News Europe to Force Laptop Makers to Adopt USB-C for Charging

[kyzarvs]

USB-C is fragile and can't supply enough power for a high end laptop. Dell and others make high-end desktops where the power is split between 2 USB-C connectors.
I would like to see the USB working group make 2 additions to the USB-C standard.

1. A standard option for higher Power Delivery voltages, specifically 24V and 42V. 24V to support thermal printer heads and 40V as near the highest Safety Electric Low Voltage for consumers to use. This would allow high end laptops to use a single cable.
2. An interchangeable robust connector shroud that holds the connector in place without a screw, but allows easy separation when pulled. This is easy to do, but worthless if not governed by the USB working group.

You read the part that this applies to 100w max, so a gaming laptop for example will continue to have free choice?

 

[jp7189]

For those saying that 100W is too much for such a flimsy power connector...
Do you remember light bulbs? The 100W ones? Remember how big the filament was?
Yeah, it wasn't big. At all. They even had to be manufactured to fail before their time because of market leader collusion made them so.
The reason why a power connector has to be large is mostly the power in amps that runs through it, especially for DC. With USB-C already being able to handle 20V, that means it peaks at 5A.
That was the upper range of the power charge the Micro-USB plug could deal with. And USB-C has 4 such contacts to handle the same power. It is thus actually more secure than Micro-USB for the same task, and o one ever complained about fire hazards caused by Micro-USB. Especially since it's a "smart" charging system that consistently monitors itself and will actually power down (back to 5V 0.5A, or simply shut down) if it goes wonky.

A wire hot glowing wire is literally the definition of "fire hazard".

 

[jp7189]

My primary issue with larger devices (like laptops) is most manufacturers hard solder the USB-C connector on to the motherboard. Fat, stiff charging cables can put a ton of torque on that connector, and eventually it starts to break free and malfunction requiring a full MB replacement. That used to be a problem with barrel power connectors too until it caught on to use a short, internal cable with lots of slack to connect the power socket to the motherboard. That short cable increases the build cost a little, but reduces warranty costs by a lot.

 

[InvalidError]

Do you remember light bulbs? The 100W ones? Remember how big the filament was?
Yeah, it wasn't big. At all. They even had to be manufactured to fail before their time because of market leader collusion made them so.

Remember how hot that tiny wire gets? 2700-5000K. You don't want your power delivery cables and connectors to get anywhere that hot carrying 0.05-3A.

Also, the reason the filament is so thin is because the thinner it is, the less surface area it has to radiate heat with and the less power is needed to maintain the filament at the desired light-emitting temperature, at the expense of the filament needing less time to boil off and being more fragile. It is a compromise between lifespan and power-efficiency.

AFAIK, there is no charging standard that pushes micro-B beyond 20V3A and every micro-B cable I have ever used to charge something at 2A got pretty warm at the plug, which tells me the average micro-B connectors are already at their limit there.

 

[edzieba]

The actual text of the legislation is available here, as many appear to be arguing based on an imagination of what it says rather than what it actually states:
https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?reference=2021/0291(COD)&l=en
Note that "Radio Equipment" is the umbrella under which consumer electronics falls in EU legislation.

Having a standard plug is only half the battle. Power adapters with USB plugs cover such a broad range of power delivery specs and quirks, I suspect all the EU will end up with is a bunch of complaints about "USB-C" chargers other than OE not working within expectations with their higher-powered devices because their laptop, portable gaming console or whatever else requires a specific power profile the adapter doesn't advertise. Then you also have the whole mess of people needing to be aware that special cables with an ID chip are required to enable high-current (5A) mode and even more special cables with a different ID chip are required for voltages beyond 20V.

USB-C is becoming a nightmare.

From the text:

In addition, there are several types of fast charging communication protocols for which a minimum level of performance is not always guaranteed. As a result, Union action is required to promote a common degree of interoperability and the provision of information relating to the charging characteristics of radio equipment to consumers and other end-users. It is therefore necessary to introduce suitable requirements in Directive 2014/53/EU regarding the charging communication protocols, the charging interface (i.e. charging receptacle) of certain categories or classes of radio equipment, as well as the information to be provided to consumers and other end-users regarding the charging characteristics of those categories or classes of radio equipment, such as information about the minimum and maximum power required to charge the radio equipment. The minimum power should express the sum of the power required by the radio equipment to maintain operation and the minimum power required by its battery to start charging. The maximum power should express the sum of the power required by the radio equipment to maintain operation and the power required to achieve the maximum charging speed.

Or in other words: it's not just "slap a Type-C port on and you get a pass", companies need to implement both standardised charging (USB-PD), and list explicitly the charging speed acheived under that standard. So no dodgy crap like charging at the old USB 2.0 maximum but demanding a proprietary charger for full speed (as people seem to be assuming Apple could get away with).

In addition:

It is also necessary to provide the basis for adaptation to any future scientific and technological progress or market developments, which will be continuously monitored by the Commission

Or in other words, devices are not 'locked in' to Type-C in the event a newer better connector is developed (same as the previous EU mandate of Mini-B was subsequently replaced by Micro-B and then Type-C).

100% agree with this. I don’t like government making rules that affect everybody that’s not their job. Their job is to secure the borders and take care of roads. not be nannies.

anytime the government gets involved, the costs skyrocket, and the problems don’t get solved they get multiplied

I guess you hate nationwide adoption of power connectors (so travelling from one city to another does not mean purchasing adapter or possibly blowing up your hardware if the voltage differs as well), not having to visit manufacturer-specific petrol station to fill up your car (because every manufacturer chose their own port dimensions), etc. Standardisation minimises cost and allows for interoperability which leads to actually practical consumer choice.

Besides "making rules that affect everybody" is quite literally a government's job - specifically the legislative branch.

 

[InvalidError]

Or in other words: it's not just "slap a Type-C port on and you get a pass", companies need to implement both standardised charging (USB-PD), and list explicitly the charging speed acheived under that standard. So no dodgy crap like charging at the old USB 2.0 maximum but demanding a proprietary charger for full speed (as people seem to be assuming Apple could get away with).

My point is that even if you mandate USB-PD over type-C, you still run into issues with:
1- not every type-C USB-PD power adapter supporting every possible USB-PD power profile
2- not every type-C USB-PD device supporting every possible USB-PD profile
3- not every cable supporting every possible USB-PD profile (need ID chip for greater than 3A, different ID chips for greater than 20V and you are screwed if the ID chip in your cable blocks the power profile your device wants for whatever reason)

As I wrote earlier, it will cause a nightmare for people needing to keep tabs on what type-C USB-PD adapter can power what devices and which cables are needed if they want things to work as intended since they all have the same plugs yet have wildly different capabilities.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Remember how hot that tiny wire gets? 2700-5000K. You don't want your power delivery cables and connectors to get anywhere that hot carrying 0.05-3A.

Also, the reason the filament is so thin is because the thinner it is, the less surface area it has to radiate heat with and the less power is needed to maintain the filament at the desired light-emitting temperature, at the expense of the filament needing less time to boil off and being more fragile. It is a compromise between lifespan and power-efficiency.

AFAIK, there is no charging standard that pushes micro-B beyond 20V3A and every micro-B cable I have ever used to charge something at 2A got pretty warm at the plug, which tells me the average micro-B connectors are already at their limit there.

I concur, that's why I think Apple will limit USB over the Type-C port to USB 2.0 charging and never go beyond the (0.5–15 watt / 0.1–3.0 A) range that is specified at the lowest form of USB PD.

Also No Data connections will be allowed, not for technical reasons obviously, but to protect Apple's sweet sweet royalty fee scheme with the Lightning Port/Connector.

Also the extra cost for the mandated by the EU Type-C USB port will be passed onto the consumer and Apple will be sour & whiny about it and be extra spiteful just like with "Right to Repair".

My point is that even if you mandate USB-PD over type-C, you still run into issues with:
1- not every type-C USB-PD power adapter supporting every possible USB-PD power profile
2- not every type-C USB-PD device supporting every possible USB-PD profile
3- not every cable supporting every possible USB-PD profile (need ID chip for greater than 3A, different ID chips for greater than 20V and you are screwed if the ID chip in your cable blocks the power profile your device wants for whatever reason)

As I wrote earlier, it will cause a nightmare for people needing to keep tabs on what type-C USB-PD adapter can power what devices and which cables are needed if they want things to work as intended since they all have the same plugs yet have wildly different capabilities.

Apple will will specify in their USB-C Micro Controller firmware to limit Power Delivery to no more than 15 watts (3A, 5V). The Lowest/Slowest form of USB PD charging standard to be "Safe" and use that as their justification.

While the Lightning Port will get full speed charging.

Also ALL Data lines to USB-C will be disabled in firmware and no hardware connections to the data lines will be laid out on the PCB's to prevent anybody from trying to hack the Type-C port.

It's all about that Sweet Sweet Lightning Port and that Royalty Stream that comes from it.

 

[edzieba]

My point is that even if you mandate USB-PD over type-C, you still run into issues with:
1- not every type-C USB-PD power adapter supporting every possible USB-PD power profile
2- not every type-C USB-PD device supporting every possible USB-PD profile
3- not every cable supporting every possible USB-PD profile (need ID chip for greater than 3A, different ID chips for greater than 20V and you are screwed if the ID chip in your cable blocks the power profile your device wants for whatever reason)

As I wrote earlier, it will cause a nightmare for people needing to keep tabs on what type-C USB-PD adapter can power what devices and which cables are needed if they want things to work as intended since they all have the same plugs yet have wildly different capabilities.

Part of the same legislation is also mandating a common labelling scheme for both device and charger minimum and peak power.

Nothing that can be done about <Mod Edit> cables though: you can legislate and label all you want, and consumers will still go and buy the cheapest dodgiest bit of rusty coathanger they can find and then wonder why things don't work properly. At least the ID-marked cables mean devices will just plain refuse to suck down high amperages on dodgy cables (AKA 'ignition sources'), unlike the previous random-resistor-ladder nonsense.

 

[InvalidError]

At least the ID-marked cables mean devices will just plain refuse to suck down high amperages on dodgy cables (AKA 'ignition sources'), unlike the previous random-resistor-ladder nonsense.

Just because the cable has an ID chip on it doesn't mean it or the connectors at either end including the source and destination devices are any good or in good condition. At least a dedicated charging port doesn't get the extra plug-unplug traffic of also being the port used for nearly all other external connectivity on mobile devices.