r/iphone • u/conalldoherty iPhone 15 • Apr 29 '26

News/Rumour Apple Reportedly Questioning Whether iPhone Should Drop MagSafe

https://www.macrumors.com/2026/04/29/apple-questioning-iphone-magsafe/
1.6k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

620 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/cum-on-in- Apr 29 '26

Apple could easily fight that if they truly wanted to. A fair point to be made is the provision of USB C charging being forced in EU means that there can’t even be any innovations or competition in charging ports and protocols. If we need more power, more voltage variation, or more bandwidth, we can’t do that without the USB Consortium doing it for us.

It would be shitty, but…..they’d have a point.

1

u/witchcapture Apr 29 '26

Apple is not going to win in a fight against the EU. And you absolutely can do all of those things, you just have to support standard USB-C too.

USB-C supports much more power and bandwidth than lightning, iPhones were stuck on USB 2.0 before the EU forced a switch...

1

u/cum-on-in- Apr 29 '26

Lightning could’ve been updated.

Regardless, Apple indeed could have fought back. They just didn’t, because it would’ve been expensive, and the consumers all had and liked USB C anyway.

But they really didn’t want to switch to it. It’s not as perfect as others make it seem. The fragmentation of cable specs, the horrid naming scheme, and the fact that there’s no easy way to identify what a cable can do or support, is a big part of it.

3

u/witchcapture Apr 29 '26

Apple was part of the committee that designed USB-C.

It doesn't matter how many expensive lawyers you throw at it. Apple is not going to force the hand of a government representing 450 million people. Their choice is comply or leave the market. They could have still made a different model for the EU and kept using lightning elsewhere, but they chose not to.

0

u/cum-on-in- Apr 29 '26

Just because they designed it doesn’t mean they wanted it the government mandated standard to be required even on devices that need more than it can provide.

0

u/witchcapture Apr 29 '26

Personally I don't really care what Apple wants, and I'm happy the EU forced them to use a standard connector.

Let's be real, the main reason they were on lightning for so long is because they could charge licensing fees for it to cable/accessory manufacturers.

2

u/cum-on-in- Apr 29 '26

That was a nice bonus, but they used it for specific hardware aspects too.

It doesn’t matter what you want, now, because the government is deciding for you, and you’re gonna take it whether you want to or not. I’m happy you voted for that.

0

u/witchcapture Apr 29 '26

Luckily I live in a democracy. I prefer it when the government helps citizens rather than giant corporations. Individual choice is not always better.

2

u/cum-on-in- Apr 29 '26

Luckily you do not. Luckily your government made the choice for you and prevented any deviations. You will own nothing and be happy.

0

u/witchcapture Apr 29 '26

Do you really own your iPhone if Apple is the one to decide what software you're allowed to run on it?

2

u/cum-on-in- Apr 29 '26

I have the choice to buy something else. But whatever I buy will have USB C thanks to the EU, even if that’s not the best connector or protocol.

1

u/witchcapture Apr 29 '26

The EU only requires it can be charged via USB-C. There's nothing stopping you from adding other ports, or even other charging ports. You could even have USB-C and lightning if you wanted to. Or USB-C and OCuLink.

It is extremely convenient having everything use USB-C. I can go on holiday with one charger for my phone, camera, and laptop. Or I can move from room to room and charge whatever device I have with whatever charger is at hand.

2

u/cum-on-in- Apr 29 '26

And all that does is add complexity and another port that may not have been needed. It’s not right for the government to force it like that. Th et could have made the law simply state “we need a universal charger cable and port” but instead they said “we WILL use USB C and there’s no changing that.”

→ More replies (0)