> A “good” USB C cable that supports all of the things I said - high speed data, video over USB, etc - costs around $15. The same price as an Anker Lightning cable.

But the Lightning cable won't support high speed data. And if you want video over Lightning you can't just use a cable, you need an adapter with an embedded computer to decompress the output.

A USB C cable that has the same capabilities as that Lightning cable is 2-3 dollars.

The EU is suppose to be mandating a “standard”. What good is a “standard” that doesn’t support the “standard”?

USB C cables that come with the iPad supports all of those standards. What are the chances that unsuspecting users in the EU dancing in the streets go in an buy a “standard USB C” and find out that it doesn’t work when they get ready to plug their phone to the TVs or when they find out the promise of “USB3 speeds” because it was the “standard” is a lie because the EU didn’t mandate that as part of the standard?

Personally I like that the cables can get better over time, I just want them to have the speed labeled on them.

But this is a charging standard and for charging all cables are the same for the vast majority of devices.

All the stuff that might break because I don't have high speed data is no worse than lightning which never has high speed data*.

*Except for a single model of iPad.

> Personally I like that the cables can get better over time

Everything I mentioned has been part of the standard fir years.

> But this is a charging standard and for charging all cables are the same for the vast majority of devices

The purported goal is to “prevent ewaste”. How does it prevent ewaste if you still can’t depend on the cords working the way they should?

> All the stuff that might break because I don't have high speed data is no worse than lightning which never has high speed data*.

Is that the bar we set now? It’s no better than what came before?

> The purported goal is to “prevent ewaste”. How does it prevent ewaste if you still can’t depend on the cords working the way they should?

For charging, it's fine.

> Is that the bar we set now? It’s no better than what came before?

A charging standard shouldn't care about data except to avoid getting in the way, and it probably shouldn't mandate more expensive cables for devices that don't have data.

Also USB C supports more power than lightning.

But to directly answer: That bar is just fine, because the point is the make everyone use the same thing. It doesn't need to be better, it needs to be good and everyone the same.

> because the point is the make everyone use the same thing

That’s kind of the point. Just because it has the same connector it’s not the “same thing”.

People just want to charge their phones. Maybe if someone actually cares about USB3 transfer speeds, they'll go buy the slightly more expensive cable for that. It's not like TVs even have USB-C.

And I don't think this reduces ewaste. It's about the same.

Thought experiment: grab a random “standard USB C” cable.

Now answer a few questions just by looking at it:

- what wattage does is supper?

- what data speed does it support?

- will it support video over USB C?

Why didn’t the EU in all of its technical brilliance at least attempt to come up with a minimum “standard”?

What wattage, enough to charge my phone. What speed, don't really care but it's at least the same as Lightning. Video, never used it.

EU wanted to break up Apple's proprietary control over the iPhone ports and create a charging standard, cause charging is the important part. Anyone can make a higher-spec USB-C cable without going to Apple, and chargers are uniform for all phones.

Worth repeating that I don't agree with the EU's law, just saying why they did it. Nobody in this thread has brought up the real con, which is that tech regulation hinders innovation, and the minor frustration with chargers wasn't a big enough problem to warrant that.

> What wattage, enough to charge my phone

Maybe or maybe not. There are plenty of really low watt capable USB C cords that come with headphones for instance.

> What speed, don't really care but it's at least the same as Lightning

That’s not true either. There are plenty of “power only” USB C cables.

I charge my iPhone on an 0.5A source. What's the lowest a cable goes, the USB 2.0 spec of 2A? Even power-only is fine in most cases.

So your definition of standard USB C cable includes nonstandard USB C cables?

Those are all part of the “standard” as far as the EU “mandate” is concerned and it does nothing to address the issue.

It's not free, but it's cheap. A good USB-C cable costs less than $5, not $15. You hardly ever need a good one either, just one for charging.

Re ewaste, that's a different topic. I'm just talking about licensing fees.

Can that $5 USB C cable support data transfers at USB3 speeds and video over USB C?

USB C also has licensing fees. The stated reason was to prevent “ewaste” and yes you can buy a $5 lightning cable.

Here is a 3 pack for $10

https://a.co/d/8FB2naZ

You're actually right about the video -C cables. That feature costs extra, and I didn't notice the first time. But it's rare to need one, and they'll get cheaper over time.

That 3-pack MFi Lightning for $10 is a new phenomenon. It was never like that before. I can believe it's not fake, just cheap cause it's old tech and on its way out.

Looking through my order history, I bought an “Amazon Basics” lightning cable for $8 back in 2015.