Yes. That was what I meant by “feasibly and at a reasonable price”. I don’t really care whether it is user replaceable or I have to go to a specialist screen replacement service - as long as it doesn’t end up costing 1/2 to 2/3 of the price of a new phone, which means that many customers would just ewaste the old phone in favor of getting the latest and greatest (which will no doubt have a much improved spec after 2, 3, 5 years).
That could be fixed in the web browser, which has the advantage that it will automatically retrofit to 200 million existing web sites. There are too many under-maintained or abandoned web sites to deem that new rules will apply to existing web sites.
It is poor user interface design.
I usually hover at the video waiting for it to finish initial loading so that I can immediately press Pause and then get on with reading, undisturbed. That of course doesn’t save much network traffic (on a shortish video) since it will have loaded enough for initial buffering.
There’s a video on media.ccc.de: https://media.ccc.de/v/36c3-10852-wie_klimafreundlich_ist_software
In options you will find english interpreter to understand what she sais. I think it can be more then just green washing, but I can fully understand your distrust in such logos. But I think after watching this video you will understand more about “Blue Angel”.
My comment was more about this kind of certification generally, in a global context, rather than Blue Angel specifically. Companies will make exaggerated claims, dubious claims, even false claims. Companies may even attempt to cheat the testing.
From what I’ve seen, this kind of thing works best when the claim is objective and the claim is quick and easy to test.
18 months later … this seems to have progressed, applying to mobile phones, tablets, headphones and portable speakers, cameras, chargeable game consoles. Chargers must be sold separately and devices must be able to use USB-C for charging.
It still needs some kind of approval (vote in EU parliament?), after which companies will have 24 months to comply.
This should be OK for the Librem 5 (other than that the charger should be taken out from a standard EU order and made separately orderable).
Apple, understandably, is spewing.
It raises the possibility that if you get a new iPhone (USB-C only), you won’t be able to connect it to your laptop or tablet (unless you throw the tablet out and replace it with a new tablet). So there are wider implications in the Apple ecosystem.
Or would Apple consider a legacy port on the iPhone in addition to the USB-C port (as long as the USB-C port can be used for charging)? Would it be OK with the EU if the iPhone can still be charged via Lightning i.e. can be charged via either port?
Another option for Apple is a port adapter i.e. the phone itself has a lightning port and the phone does not come with a charger but the phone does come with a small port adapter that allows you to use a standard USB-C charger with the lightning port (solely for charging, not for data, and that could even be sold as a security feature, since standardizing on USB-C charging is a security weakness).
Thinking along the same lines, Apple could implement charging via USB-C but cripple it so that most people would be encouraged to order the optional, proprietary, expensive lightning charger. They wouldn’t do that, would they?
