Mandate open standards then, not the same exact charger everywhere, so that others can make cheap replacement cables, but innovation and niche connectors (I hear mini-USB can be more durable than USB type C) can still exist.
3 Likes
I don’t think I can disagree much, but to say that it will perhaps be quite a bit slower, If a corporation develops enough motive to capture whichever regulatory body controls this, then it’s an uphill battle.
I’m not sure how that all works in the EU (regulatory capture probably possible somehow), but these multinational corps are as powerful as a nation these days. I do suppose it’s a far less risky or harmful legislation than it seemed at first. Maybe ideally, it’d expire entirely after X number of years to allow for modernization.
I am also annoyed by a multitude of cables, but operating on a legal basis is too costly and more annoying. Increasing power of government and citizen reliance on government distort the market, foul up incentives and eventually lead to H.G. Wells’ Morlocks.
I’ve been known to do that, too! 
sees WALL-E atop a skyscraper made of compressed trash on an future-abandoned Earth … Buy-n-Large - we are your friends ! 
Does anyone have any assessment how wall-socket standardisation (per country) slowed down the innovations and progress? Are US mains sockets more innovative which would explain their technical advance? I’m sure there should be quite significant figure, as it is happening now for almost a century.
A standard charger could prevent more power hungry models being developed.
A standard charger could rule out having wireless charging (whether that’s a good thing or not, I don’t know).
I don’t see how that may be true. The rule may stop you using non-standard cable on your charger, but it cannot stop you using no cable at all.
I see. You’d rather be an Eloi then… 
. I would argue that free markets don’t work in that regard and a market distortion is welcome, but I see no value in discussion that kind of political Weltanschauung here in these forums. The charger for the L5 has been decided on, the rest is … well… round-table talk .
3 Likes
Yes, it is not risky nor harmful, it is needed. On the other side, EU legislation acts will not expire, those are or will be established in timely matter and only replaced to allow for better solutions. For example you mentioned LED bulbs: Regarding products with CRI < 80, DE considered it important to put on the light source packaging that such light source is not suitable for household/interior use. If you ask me, as indoor use customer, I’d like to put in there CRI < 90, at least.
As I see it, whole discussion here is e-waste related. This thread topic EU legislation procedure dates back to March 2014, as @Caliga already pointed out. United Nations E-waste Coalition recognizes well that we have regions sending e-waste and regions receiving e-waste, etc*. And as manufacturer’s approach to the problem already discussed, here is “free and open” link to Design Considerations from Texas Instruments about USB type C Power Delivery (USB‐C Eco System): “One benefit of the wide‐spread adoption of this open standard is a realistic path to a universal charger and e‐waste reduction.”
2 Likes
I agree. Might be just coincidence or even some kind of well thought out initiative/consequence (I don’t know), but it looks like HyperJuice 87W Dual USB-C PD 3.0 Charger implements can-power-them-all (eventually to include Librem 13/15 v5) standard. In addition, credit card size 100W charger from HyperJuice is now on Kickstarter. Smaller size is just typical for the new generation of Gallium Nitride (GaN) chargers (from ANKER, RAVPOWER, …). Another example of the same standard shows Ravpower PD Pioneer 61W GaN Tech USB-C Wall Charger that provides DC 5V/3A, 9V/3A, 12V/3A, 15V/3A, 20V/3A, 20.3V/3A from only one USB-C socket.
1 Like
It depends on whether the rule controls “the cable” or “the charger”.
If the intention is that one charger from any vendor can charge all phones then this clearly rules out wireless charging for one phone unless all phones use wireless charging.
I have some reservations about this law.
One thing I wonder about is what the scope of “all portable devices” is. Even if all new models of phone after a certain date in the future must use a “standard” USB-C charger and not come with a charger, what about simpler devices that are “portable devices” but which can’t justify a USB-C port?
Another thing is the “bad charger” attack. In some respects it was a terrible idea ever to charge any device via a data port - and total standardisation makes that problem worse. In some respects it is more secure to have a dedicated charging port, just like the good old days when you used a Coaxial power connector.
As already stated, this could prevent future more power-hungry devices. However that could be a good thing or in any case could be intentional on the part of the EU parliament.
I think Apple is right that this is anti-innovation. However that doesn’t necessarily mean it is a bad law. It just means that environmental considerations have been prioritised over innovation considerations. We also don’t know what future innovations are being given up i.e. it is largely impossible to quantify the cost of this law.
Adding: If the EU really wanted to do something good, both for consumers and for the environment, they should mandate easily-replaceable batteries in all phones.
2 Likes
But if there is EU law mandating a particular charging scheme (assuming Purism doesn’t get miraculously lucky), does that not put Librem 5, and therefore Purism itself, at risk?
There is talk. There is a plan. It is not (yet) law. Even if it became law tomorrow, it is likely that there would be a phase-in period. The phase-in period could be some years (perhaps 3?). So I expect that Purism can deliver all of Evergreen without worrying about this. For sure, it could be a hassle in the future if the law specifies a particular charger and it is not USB-C.
No, a) it will only affect new models that are to be approved, models already on the market are not going to become suddenly illegal.
b) using USB-C the L5 is going to be likely on the safe side anyway.
In terms of reducing e-waste it would be silly for it to be otherwise. If an existing model suddenly becomes illegal (whether to own or to sell) then there would be a mountain of unnecessary e-waste, which would be completely counterproductive.
That is a really good connector. I use those in my tractor.
2 Likes
USB-C can deliver quite a lot of power (up to 100W with the proper cables, 60W with regular ones). Not enough to fast charge your Tesla, but then, this legislation doesn’t apply to EVs.
1 Like