Image: tomekwalecki (Pixabay)

The European Parliament has issued a press release confirming that it’s settled on making a common charger mandatory for a range of mobile devices. These include mobile phones, tablets, cameras, and handheld gaming consoles, all of which must be equipped with USB-C charging ports by Autumn 2024. The EU has decided upon establishing a single charging solution for select devices in order to make products “more sustainable, to reduce electronic waste, and make consumers’ lives easier.” Apple is significantly impacted by this agreement, as its iPhones have leveraged the proprietary Lightning connector since 2012. Recent reports have suggested that Apple has already begun testing iPhones with USB-C ports.

Under the new rules, consumers will no longer need a different charging device and cable every time they purchase a new device, and can use one single charger for all of their small and medium-sized portable electronic devices. Mobile phones, tablets, e-readers, earbuds, digital cameras, headphones and headsets, handheld videogame consoles and portable speakers that are rechargeable via a wired cable will have to be equipped with a USB Type-C port, regardless of their manufacturer. Laptops will also have to be adapted to the requirements by 40 months after the entry into force.

Source: European Parliament

Go to thread

Don’t Miss Out on More FPS Review Content!

Our weekly newsletter includes a recap of our reviews and a run down of the most popular tech news that we published.

23 comments

  1. Honestly, I had thought this had happened long ago, and that we were just waiting for the implementation deadline to hit.

    They have seemingly been talking about this for bloody ever.

    That said, it is a double edged sword.

    Apple are a goddamn pain in the *** with all of their proprietary connectors and other solutions, but on the flipside legislation like this can stagnate innovation and make next generation standards require a literal act of Congress (or parliament as it were).
    A more vague approach, requiring the use of an open industry standard, but less specifics about exactly which one to use might be a better approach.
  2. Yeah we are now doomed to be required to use USB-C until at least 40 years past it's useful life.

    It will be like the PS/2 port that just refuses to die. Because it can't - EU says so.
  3. I was thinking about this the other day as well.

    An open standard is a must so undue costs are not forced onto everything. Apple will have to get on board or get out of town and I doubt they want to lose the EU market. If USB-C can be used without royalty issues(I have no clue) that's great. Presently it has evolved to a pretty nice standard.

    Some kind of definitive process for upgrading down the road that includes notification for manufacturers and deadlines to implement. Gotta keep the playing field level for all. The process should also involve input from the industry for recommendations on moving on to the next standard.

    Similar to most USB and HDMI-type ports it would be recommended to use the same form for as long as possible and require backward compatibility. I agree with @Brian_B about PS/2, we don't need things long past overdue to be abandoned but there should be a process for keeping as long as all or most agree and then moving on.
  4. I was thinking about this the other day as well.

    An open standard is a must so undue costs are not forced onto everything. Apple will have to get on board or get out of town and I doubt they want to lose the EU market. If USB-C can be used without royalty issues(I have no clue) that's great. Presently it has evolved to a pretty nice standard.

    Some kind of definitive process for upgrading down the road that includes notification for manufacturers and deadlines to implement. Gotta keep the playing field level for all. The process should also involve input from the industry for recommendations on moving on to the next standard.

    Similar to most USB and HDMI-type ports it would be recommended to use the same form for as long as possible and require backward compatibility. I agree with @Brian_B about PS/2, we don't need things long past overdue to be abandoned but there should be a process for keeping as long as all or most agree and then moving on.

    I wonder if this will just result in an "everything is USB-C" type approach like we have seen in other areas across the industry.

    Just like how we kind of got to USB 3 and then the naming mostly stayed there and they just started adding stupid subspecification names that made less sense than the previous version increments.

    Every future revision of USB will now be called USB-C.

    USB-C 2.0
    USB-C 40G
    USB-C 220V

    Etc. Etc.
  5. I wonder if this will just result in an "everything is USB-C" type approach like we have seen in other areas across the industry.

    Just like how we kind of got to USB 3 and then the naming mostly stayed there and they just started adding stupid subspecification names that made less sense than the previous version increments.

    Every future revision of USB will now be called USB-C.

    USB-C 2.0
    USB-C 40G
    USB-C 220V

    Etc. Etc.
    I think you're spot on. I won't miss formats changing every year or two. That gap before 3.0 got pretty crazy between standard, micro, and mini. I think there was another one that I'm missing but not sure.
  6. Quite frankly I'm annoyed by all the variations of connectors even just within USB. Why the F did we have like 5 different connectors doing the exact same thing? mini usb, micro usb, usb-A usb-b, micro3. It was time to standardize this. I'd also include printers.
    And I hope they don't just leave a loophole where including an adaptor is enough.
  7. Quite frankly I'm annoyed by all the variations of connectors even just within USB. Why the F did we have like 5 different connectors doing the exact same thing? mini usb, micro usb, usb-A usb-b, micro3. It was time to standardize this. I'd also include printers.
    And I hope they don't just leave a loophole where including an adaptor is enough.
    I agree. I've got boxes of cables filling the closet in the cave that are from pre USB 3.0 that is just filled with crap like that (plus misc analog audio adapters/splitters/etc.) and will be getting tossed soon. I did the same at my day job about a month ago.
  8. Quite frankly I'm annoyed by all the variations of connectors even just within USB. Why the F did we have like 5 different connectors doing the exact same thing? mini usb, micro usb, usb-A usb-b, micro3. It was time to standardize this. I'd also include printers.
    And I hope they don't just leave a loophole where including an adaptor is enough.

    Certainly having a mini version made sense, for devices that were small, but why both a mini and a micro? Especially when they were so close to each other in size?

    Also, what was the point of USB-B connectors? Why not just make them A, male or female on both sides? It just over-complicated things.

    USB-C is really the design they should have gone with from the start, a universal (well, at least two-way) orientation connector.

    The little dance of trying to insert the USB-A plug, failing, rotating it around, trying again, failing and then rotating it back and finally succeeding got old as soon as it hit the market already in 1996.

    I mean, don't get me wrong It was a HUGE improvement over DB9 and DB25 serial cables, but if the members of the implementation forum or whatever they called themselves had taken even a single engineering class in design for usability, design for manufacturing or design for assembly we would have had something like USB-C from the get go in 1996.
  9. Certainly having a mini version made sense, for devices that were small, but why both a mini and a micro? Especially when they were so close to each other in size?
    Yeah, the mini version made some sense, for devices that phyisically didn't have the space for an USB-A connector. But the micro USB is slightly wider and slimmer than mini USB, while being 10 times more fragile and prone to contact issues. It is the worst "evolution" ever.
    Also, what was the point of USB-B connectors? Why not just make them A, male or female on both sides? It just over-complicated things.
    But USB-B? That made no sense at all. It is rarely used outside of printers, I think I've had a few early cable modems that used USB-B, but nothing else. And it is the cable that you can never find when you need one, but keeps turning up in droves when you don't need it.
    USB-C is really the design they should have gone with from the start, a universal (well, at least two-way) orientation connector.
    There is no problem with single orientation connectors, just give a visual cue for the orientation and perhaps a physical guide.
    The little dance of trying to insert the USB-A plug, failing, rotating it around, trying again, failing and then rotating it back and finally succeeding got old as soon as it hit the market already in 1996.
    I bet the logic behind it was that you shouldn't just blindly connect things left right and center, so they forced you to look at what you are doing :LOL:
  10. There is no problem with single orientation connectors, just give a visual cue for the orientation and perhaps a physical guide.
    USB-A has both of these and doesn’t prevent it me from always being wrong. Granted, they were engineered in an awful manner. The physical guide is internal to the connector, and the visual/physical cue (the USB logo) is often molded in the same color as the rest of the connector and hard to see, or omitted by various third parties.

    I liked that USB A was plug and play, and compact, but DB9 and PS/2 were the better connectors in respect to usability to be honest.
  11. USB-A has both of these and doesn’t prevent it me from always being wrong. Granted, they were engineered in an awful manner. The physical guide is internal to the connector, and the visual/physical cue (the USB logo) is often molded in the same color as the rest of the connector and hard to see, or omitted by various third parties.

    I liked that USB A was plug and play, and compact, but DB9 and PS/2 were the better connectors in respect to usability to be honest.
    Don't forget S-video!! (same exact port as PS/2)
  12. USB-A has both of these

    and doesn’t prevent it me from always being wrong. Granted, they were engineered in an awful manner. The physical guide is internal to the connector, and the visual/physical cue (the USB logo) is often molded in the same color as the rest of the connector and hard to see, or omitted by various third parties.

    I liked that USB A was plug and play, and compact, but DB9 and PS/2 were the better connectors in respect to usability to be honest.
    A visual cue is only a visual cue if it is visible without having to peer down the both the connector and the plug to be sure.
    And the guide only helps if you can't even insert the connector in the wrong orientation, USB-A goes in slightly the wrong way. Now USB-B is impossible to insert the wrong way due to the hole being a different shape on top and bottom, which also serves as a visual cue.
  13. Don't forget S-video!! (same exact port as PS/2)
    They are all actually mini-Din connectors.

    But the best are Lemos, too bad they cost more than most devices that have USB ports.
  14. Don't forget S-video!! (same exact port as PS/2)
    I loved S-Video back in the day. I upgraded to gold-contact high-grade cables for everything(PC/Playstation 1-2/DVD players) I had back then and used a nice switch box to connect to one of the last model Trinitron's. For the time, the picture was amazing and my PC's were able to display at 1024x768/60hz on it. Good times.
  15. I loved S-Video back in the day. I upgraded to gold-contact high-grade cables for everything(PC/Playstation 1-2/DVD players) I had back then and used a nice switch box to connect to one of the last model Trinitron's. For the time, the picture was amazing and my PC's were able to display at 1024x768/60hz on it. Good times.
    S-Video was barely better than Composite, RGB was the real deal, most TVs could recieve RGB signal on scart, basically turning them into monitors.
  16. S-Video was barely better than Composite, RGB was the real deal, most TVs could recieve RGB signal on scart, basically turning them into monitors.

    SCART was a European only standard as I recall.

    Even growing up in Europe though, I don't ever remember coming across any equipment that had a SCART connector.

    My parents weren't exactly tech enthusiasts though. I think we had the same 28" tube TV in our living room from ~1983 until 1999 when we moved to the states. They would always buy the cheapest stuff on the market thinking it was "all the same" and would never upgrade anyhting unless it stopped working.

    You know, fake wood paneling,no remote control, like 12 channel buttons on the front of the unit that clicked in when you changed the channel.

    1654713956500.png

    Something like this, (not exact model)

    Heck, at least it matched the wood paneling on the walls. :p

    1654714015500.png


    I do recall the SCART connector being HUGE.
  17. I loved S-Video back in the day. I upgraded to gold-contact high-grade cables for everything(PC/Playstation 1-2/DVD players) I had back then and used a nice switch box to connect to one of the last model Trinitron's. For the time, the picture was amazing and my PC's were able to display at 1024x768/60hz on it. Good times.
    Still rockin' S-Video over here. My SNES, Super Famicom, N64, Gamecube, and Saturn all use S-Video on my CRT TV. I also previously used S-Video with PS1 and Dreamcast. In the 2000s I upgraded Dreamcast to VGA and it's been on that ever since. For PS2 I used Component cables. Wish I could've used Component with GCN but I laughed at Nintendo's $30 prices for the cables (there were no 3rd-party ones). Joke's on me cuz in the following 20 years the price range of those things ha been $200-$300. I could and did use Component with GCN games on Wii, but I've seen stuff online that showed that GCN's Component video output quality is better than Wii's. Ah well. X360 was the first system I had with HDMI output. My Neo-Geo C-MVS supports S-Video, Composite, Component, and RGB/SCART. I have the cables for all of those, but I am currently using Component. My NES and Genesis are the only systems on Composite.

    S-Video was a huuuuuge jump for me. I was still on RF switch and RF modulator most of the way through 5th-gen (so I had to deal with mono sound on top of sh1t video quality). I eventually started plugging in Composite cables for game consoles into my VCR, but the VCR still went to the TV through RF. It wasn't until 2003 when I got a new TV for my berfday did I finally have access to S-Video (and Component). Going from RF to S-Video was a world of difference. I was always pissed off that my HDTV from 2009 (which I am still using) didn't have S-Video. Of course modern HDTVs don't have analog inputs at all anymore. Not that it really matters, 6th-gen-and-earlier consoles look like @ss on HDTVs without an image processor like the xRGB Mini Framemeister or the OSSC (Open Source Scan Converter) anyways. At the very least you should be using a decent HDMI converter for your classic systems. But yeah, I still love me some S-Video. Quite a noticeable jump over Composite.

    Aaaaaaahhhhhhh, those final Trinitrons, so awesome...

    I had all kinds of switch-boxes back in the 4th-gen, 5th-gen and 6th-gen days. Most of the ones I used were from Pelican. I like Pelican's stuff but most of the switch-boxes I had from all brands eventually crapped out on me. Some of them needed external power to prevent degradation of the video signals, so they had tiny AC adapters I had to account for on my surge protectors. The ones I am using now are Sony SB-V40S units (which hold image/audio quality without needing external power), and so far they've been the best I've ever used. No Component support though.

Leave a comment

Please log in to your forum account to comment