USB-C Chargers Are the Future: European Union Signs Common Charging Standard Into Law

[trsttte]

It could be packaging thing. A thinner cable can be bent more tightly and takes a lot less room in the box. Though I figure you could wrap the cable around the phone or something like that if it was thicker.
Or, like you said, it could be a cost saving thing.

Certainly just cost savings, just like removing the charger was (reducing waste is nice, but it's just a pretty excuse, apple chargers were uselessly weak anyway - they included 5w charger with iphones, ridiculous - but the others generally weren't).

They also could take a lesson from Ikea on how to properly pack stuff, one of the points in the excuse was that it made packages flatter but they could do that by moving the charger to the bottom of the phone instead of bellow. They could do this and more with the cables, circle it around the phone could make for much smaller boxes

 

[bug]

You totally misunderstood. An USB2.0 cable IS NOT compatible with USB3.~ cable/port, from the power delivery point, transfer rates, etc. That was my point. So you will still need to change the cable if a new standard comes, that's also my point.

I think you don't know what "compatible" means. You can plug an USB2 cable in a USB3 port and it will work just fine. It won't transfer at USB3 speeds and it won't deliver as much power, but it will work. As such you don't "need to" change the cable if a new standard comes. You can choose to, but you definitely don't need to.

 

[Valantar]

Point isn't buying yet another charger, but reusing one you get with assorted devices. Otherwise we aren't cutting on waste but creating even more. Sure, mouse charger was a bit of a caricature just to get to point, but eg. if I buy tablet, laptop and a phone, I'll probably get 3 chargers which I can then just use for example one in office, one at home, one for emergencies/travel, instead carrying all 3 with me. So if lowest they'd be allowed to pack is 5W that'd be pretty useless even for that "emergency" use. But if I get 25W (phone), 60W (tablet) and 100W (laptop) then that slowest 25W is still kind of ok for emergencies, and sure enough as we already knew those 60W/100W will easily charge anything from 0.1W to 100W. I'll go back to that mouse, sure, you've never seen anyone pack a charger because they're saving money and on a 20$ mouse adding 10$ charger would be dumb so they add that joke of 15cm cable at best that costs pennies. And trust me, those phones that currently charge with micro USB won't rush to pack a 60W charger, they'll pinch pennies and pack lowest they are legally allowed. So if lowest that PD 3.0 allows is 15W - that's exactly what we will get.

As for asking questions and then wanting different answer, @TheLostSwede , my only fault is not being clear enough resulting in you not understanding question in the first (second or third) place. I have asked 3x what is the minimum allowed spec. I'm unsure how is that hard to grasp. I didn't ask what's the lowest current it can provide, I can read just about everywhere that PD negotiates and varies in small 30mA & mV steps, but I did not ask that. When I ask what's lowest legal speed of a car on a highway you don't answer that car can go 0-100km/h. There is a legal MINIMUM in some countries and you aren't allowed to drive a tractor at 5km/h on highway, you need to go 60km/h at least. Same way I wanted to know lowest "legal" (in-spec) wattage that charger must provide for it to be called USB PD 3.0 certified. And so far answer looks to be - "same as PD 2.0 which starts at 15W".

Quotes I gave were historical as I bolded word MANDATED just for your eyes, so you can see that USB 1.1 at first MANDATED 2.5W, then USB 3.0 brought that to 5W, and finally PD 2.0 brought that to 15W. PD 3.0 did not change that so no quote, yet PD 2.0 isn't obsolete or deprecated because PD 3.0 builds on it.

Btw this was my source:

https://www.renesas.com/us/en/support/engineer-school/usb-power-delivery-01-usb-type-c

But hey, if they were wrong so am I. I guess I should now get my evening reading, they say it's "just" 410 pages of USB specs... It might be easy to get lost in translation when original work is 410 pages of specs.

I mean, I don't see the problem of the (rather convoluted) scenario you're drawing up. Are you getting a ton of underpowered chargers today? 'Cause if not, then why would such a change suddenly shift things in this direction? Most small electronic devices - smartwatches, mice, BT speakers or earbuds, etc - don't come with a charger at all, just a cable. You're either expected to BYO charger or use a port on some other device. Who the hell would charge a mouse using a discrete charger? Just plug it into your PC. Phones, tablets, laptops etc. tend to come with chargers that fit their target market, price bracket, and power draw. Even dirt-cheap phones these days tend to come with 20W+ chargers, and many of those are already PD compatible. Will some devices have underpowered chargers? Sure, possibly. Is there an expectation from this standardization that every device will suddenly pack a charger capable of charging your laptop? Of course not. But it will spell the end of your phone coming with a "60W fast charger" that for some obscure reason won't deliver 60W to your laptop, and ensure that the BT earphones you buy in three years will work with the chargers you already own.

The fear of this creating more waste is completely unfounded, as it will reduce the overall need to bundle - and thus produce - ever more chargers, as the law establishes a reasonable expectation that people already have a compatible charger.

 

[Wirko]

Point isn't buying yet another charger, but reusing one you get with assorted devices. Otherwise we aren't cutting on waste but creating even more. Sure, mouse charger was a bit of a caricature just to get to point, but eg. if I buy tablet, laptop and a phone, I'll probably get 3 chargers which I can then just use for example one in office, one at home, one for emergencies/travel, instead carrying all 3 with me. So if lowest they'd be allowed to pack is 5W that'd be pretty useless even for that "emergency" use. But if I get 25W (phone), 60W (tablet) and 100W (laptop) then that slowest 25W is still kind of ok for emergencies, and sure enough as we already knew those 60W/100W will easily charge anything from 0.1W to 100W. I'll go back to that mouse, sure, you've never seen anyone pack a charger because they're saving money and on a 20$ mouse adding 10$ charger would be dumb so they add that joke of 15cm cable at best that costs pennies. And trust me, those phones that currently charge with micro USB won't rush to pack a 60W charger, they'll pinch pennies and pack lowest they are legally allowed. So if lowest that PD 3.0 allows is 15W - that's exactly what we will get.

As for asking questions and then wanting different answer, @TheLostSwede , my only fault is not being clear enough resulting in you not understanding question in the first (second or third) place. I have asked 3x what is the minimum allowed spec. I'm unsure how is that hard to grasp. I didn't ask what's the lowest current it can provide, I can read just about everywhere that PD negotiates and varies in small 30mA & mV steps, but I did not ask that. When I ask what's lowest legal speed of a car on a highway you don't answer that car can go 0-100km/h. There is a legal MINIMUM in some countries and you aren't allowed to drive a tractor at 5km/h on highway, you need to go 60km/h at least. Same way I wanted to know lowest "legal" (in-spec) wattage that charger must provide for it to be called USB PD 3.0 certified. And so far answer looks to be - "same as PD 2.0 which starts at 15W".

Quotes I gave were historical as I bolded word MANDATED just for your eyes, so you can see that USB 1.1 at first MANDATED 2.5W, then USB 3.0 brought that to 5W, and finally PD 2.0 brought that to 15W. PD 3.0 did not change that so no quote, yet PD 2.0 isn't obsolete or deprecated because PD 3.0 builds on it.

Btw this was my source:

https://www.renesas.com/us/en/support/engineer-school/usb-power-delivery-01-usb-type-c

But hey, if they were wrong so am I. I guess I should now get my evening reading, they say it's "just" 410 pages of USB specs... It might be easy to get lost in translation when original work is 410 pages of specs.

In USB PD, everything is negotiable, so you can't even say for sure that PD 2.0 mandates any power level above 0.5 W. The supply side must be able to communicate the maximum current it can supply at each voltage, and the consumer must be able to communicate the maximum current it can sink at each voltage - and that's all. See the table here and tables here, for example.

The legislative proposal doesn't make it clear enough - here it is, I hope I found the latest version.

INFORMATION ON SPECIFICATIONS RELATING TO CHARGING CAPABILITIES
In the case of radio equipment falling within the scope of Article 3 (4), first subparagraph, the following information shall be indicated in printed form on the packaging or, in the absence of packaging, on a label accompanying the radio equipment with the condition that the label can be visible:
(a) a description of the power requirements of the wired charging devices that can be used with that radio equipment, including the maximum power required to charge the radio equipment expressed in watts by displaying the text: “the minimum power delivered by the charger shall be equal to or higher than [xx] Watts”. The number of watts should express the maximum power required by the radio equipment

The use of words "maximum" and "minimum" here is weird, given that a phone can use, for example, up to 30 W for fast charging but will still charge the battery with a 15 W charger. Which is the minimum, and which is the maximum? Is a charger that can only supply 7 watts still PD compliant? Is a phone that can't use a 7 W source for charging still PD compliant?

I see your questions as valid because not every charger is powered either by mains or 12 volts in cars. There are power packs, solar chargers, and phones that can charge other devices via USB C. Those may be limited to a low power.

 

[Valantar]

In USB PD, everything is negotiable, so you can't even say for sure that PD 2.0 mandates any power level above 0.5 W. The supply side must be able to communicate the maximum current it can supply at each voltage, and the consumer must be able to communicate the maximum current it can sink at each voltage - and that's all. See the table here and tables here, for example.

The legislative proposal doesn't make it clear enough - here it is, I hope I found the latest version.

The use of words "maximum" and "minimum" here is weird, given that a phone can use, for example, up to 30 W for fast charging but will still charge the battery with a 15 W charger. Which is the minimum, and which is the maximum? Is a charger that can only supply 7 watts still PD compliant? Is a phone that can't use a 7 W source for charging still PD compliant?

I see your questions as valid because not every charger is powered either by mains or 12 volts in cars. There are power packs, solar chargers, and phones that can charge other devices via USB C. Those may be limited to a low power.

There is no phone in the universe that won't charge off a 7W source. They'll charge at least from 5W, as that's the most common power level that can be expected from legacy USB-A ports - though they'll likely even trickle charge off of a 500mA 2.5W USB-A host port - it'll just be dead slow. This is basic, essential functionality that any PD charge controller will take care of, and that won't likely be deprecated for decades due to the prevalence of non-fast charging USB-A ports in everything from airplanes to wall sockets to power banks to all kinds of devices (PCs, TVs, stereos, lamps, charging stations, desk organizers, whatever).

I still don't understand what you're worried about here. Can you put into more precise terms what exactly it is that you're envisioning might come from this?

 

[Guwapo77]

Those power requirements you're talking about are for non-portable electronics only, and won't transfer over. Portable electronics are first and foremost bound by battery life and size/weight, both of which set pretty hard limits for maximum power draw. Desktop 30-series GPU increased peak TDP from 250W to 450W, yet peak mobile SKU power didn't budge - if anything the most common power levels went down slightly as thinner designs kept winning over customers. There is no new battery tech on the horizon that will make >200W mobile GPUs even remotely feasible (not that 200W mobile GPUs are feasible on battery currently either), and there's no revolution in cooling making it possible to cool such a GPU in a reasonable size and weight. So no, there really won't be any major increases in mobile power draw coming any time soon.

And besides that wildly unrealistic idea of power, what future deficiency are you imagining USB-C to have, that would necessitate a replacement connector standard within the next decade?


This is exactly why USB-C is such a good choice for this - it's easily adapted with passive adapters to USB-A, and natively supports signalling for a wealth of connectivity - ranging from USB 2.0 (I think 1.1 has been deprecated, but I might be wrong?) to USB4/TB4, assuming the cable is built to that spec, to DP 1.4 (and 2.0), and much more. It'll even work for future 80Gbps USB4. And with the newest PD spec supports 48V5A power - with every charger, host device and sink device supporting various fallback modes natively if any link in the chain doesn't support whatever is the highest spec available. I honestly can't see any realistic, widespread future use case where USB-C wouldn't be up to the task. >80Gbps data transfers just aren't particularly useful for most people. Nor is >240W charging. Nor >8k120 video, nor whatever else you might start imagining. USB 2.0 is still the most common connectivity standard, after all.

I was seriously joking with the excessive power requirements, I thought that was rather obvious. However, your point makes a lot of sense and hopefully nothing comes out that challenges this theory.