The end of lightning is nigh, possibly.

[Guest]

I still don’t get why my AirPods Pro came with a USB-C - Lightning cable. Ffs Apple, make up your mind across the whole product line or make the cable an option so we do not end up wasting it. 

[dalekphalm]

29 minutes ago, Phill104 said:

I still don’t get why my AirPods Pro came with a USB-C - Lightning cable. Ffs Apple, make up your mind across the whole product line or make the cable an option so we do not end up wasting it. 

What do the airpods themselves have? USB-C or Lightning?

[Lady Fitzgerald]

2 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

Most printers still don't come with USB cables (even ones without WIFI).

 

This is literally a non-issue. They could decouple chargers from phone boxes right now and, while it would be a mild hassle to retailers for training purposes (and ensuring potential stock levels for chargers), it would be a very short term problem that they would work out in a matter of weeks or months.

I prefer it when devices come without USB cables. The ones I get are always to short or too long. I have USB cables comming out my ears (and yes, it hurts) with none ever being the correct length.

[Blademaster91]

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

What report is reliable, if it is sooooooo reliable why are they telling everyone they can't guarantee anything about it.

Nope, not even in the slightest,  before printers became wifi it was common to for them not to ship with a USB cable.  They did this not for the environment but because USB cables were so prolific they could save the cost of a cable and not effect their sales/reputation.

IMO it's less of an annoyance with a printer, but if I'm going to pay over $800 for a phone I want it to at least come with a cable, the charger I don't care cuz I have enough of those. I think its bad enough phone manufacturers cut out the headphone jack for cost savings and charge you extra for the dongle or push to buy their wireless headphones.

[nightmarevoid]

Quote

...proposed regulation would stifle innovation and be disruptive to consumers.

Well, no, quite the opposite, but it still seems like over reach.

[mr moose]

18 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

IMO it's less of an annoyance with a printer, but if I'm going to pay over $800 for a phone I want it to at least come with a cable, the charger I don't care cuz I have enough of those. I think its bad enough phone manufacturers cut out the headphone jack for cost savings and charge you extra for the dongle or push to buy their wireless headphones.

 

I get the frustration and your issue makes perfect sense.  But I guess that's one of the prices we are going to have to pay if we want to reduce e-waste.  Unfortunately we are all part of a bigger system, the device companies want to maximize profit, the consumer wants to spend less, the government should be doing something more altruistic and well founded.  

 

Ensuring that consumers don't wear the brunt of any change is something government should be doing, although if we had better more transparent systems in place to rate products for this type of thing,  the market would then self regulate to a higher degree.

 

 

[Bombastinator]

1 minute ago, nightmarevoid said:

Well, no, quite the opposite, but it still seems like over reach.

“Over reach” is such an interesting term.  It kind of means “making demands they shouldn’t” or “taking power from another section of the country” while being very vague about what “should” actually refers to.  Both wings use it.

[Bombastinator]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

I get the frustration and your issue makes perfect sense.  But I guess that's one of the prices we are going to have to pay if we want to reduce e-waste.  Unfortunately we are all part of a bigger system, the device companies want to maximize profit, the consumer wants to spend less, the government should be doing something more altruistic and well founded.  

 

Ensuring that consumers don't wear the brunt of any change is something government should be doing, although if we had better more transparent systems in place to rate products for this type of thing,  the market would then self regulate to a higher degree.

 

 

I like the “bad enough that” bit which goes on to purport a reason phone jacks were removed which has been denied by almost everyone.  There are a few reasons phone jacks may have been removed.  Lower cost was never even suggested by anyone to be it though.  The cost was usually actually higher.  Lower end phones which are cheaper are actually seeing them. The most common one I remember was that they took up too much room relative to what they did.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

What do the airpods themselves have? USB-C or Lightning?

Lightning. It just seems that Apple have such a random mix of what connector comes on the source end.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Blademaster91 said:

IMO it's less of an annoyance with a printer, but if I'm going to pay over $800 for a phone I want it to at least come with a cable, the charger I don't care cuz I have enough of those.

So for you if you spent a grand on a printer it should come with a cable? Interesting how the more expensive the item the more your expectations are as to what comes with it. 
 

As for the chargers themselves, that is also something the EU have regulations on but for safety reasons. That I can understand. However the legislation is full of loopholes. So in much of Europe there are huge problems with unsafe devices being sold. There are many chargers setting fire to things or melting, plenty with poor mains isolation resulting in shocks. Some of the worst are coloured iPhone style copies where the back is falling off. This has resulted in a number of shocks and burns in the last few years. At least when phone manufacturers are supplying chargers they should be of decent quality. If they are removed people will buy these super cheap crappy alternatives causing other problems. It always seems that one bit of well intended regulation often leads to other problems.

[ARikozuM]

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

What report is reliable, if it is sooooooo reliable why are they telling everyone they can't guarantee anything about it.

The disclaimer on that report is one that you see very often in medical reports. It's there to let you know how it was funded, who asked for the report, and who led the research for the report. Putting it at the end is the only thing of poor taste that I care for. 

 

Anyone that says their report is the end-all be-all is doing a major disservice to the scientific community. 

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, ARikozuM said:

The disclaimer on that report is one that you see very often in medical reports. It's there to let you know how it was funded, who asked for the report, and who led the research for the report. Putting it at the end is the only thing of poor taste that I care for. 

 

Anyone that says their report is the end-all be-all is doing a major disservice to the scientific community. 

 

I don't see disclaimers like that on medical reports, I don't see them on normal tabled documents in government nor in consultation reports ordered by the government.  The problem is if they have to put a disclaimer to the end on any report then they shouldn't be using it to fashion legal mandates let alone publishing it.

 

 

[ARikozuM]

6 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I don't see disclaimers like that on medical reports, I don't see them on normal tabled documents in government nor in consultation reports ordered by the government.  The problem is if they have to put a disclaimer to the end on any report then they shouldn't be using it to fashion legal mandates let alone publishing it.

I think we're confusing medical reports like you would find for patients with ones for research reports. Research reports should always have a disclaimer about who conducted the research and for whom to limit the amount of bias that is hidden or incriminating. 

[Kisai]

7 hours ago, Sakkura said:

That would cause massive inconvenience in the absence of other measures. Out of the question.

Nonsense. Have you ever bought anything? Often even the cables that come with the device get thrown in the bin/drawer.

 

I have a 1/2 cubic meter tote full of nothing but cables, the vast majority have some proprietary end (eg playstation AV out) on them. HDMI was a fricking godsend for game consoles and TV, and as a result ALL TV screens and computer monitors either support HDMI or Displayport or both. And since HDMI is backwards compatible with earlier versions, no more tossing AV cables in the bin, yet many consoles still come with HDMI cables. 

 

So how to solve that is the same with the power bricks. Label things. USB cables are labeled for USB, HiSpeed(USB 2.0) and SuperSpeed (USB 3.0) and so forth.

 

 

The biggest issue with dealing with cables is the fact that newer cables don't work on older devices because they made mechanical changes (eg USB 3 type B cables will not fit USB 2.0 type B devices) or protocol differences (USB 1.1 vs USB 2.0 cables look the same and are mechanically the same.)

 

So if we get rid of all these other cables and stick with USB-C for pretty much everything, a lot less stuff ends up collecting dust or going into the trash. Thus they can stop being shipped with devices. While we're at it, let's stop shipping NEMA 5-15P to IEC320 C13 power cables and have them only shipped with devices that pull the full 15A (like servers), as many of the cables that come with computer monitors and even PC's don't pull 5A and come with thinner cables. I have quite a few of these, and the office has two bins of them.

 

If we're being honest Video cables and Power cables are the largest e-waste from cables.

[leadeater]

34 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

I think we're confusing medical reports like you would find for patients with ones for research reports. Research reports should always have a disclaimer about who conducted the research and for whom to limit the amount of bias that is hidden or incriminating. 

That's different than stating they do not actually back the data and conclusions of the report. Research reports don't claim they are absolutely correct but they do back their methodology and the data, because if you can't trust the data then everything derived from that data is worthless.

 

It does nobody any good to publish a report stating cars are on average 3.6m to 4.8m in length but then put a disclaimer at the end that they do not guarantee the accuracy of the data or the measuring device. That's not better than me just having a guess, would be a pretty bad idea to then create garage floor plan specifications off that report. If it's not accurate then cars may not fit or be much larger in size than necessary. Or the counsel repaints all the parking spaces to a size that cars can't actually fit in then you get a parking fine for being outside the lines.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Phill104 said:

I still don’t get why my AirPods Pro came with a USB-C - Lightning cable. Ffs Apple, make up your mind across the whole product line or make the cable an option so we do not end up wasting it. 

So do the iPhones now to be fair

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, ARikozuM said:

I think we're confusing medical reports like you would find for patients with ones for research reports. Research reports should always have a disclaimer about who conducted the research and for whom to limit the amount of bias that is hidden or incriminating. 

 

Research papers do not have disclaimers, they are qualified instead.  The qualifiers are necessary so as to be repeatable and understood properly.  Those qualifiers actually validate the data in said reports as opposed to disclaimers (like above) which dismiss all data as being nothing they wish to take responsibility for. 

 

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Kisai said:

Nonsense. Have you ever bought anything? Often even the cables that come with the device get thrown in the bin/drawer.

 

I have a 1/2 cubic meter tote full of nothing but cables, the vast majority have some proprietary end (eg playstation AV out) on them. HDMI was a fricking godsend for game consoles and TV, and as a result ALL TV screens and computer monitors either support HDMI or Displayport or both. And since HDMI is backwards compatible with earlier versions, no more tossing AV cables in the bin, yet many consoles still come with HDMI cables. 

 

 

HDMI cables can be a nightmare. Try setting up a new AV amp and you soon realise all HDMI cables are not equal. Older cables don’t support ARC for instance, or HDR or even 4K and data. When I setup my latest home cinema amp I had to chuck away three HDMI cables for these very compatibility reasons, or at least they ended up in the huge box of cables I too own.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

So do the iPhones now to be fair

Interesting. Unfortunately I have only two ways of using that cable, either on my PC or on my work laptop. I have no USB-C wall warts, no USB-C powerbanks. On aeroplanes, in restaurants and in the car there are no USB-C outlets. So should the EU mandate on USB-C will that be green for the millions of existing USB sockets already in use? 

[Guest]

53 minutes ago, Phill104 said:

Interesting. Unfortunately I have only two ways of using that cable, either on my PC or on my work laptop. I have no USB-C wall warts, no USB-C powerbanks. On aeroplanes, in restaurants and in the car there are no USB-C outlets. So should the EU mandate on USB-C will that be green for the millions of existing USB sockets already in use? 

Hopefully, USB-C has far better power delivery, and is ubiquitous for power and data. It’s also the socket on the phone that is being mandated, so USB to Type-C connectors would be fine, although bottlenecked.

[Kisai]

1 hour ago, Phill104 said:

Interesting. Unfortunately I have only two ways of using that cable, either on my PC or on my work laptop. I have no USB-C wall warts, no USB-C powerbanks. On aeroplanes, in restaurants and in the car there are no USB-C outlets. So should the EU mandate on USB-C will that be green for the millions of existing USB sockets already in use? 

USB-C on Laptops are 7.5W or 15W, USB-C PD will go up to 100W (Docking stations and dedicated power bricks.) 

 

I'd suggest buying a USB-C battery really, since you could just take it with you then and charge anything else off it.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Kisai said:

USB-C on Laptops are 7.5W or 15W, USB-C PD will go up to 100W (Docking stations and dedicated power bricks.) 

 

I'd suggest buying a USB-C battery really, since you could just take it with you then and charge anything else off it.

So there is the crux of the matter, legislation will mean we have to buy something else. Hardly green. I probably have 8 power banks in my house, 5 USB sockets in my new car to be delivered next month and probably about 8 USB based chargers around the house in my family. Many houses now have USB sockets built into the mains plug sockets, should all those be changed due to legislation? That is my point here, let consumer demand drive this. I am sure in a few years new standards will arrive. We cannot get stuck with one because poor legislation demands. We are making something for the sake of it, not because it is needed. Not one device I charge in my car for instance needs high power charging offered by USB-C. 

[TechyBen]

2 hours ago, Phill104 said:

So there is the crux of the matter, legislation will mean we have to buy something else. Hardly green. I probably have 8 power banks in my house, 5 USB sockets in my new car to be delivered next month and probably about 8 USB based chargers around the house in my family. Many houses now have USB sockets built into the mains plug sockets, should all those be changed due to legislation? That is my point here, let consumer demand drive this. I am sure in a few years new standards will arrive. We cannot get stuck with one because poor legislation demands. We are making something for the sake of it, not because it is needed. Not one device I charge in my car for instance needs high power charging offered by USB-C. 

Huh? Why would those be changed due to legislation? That's not what this is.

[Guest]

32 minutes ago, TechyBen said:

Huh? Why would those be changed due to legislation? That's not what this is.

Why not? Target end or source end, if target goes USB-C people will expect the full speed charging of USB-C, not USB2. With Apple and others already supplying cables that are USB-C on the charger end there is already a need to have a second cable or adaptor for the car, or for on a flight, in a restaurant etc.

[Mira Yurizaki]

8 hours ago, Phill104 said:

HDMI cables can be a nightmare. Try setting up a new AV amp and you soon realise all HDMI cables are not equal. Older cables don’t support ARC for instance, or HDR or even 4K and data. When I setup my latest home cinema amp I had to chuck away three HDMI cables for these very compatibility reasons, or at least they ended up in the huge box of cables I too own.

They probably don't support ARC or 4K simply because the cable didn't connect the necessary pins (ARC and HEC use pin 14, which was effectively optional to connect, as it was marked as "reserved", in the HDMI spec before 1.4) or the cabling was such that it was good up to whatever the maximum data transmission was at the time and anything higher wouldn't work. Pretty sure if you found a well-built, fully connected HDMI cable built before the 1.4 spec, it'd work with 1.4 and beyond.

 

There's nothing in an HDMI cable that would actively tie to an HDMI spec number.

 

8 hours ago, Phill104 said:

Interesting. Unfortunately I have only two ways of using that cable, either on my PC or on my work laptop. I have no USB-C wall warts, no USB-C powerbanks. On aeroplanes, in restaurants and in the car there are no USB-C outlets. So should the EU mandate on USB-C will that be green for the millions of existing USB sockets already in use? 

USB A to USB C is still a valid combination. And even then, there's converters.