Apple is making moves in this direction. I certainly hope not as the Bluetooth thing is a legitimate concern. It's probably a matter of months until the next Bluetooth vuln.
this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2024
11 points (62.8% liked)
Showerthoughts
29819 readers
743 users here now
A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.
Rules
- All posts must be showerthoughts
- The entire showerthought must be in the title
- Avoid politics
- 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
- 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
- 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
- Posts must be original/unique
- Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Apple will change it first, and Samsung and Google will make fun of them for it and promote how they still let you plug your phone in... Until next year's model when they do the same thing.
Apple will develop their own proprietary Bluetooth version first. iWave or some shit like that
They'll clone the Bluetooth standard, and change a couple of minor things only to make it incompatible with Bluetooth. Like they did with the wired headphone playback controls.
We'll see. The rumors have been around... But Europe just required that they add a USB-C charging port to all devices. They can't afford to ignore the mandates of the EU.
I don't think they'll get a pass for not having any port at all: the EU is the last remaining regulator.
The EU does not require a charging port, it only says that if you have a charging port it must be USB-C.
By the end of 2024, all mobile phones, tablets and cameras sold in the EU will have to be equipped with a USB Type-C charging port.
Source: Official EU Parliament News
Idk seems like the port is a requirement.
Nope.
Look at the actual directive , not some press release. Note that this is an older directive, but the common charger directive only describes the changes that need to be made to the earlier directive. The first link is to the latest updated version of that directive.
I quote (emphasis mine):
In so far as they are capable of being recharged by means of wired charging, the categories or classes of radio equipment referred to in point 1 of this Part shall:
2.1. be equipped with the USB Type-C receptacle, as described in the standard (…)
2.2. be capable of being charged with cables which comply with the standard (…)
At the moment the directive does not prescribe a universal standard for wireless charging, but does reserve the right to do so in the future. (At the moment it doesn’t seen necessary as everyone seems to be adopting QI)
Thanks for linking the actual directive.
To be fair: it wasn't "some press release" - it was the official statement on the matter by Parliament.
Quoting from the directive:
When preparing the delegated acts referred to in this Article with respect to radio equipment capable of being recharged by means of wired charging, as well as with respect to radio equipment capable of being recharged by means other than wired charging, the Commission shall take into account the degree of market acceptance of the technical specifications under consideration, the resulting consumer convenience and the extent of the reduction of environmental waste and market fragmentation that can be expected from such technical specifications.
Given that they're focused on reduction of waste and reduction of market fragmentation there's definitely a question mark over only QI based charging. I think they've left themselves significant latitude to smack down any attempts to fully go to wireless charging without a port.
Remains to be seen if they will.
Given that they’re focused on reduction of waste and reduction of market fragmentation there’s definitely a question mark over only QI based charging.
I don't see how you can get that from the text. The way I read it, wired and wireless charging are separate. There is nothing in the directive that mandates one should be used over the other. They explicitly require USB-C for wired charging, but do not put any requirements on wireless, as there doesn't seem to be any significant fragmentation on the wireless side (i.e. no need to enforce a standard if everyone already agrees on a standard).
My quote explicitly ties wired and wireless charging together into the document. They left it open in saying "we're not establishing any rules yet but these go hand in hand and we'll immediately start looking at wireless charging in the context of e-waste".
My quote explicitly ties wired and wireless charging together into the document.
It just says they are keeping an eye on developments in both wireless and wired charging standards. Not a word on requiring either on any device.
Not a shower thought
Earbuds only cost $4 and last years before breaking. Wireless audio devices cost a lot more and break sooner. Of course they're going to get rid of the 3.5mm jack, there is no cash money reason not to.
The only way that would work is if you can use your phone for longer than a day, or if wireless charging is powerful enough to use your phone while it's charging wirelessly. Most devices have pretty poor battery life with constant, active use, and users need to plug their phones in for extended gaming sessions, long video conferences, and stuff like that. You can't charge your phone wirelessly while you're using it right now, and that's a deal breaker for most people.
It's definitely a possibility. Mac OS has a thing that will let you restore the operating system by downloading it directly from the web over Wi-Fi or Ethernet. So it wouldn't surprise me if phones eventually have that kind of recovery system that will let you connect to Wi-Fi as well to download the image.
God I hope not, that would lead to awful battery health and lots of laggy interactions with devices over Bluetooth since the bandwidth for bt5 is 2 Mbps
that's just straight up inaccurate information. bluetooth low energy has a data rate of 2mbps, which was introduced with bluetooth 5. regular bluetooth 5 has a 50mbps bandwidth based on a very cursory google search