Capitalist companies are, you know, impossibly greedy and quite oblivious to the genuine needs of customers. They are good, very good, at enticing us to buy products which we do not need nor truly want. The system, in itself, is a conundrum of unnecessary duplications: what’s the point of having shoes of different colours, or ties with different patterns? It is thus a relief to know that governments are watching out for consumers’ interests and properly setting standards which may spare us useless duplications and waste.
Take the European Union. In the midst of the Ukrainian crisis, between the adoption of one package of sanctions and the other, while searching for new energy supplies outside Russia, the almighty European authorities also succeeded in harmonising chargers for all portable devices: cellphones and tablets.
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.
The charging speed is also harmonised for devices that support fast charging, allowing users to charge their devices at the same speed with any compatible charger.
Isn’t that wonderful? Producers have converged spontaneously towards chargers equipped with the USB Type-C port. If you try to remember how things were five or ten years ago, quite a different picture comes to mind. But common standards is something consumers tend to want and hence we are basically now in a situation in which either your charger has a USB-C or a Lightning port. The latter is the realm of iPhone and Apple, though a few Apple devices have a USB-C charger.
The European regulator thinks she deserves a round of applause. She nudged (well, she pushed) the private sector to the last step. “One charger to charge them all”.
On the one hand, some customers may appreciate the convenience, though others will need to dispose of lots of connecting cables past their useful life. But on the other hand, the move reduces the scope for innovation: it may be unlikely, but some may develop chargers which do not work well with USB-C and would do better with another system. Now, they can’t and they won’t.
The real question is: why should political authority bother with this kind of thing at all? That’s the question which is seldom asked, and that we should ask more often. There is no shortage of problems in the world we live in: from the pandemic to Ukraine; we were showered with problems over the last couple of years. Aren’t these a big enough deal for our rulers and legislators? Shouldn’t they concentrate on obviously relevant issues? Why do they so eagerly sacrifice time and attention to dictate to private companies, such as Apple, how they should make their products?
The EU decision looks trifling. But it signals an attitude and a habit- that of attaching no value to the basic economic freedom of an individual or a company to engage in the production and exchanges she wants to engage with. There might be legitimate instances in which such freedom is traded off with other values. But do authorities at least make an attempt at a cost-benefit analysis? And do they consider a presumption of sorts in favour of economic liberty?
Euroskeptics used to make fun of Brussels legislating over the calibre of zucchini. Implicitly, they meant that the EU was quite impotent when it comes with significant stuff but took pride in regulating the smallest things. Let’s see if they’ll make fun of the Lady of the Chargers too.
READER COMMENTS
Thomas Lee Hutcheson
Jun 8 2022 at 9:05pm
Now if we could standardize wall sockets! There is a job for the United Nations if there ever was one
BC
Jun 9 2022 at 2:08am
Europe is lucky to have regulators that can so reliably see the future that they know that no firm in the future will ever have reason to produce a device that uses some other charger besides USB-C. Venture capitalists are also fortunate that these clairvoyants are so selfless that they have chosen careers in “public service”, willing to work for the public good at government salaries. If these people with uncanny abilities to predict the future of tech were to become venture capitalists, how would the other VCs hope to compete?
Atanu Dey
Jun 9 2022 at 10:00am
It’s truly amazing that the government bureaucrats are so wise and foresighted. As you say, thank goodness that they don’t compete with the VCs — the VCs would be wiped out overnight. It’s just out of the goodness of their heart that keeps them from killing off the stupid VCs and their worthless funds.
Capt. J Parker
Jun 9 2022 at 11:08am
I think the main reason for EU regulators thinking they can write standards for things like chargers is that the regulators believe they are helping to reduce consumer electronics waste. Disposal costs of end of life products is an externality so, one could argue that government does have some legitimate role in trying to have producers internalize those costs or at least minimize the externalized costs.
No doubt there are more efficient ways to internalize disposal costs than what Charger Woman has done. However, many of those other policies would directly impact the wallets of consumers and those consumers vote. That’s one reason why Mr. Hutcheson won’t see standardized wall sockets.
Jon Murphy
Jun 9 2022 at 12:39pm
Forgive my ignorance, but how much of a problem is this? Just in my experience, it seems like every electronic I have bought over the past few years has a USB-C charger slot.
MarkW
Jun 9 2022 at 3:59pm
Forgive my ignorance, but how much of a problem is this?
Right now, not much. Mostly because every manufacturer other than Apple has already converged on USB-C and (and many have stopped including $15 chargers in $700 new phones, including my most recent one — gee thanks guys!) But go back ten years, and there was no such thing as USB-C. If the EU had acted in the interim and mandated micro-USB, would we still be stuck with that standard now and indefinitely into the future?
Johnson85
Jun 10 2022 at 10:59am
It’s going to be a major pain in the ass for Apple to have to either add a USB-C slot or replace their lightning charger with it. Mainly for phones and to a lesser extent Ipads, because they don’t have a lot of space to utilize. They took out the phone jack, which was an extremely useful feature to me just to save the space. I’m sure they don’t want to add a USB-C port.
And I have yet to see a lot of USB-C chargers. We have them on laptops and we have had problems with them staying connected and charging. Not sure if that’s a problem with just the Dell ports or if they generally just don’t “grab hold” as well as other chargers.
Don’t buy a lot of non-apple products, but my earbuds and portable speakers still use the mini-USB ports.
Gene
Jun 10 2022 at 4:19pm
The newest iPads already use USB-Cs.
nobody.really
Jun 10 2022 at 1:30pm
I don’t know what has motivated the European Union to adopt this standardization practice.
But in general, governments often adopt standardization practices to facilitate competition. For example, the US adopted a standard telephone jack—and thereby opened the market for many competing firms to enter the business of making telephones, and eventually computer modems.
Another example: Arguably, as tractor-trailers grow longer, they impose greater threats to public safety. But how long is too long? In the absence of national standards, Iowa and Wisconsin each adopted an especially short standard—allegedly in the interest of public safety, but perhaps simply to generate extra economic activity at the state’s borders or to encourage long trucks to stay out of the state. Did this policy vindicate federalism (the right of each state to set its own policies) or frustrate interstate commerce (a topic exclusively within the federal jurisdiction)? In each case, SCOTUS concluded the latter and effectively established national standards authorizing trucks up to 65 ft long on interstate highways.
More immediately, the US faces a chicken-and-egg problem: Americans are reluctant to buy electric vehicles if they cannot find places to charge them–and people are reluctant to build chargers if they’re not confident there will be enough drivers to justify the cost. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that there is no standard design for charging facilities. Maybe this variety facilitates innovation; maybe it impedes growth in the electric vehicle market; probably both.
Funny you should mention Ukraine: The Russians are in the process of annexing portions of it—and this will entail imposing new standards. For example, the Russians are seeking to impose the use of the ruble as the local currency. But presumably it will also entail replacing the raft of business standards that EU nations have adopted to facilitate trade. These include standards regarding such diverse topics as the frequency of electrical current, the spacing of threads on screws, the frequency of commercial airplane maintenance, and the distance between rails on railroads. (When trains cross the Russian frontier, they must stop to swap out axels.) Perhaps standardization of these issues has been a net impediment to European economic development; perhaps it has been a net stimulus.
MarkW
Jun 11 2022 at 9:50am
But in general, governments often adopt standardization practices to facilitate competition. For example, the US adopted a standard telephone jack—and thereby opened the market for many competing firms to enter the business of making telephones, and eventually computer modems.
Industries adopt standards on their own all the time without government forcing the issue. The tech industry has countless standards adopted without government mandates. WRT to telephones, even into the 1970s, standardization of connections was irrelevant because you could not use a telephone that you owned (you had to rent from the government-licensed telephone monopoly operator). You also could not legally wire an extension in your house (that had to be done by ‘Ma Bell’ and there was an extra monthly charge for both the extra phone and line). Even now, in 2022, I’m one of the few people I know who owns their own cable modem and router to avoid the monthly charge — and my (government licensed) cable operator makes this as difficult as possible. Government as a champion of fostering competition? Lol.
More immediately, the US faces a chicken-and-egg problem: Americans are reluctant to buy electric vehicles if they cannot find places to charge them–and people are reluctant to build chargers if they’re not confident there will be enough drivers to justify the cost.
Americans are reluctant to buy electric vehicles because the ranges are short and the charging times are long — standardization cannot help with that. And:
In North America, every electric vehicle manufacturer (except Tesla) uses the SAE J1772 connector, also known as the J-plug, for Level 1 (120 volt) and Level 2 (240 volt) charging. Tesla provides a Tesla charger adapter cable with every car they sell that allows their cars to use charging stations that have a J1772 connector. This means that every electric vehicle sold in North America can use any charging station that comes with the standard J1772 connector.
What about fast charging (which, BTW, can only be used sparingly without shortening the life of the battery pack)? There’s a standard there too:
CCS (Combined Charging System): The CCS connector uses the J1772 charging inlet, and adds two more pins below. It “combines” the J1772 connector with the high speed charging pins, which is how it got its name. CCS is the accepted standard in North America, and was developed and endorsed by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). Just about every automaker today has agreed to use the CCS standard in North America, including: General Motors (all divisions), Ford, Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen, Audi, Porsche, Honda, Kia, Fiat, Hyundai, Volvo, smart, MINI, Jaguar Land Rover, Bentley, Rolls Royce and others.
Only Tesla is different, but that doesn’t matter because Tesla provides its own charging network exclusively for use of its customers — so interconnectivity is irrelevant.
The idea that there’s a critical role for the heavy hand of government here (or the lack thereof is holding the industry back) is a fantasy.
vince
Jun 10 2022 at 9:56pm
“Capitalist companies are, you know, impossibly greedy and quite oblivious to the genuine needs of customers.”
What propaganda. How do you define a capitalist company? And impossibly greedy? Companies are shareholders. Do you have a 401K?
Companies that are oblivious to the genuine needs of customers go out of business. Unless of course you are saying customers are too ignorant to satisfy their genuine needs.
Joseph
Jun 12 2022 at 7:30am
Sarcasm not detected?
vince
Jun 12 2022 at 4:34pm
… maybe. If so, the post is to that huge contingent who make the same claim in all seriousness. Like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and so on.
Comments are closed.