Slashdot Mirror


Switzerland Moves Toward a Universal Phone Charger Standard (vice.com)

Press2ToContinue writes: Apple's Lightning cable cartel be damned: Switzerland is moving forward with a plan for a single, universal phone charger across the country, standardizing phone chargers across the board. While the exact standard hasn't been mentioned yet, it wouldn't be hard to guess the standard: Micro USB, used across phone platforms, most especially Android, which has a gigantic chunk of the cell phone market worldwide.

The likely loser? Apple, which has relied on proprietary chargers since introducing the iPhone in 2007. While many companies have tried releasing generic cables, Apple often relies on DRM software to ensure that it's an Apple certified cable, charging $19 a piece for the Lightning charger used by the iPhone 5 and 6 and similar models.

What do you think -- are government-mandated standards for chargers a good idea? Despite the success of the standard household 3-prong electrical plug, doesn't this hamper progress?
China seems to have done most of the work on the wall-circuit side of the equation,several years ago. But as to the "standard" 3-prong plug, any particular plug type is only as universal as the sockets and voltages they supply.

23 of 401 comments (clear)

  1. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Switzerland movies nothing, our Government just tries to suck up to the EU wherever they can and copy their laws... and, it just mandates a USB-Plug *on the charger*, so even for the crap from Cuppertino it does not change anything...

  2. Government should enforce more standards by NotInHere · · Score: 5, Funny

    Standards are the basis of a free market, and proprietary "standards" are the basis of proprietary lock-in.

    Governments are given the oversight to ensure that there still is a free market.

    Examples for proprietary "standards" being used for proprietary lock-in:

    -> microsoft office to make interopability with their formats hard

    -> whatsapp's messaging protocol. its basically xmpp, but they still only allow the official client to communicate

    -> printer cartriges, even used to lie to the customer by lowering the price for the printer.

    1. Re:Government should enforce more standards by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Government mandated standards may or may not be a good idea, but they are certainly not "the basis of a free market" because they represent an intervention by government in the forces of supply and demand.
      This is nonsense. The parent was right.
      The underlying supply, mor important, demand, does not change, just because the suppliers need to meet a certain standard. And by all being forced to adhere to the same standard, a single supplier can not abuse his artificial monopoly.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    2. Re:Government should enforce more standards by dejitaru · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sigh... i'm still waiting for the U.S. to move to the metric system :|

    3. Re:Government should enforce more standards by amiga3D · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your statement may be true but still standards are not the basis of a free market.

    4. Re:Government should enforce more standards by sunderland56 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes. However, there is no world government; so planetary adoption of standards is still hard.

      the success of the standard household 3-prong electrical plug

      Haha. Right. All the proposed regulation does is to make *one* end of the charger a standard. Good luck with the other end. There is no "standard household outlet"; countries can't even agree on what the voltage should be, or the AC frequency, never mind the number of, arrangement, size, and shape of prongs.

    5. Re:Government should enforce more standards by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A free market is a ...

      That is ONE definition of a "free market", as a market free of government regulation. Another definition of a "free market" is a competitive market with negligible barriers to entry, and the inability of a single participant (either buyer or seller) to unilaterally set prices. In practice, these two definitions are opposites, since completely unregulated markets tend to be rigged.

    6. Re:Government should enforce more standards by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Informative

      The first definition has proven time and time again to lead to abuses in the market, abuses against rights of citizens, abuses against its own workers, cheating against its own shareholders even.

  3. Douglas Adams had an opinion: by Alien7 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    http://www.douglasadams.com/dna/980707-03-a.html

    1. Re:Douglas Adams had an opinion: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Cut the man some slack, he's been dead almost 14 years, and as far as anyone can tell, not for tax purposes.

  4. Re:why? by Insanity+Defense · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The government must be involved to prevent the formation of monopolies or cartels that remove the "free" from free market.

  5. In this case ... by SwashbucklingCowboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... government standardization would be a good thing since the vendors obviously aren't going to do it themselves. Proprietary connectors mostly help the vendors with lock-in due to patents which only helps to pad the balance sheets of those vendors.

  6. Jeunism by Max_W · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The problem with chargers cables is that it seems they are designed by young designers, who have a perfect vision.

    But after fifty years almost everyone experiences a deterioration of vision. It is so simple to make an explicit clear design of a plug, still I am to put on my glasses just to connect a smartphone to a charger.

    It is not only with cables, it's with everything, an iron, a headphones, etc. About everything is designed by young cool people with perfect youthful vision.

  7. Re:Govt mandated? by NotInHere · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The digital industry is filled with almost monopolies. Microsoft is almost monopolist for the desktop (and its office suite is almost monopolist was well), intel is almost monopolist for the desktop CPU market. Google is almost monopolist for internet search. If these companies now use their monopoly to promote only a part of the market they control, its an abuse of their monopoly.

    Its hard if a company wants to improve a product, yes. But here the thought of a free market is more important than wanting to improve cabled charger technology.

    Imagine if you bought a house with apple IOT, and apple sells thousands of these houses, and after they sold them, they declare that only devices will work with the house's power grid that are certified by apple. This will be their next money printing machine. Modifying the house would be forbidden because of the strong IP laws, and patents apple has on the house. Your only option would be to tear down. Would you want this? And what is if only such houses are on the market, if nobody can build a normal house anymore, without vendor lock in?

  8. If the industry actually had to pay... by ffkom · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ... for the environmental cost of dumping the toxic waste that is millions of perfectly fine but "obsolete" chargers every year, they might also rethink this pseudo-innovation stuff.

    However, regulating the production seems to be just more practical than searching through all trash cans for illegal dumping of toxic waste.

  9. I'm conflicted about this... by Bearhouse · · Score: 5, Interesting

    On the one hand, I have drawers full of old phones and chargers...so I reckon standards are good.
    On the other, my kids (and to a lesser extent I) enjoyed the extended functionality that iPhone sockets brought to (cheap, non-Apple) peripherals like bedside alarms, autonomous amp/speakers in the bathroom or by the pool, replacement car stereos...access to contacts, charging, music and all without Apple or Android "car OS" bullshit. And no, bluetooth alternatives for non-Apple devices do not count...only recently have they become remotely equivalent in reliability of connection, integration and ease of use.
    The cheapo Chinese iThings mostly "Just Worked"...(OK, albeit with hilariously poor and inconsistent interfaces)
    Well, up to iPhone 4s anyway.

    All that came to a grinding halt with later iPhones / iOS.
    Since my kids and cats routinely lose, loan, or just simply destroy chargers and cables, I have a bunch of hard-wired armoured micro-USB cables all around the house, the garden, the cars etc.
    Fine for me and the wife with Android 'phones; for kids and visitors a small "tip" that converted the mini-USB to Lightening was attached with a steel flying wire near the end, (fishing line header, if you're interested...)
    Neat little thing, bought for cheap. Worked fine.
    Until an "update" rendered them useless...

    Fuck you Apple.

    Oh, and don't get me started on how later iOS updates rendered the user interface LESS usable.

    Fuck you again, boys, and BTW fuck iTunes while we're at it.

    Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to mow the lawn.
     

  10. Re:Lightning Charger? Bias Much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The cable should be a dumb piece of conductor. A Lightning cable isn't. You might think that the ability to insert it either way would rely on special hardware in the phone, but that's because you're not thinking like a piece of shit that wants to force everyone to buy overpriced cables. In the Lightning cable, the hardware to determine the cable orientation and get everything hooked up right is IN THE CABLE.

    That little bump before the Lightning plug? That's a chip. That's where the "insert either direction" magic happens.

    About the fifth time you get the this accessory is not supported by this iPhone message on the included cable and charger, you'll start to realize why the whole Lightning system is a horrible idea.

    FWIW I rather pay a "premium" on a cable that will not fry my hardware and might burn my house down.

    That's the charger, not the cable. Poorly built chargers can catch fire, and they can do that just fine with an Apple approved Lightning cable.

    Of course, you also need an Apple approved charger, because iOS won't draw anything past the absolute minimum USB charge if not connected to an official Apple charger.

  11. Hopefully NOT USB Micro B by CharlieG · · Score: 5, Insightful

    USB-C is a way better connector - No schrodinger's cat problem where the ports direction isn't determined until you try it the first time, so it always takes 3 tries. Aupports higher power etc - just a way better standard than Micro B

    --
    -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
  12. Re:why? by FrankSchwab · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, the Bell System WAS a government created monopoly, which fought tooth and nail against every attempt to nibble away at any part of it. All the government had to do to dismantle it was to repeal the laws the prevented any competition.

    Standard Oil, on the other hand, was a market created monopoly where the government had to take aggressive action to dismantle it.

    --
    And the worms ate into his brain.
  13. Oh come on! by wbean · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't you remember all the different chargers? I love being able to use any micro USB charger with any phone or camera. No more digging around to find the proprietary charger that I may have labelled to identify the device that it works with. It may pay the individual companies to design their own proprietary chargers and still be better for the consumer for the government to insist on a single design standard. The "free market" isn't some wonder drug.

  14. standarizing phone chargers by unixisc · · Score: 3, Funny

    I fail to see why that's a problem. Having a type A slot on the charger means that any phone w/ the correct cord can be charged - not just Apple or Android but also past generations of phones that may have used other types, like mini USB (used on the old Moto Razrs) or the proprietary types from Nokia, Samsung or LG.

    Only issue as far as charging goes is iToys sometimes refusing to charge when not using the original white Apple made connectors. But even that happens only in certain environments, like a car's USB port.

    As far as standardizing goes, USB has a pretty sordid record itself. Type A & Type B was fine, then you had mini, then micro, now Type C is coming out that is symmetric... Why can't the USB committee just standardize on Apple's lightning connector, instead of reinventing the wheel?

    1. Re:standarizing phone chargers by jmac_the_man · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Apple is using the lightning connectors (and the associated data transfer standards) to lock customers in to only purchasing from Apple. Letting the USB committee standardize on Lightning would defeat the purpose

    2. Re:standarizing phone chargers by tlhIngan · · Score: 5, Informative

      I fail to see why that's a problem. Having a type A slot on the charger means that any phone w/ the correct cord can be charged - not just Apple or Android but also past generations of phones that may have used other types, like mini USB (used on the old Moto Razrs) or the proprietary types from Nokia, Samsung or LG.

      Only issue as far as charging goes is iToys sometimes refusing to charge when not using the original white Apple made connectors. But even that happens only in certain environments, like a car's USB port.

      As far as standardizing goes, USB has a pretty sordid record itself. Type A & Type B was fine, then you had mini, then micro, now Type C is coming out that is symmetric... Why can't the USB committee just standardize on Apple's lightning connector, instead of reinventing the wheel?

      Well, several problems with the summary.

      1) Micro USB sucks. I mean, USB Type C is coming out and for good reason - plugging in cables without doing the twist-around dance is a good thing. Rumor has it Apple actually gave that design to the USB forum because well, uni-directional connectors stink especially on mobile. Heck, there are several designs for the old Type A connector that are... reversible! Unfortunately, the design of the Type A means they are fragile

      2) USB lightning cables aren't expensive, nor proprietary. The chip only comes into play if you want to do anything more than connect a sync/charge cable. You can pick up a ton of sync/charge USB to lightning cables on eBay/DealExtreme/monoprice/Alibaba for $5 shipped these days. There's a lot of clone cables out there. Hell, even licensed cables are only $10 on sale nowadays.

      3) The chip allows lightning to do fancy things like send audio or video data out of it. USB has no such functionality directly (except through USB Host ports faking OTG - no one implements real OTG), so it's considered a "value add".

      4) Reversible connectors are good. Imagine trying to design a phone accessory that uses the USB port - if you want to support a lot of phones, it's hard because half will have the USB plug one way, the other half will be the opposite, so you get stuck with releasing a product with a pigtail and some hokey attachment option.

      5) Apple chargers have special resistors to tell you how much current the charger allows. USB Charging spec shorts D+/D-, offering no clue as to how much you can draw. And it's changed - 500mA, 800mA, 1A and 2A are valid. And devices that draw 2A have been known to explode/set on fire cheap chargers. Why the USB folks couldn't have adopted the Apple system (which is cheap, requires no special hardware (the resistors pull the D+/D- lines to logical 0 and 1 states) to measure or use and lets you mix and match chargers at will, I have no idea. I mean, why can't the charger tell the device it only supports 500mA? (FYI - the circuits to detect a USB charger are the same as Apple resistors - the D+/D- short coupled with "special resistors" inside the device across ground and Vbus means you detect it because the USB lines go a certain way)

      6) Government mandating USB Micro is already limiting - consumers won't get Type C style connectors on their phone. I mean it's good it's standardized, but you really want to harm innovation like this? Of course, you can allow adapters for the Apple folks, and the Type C phone folks as well. (And face it - more phones are coming with Type C nowadays).

      SO no, I'm sure Apple's really worried. Because likely the adapter provision will have to say, or you're going to really deny people the ability to buy phones that have USB Type C?