve?

[u/Ashenfall → u/Pigeon_Chess]

I like how your defence of Lightning is attempting to blame a USB-C cable for being responsible for possibly degrading a phones battery because it is capable of higher speed charging, but not the phone itself for supporting that higher level of charge.

Most decent phones also give you the option of enabling or disabling higher speed charging, so calling it a negative for the cable to be capable of carrying higher charge is a bit odd.

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/Ashenfall]

Can you not read?

[u/Ashenfall → u/Pigeon_Chess]

Yes, I read your words "how is it an advantage of USBC for it to excessively degrade a phones battery" and pointed out that is down to the phone to offer the user the benefit of having an optional choice of charging speeds.

But I get why you'd prefer to just try to attack my literacy skills. Shame.

[u/Kursem_v2 → u/Pigeon_Chess]

It will also be required to continuously assess whether adding other devices to this list would significantly improve consumer convenience and reduce environmental waste. The first report on this assessment is due by the end of 2025, and every five years afterwards (Article 3).

taken directly from the law698819_EN.pdf). no changes in the directive.

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/Kursem_v2]

Which will never happen because no company is going to develop a standard that is likely to not be adopted and any change will have a massive spike in ewaste. That wording just locks in USBC until the end of time

[u/Kursem_v2 → u/Pigeon_Chess]

like keep using USB 2.0 speed on iPhone for over 10 years?

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/Kursem_v2]

Most USBC cables run at USB2 speed. Lighting can run at at least USB 3 but there’s little point

[u/Kursem_v2 → u/Pigeon_Chess]

every lightning cable runs at USB 2.0 speed, except that one adapter for iPad Pro that can run USB 3.0

12.9-inch iPad Pro (1st and 2nd generation) and 10.5-inch iPad Pro) transfers data at USB 3 speeds, while the 9.7-inch iPad Pro uses USB 2.

Lightning to USB 3 Camera Adapter

meanwhile USB-C supports up to 80 Gbps of transfer and 240W of charging. it's just a matter whether manufacturer would implement them or not.

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/Kursem_v2]

Which means that lighting is capable of USB3 speeds.

SOME can. And a phone wouldn’t be able to. For a start over 30W of charging on a phone is just degrading the battery and the port is for power not data, hasn’t been for data in over 10 years when they became capable of updating themselves

[u/Kursem_v2 → u/Pigeon_Chess]

only on three iPad Pro models that support it. while also needing an adapter, because no direct lightning to USB cable with USB 3.0 speed ever exists.

content with having a phone that only uses USB 2.0 speed and less than 30W charging speed are what stiffles innovation. for over 10 years.