Apple gets $19M fine in Brazil for not selling iPhones with charger(engadget.com)
engadget.com
Apple gets $19M fine in Brazil for not selling iPhones with charger
https://www.engadget.com/apple-19-million-fine-brazil-for-not-selling-phones-with-a-charger-051025019.html
175 comments
We have a Brazilian Au Pair, who told me that she was waiting until she came up here to the states to buy a new phone. I thought that getting a new iPhone in Brazil might be more affordable. Turns out I was wrong. The iPhone list price was somewhere around 180% as in the US. I was shocked.
Yes, Brazil has very high import duties on all electronics. Maybe they were hoping to promote local production, like what happened with the auto industry in the 50s and 60s there where major car manufacturers opened production plants in
Brazil.
It did work out to some extent in the 80s, with TV manufacturers moving to the Free Trade Zone of Manaus but didn't translate with the high tech stuff afterwards
It did work out to some extent in the 80s, with TV manufacturers moving to the Free Trade Zone of Manaus but didn't translate with the high tech stuff afterwards
This is true in various countries. Relatives have asked me to buy electronics in the US when traveling to see them because of high import taxes.
Pakistan gets around this by charging you a ridiculous (I think 40%) amount of the MRSP in tax when you first connect your phone to mobile networks.
I used to buy my parents phones from the US but they have to get chinese phones with low MRSP now to not get gouged out.
I used to buy my parents phones from the US but they have to get chinese phones with low MRSP now to not get gouged out.
Note bringing in goods like this, without declaring them at customs and paying due taxes, is often illegal.
The rules differ between countries, and so does the chance of being caught.
The rules differ between countries, and so does the chance of being caught.
Brazil is by far the highest, there's no comparison. Electronics in Brazil cost roughly double. Other places are 20 or 40% more, not 100% more.
I'd wager to say that worldwide, America is still the cheapest place to buy a new iPhone.
> Apple products in Brazil are in general expensive, people do not replace their iPhones every generation
“People” everywhere else do not replace their iPhones every generation either.
“People” everywhere else do not replace their iPhones every generation either.
What about all these Ads on YT from ATT/T-Mobile/etc. offering to update our phones "for free"? You may not do it, but many more do.
What about them? Businesses run ads all the time, and obviously iPhones are not free. People can see that prices for mobile network access with offers of “free” phones are much higher than without “free” phones.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/08/apple-iphone-replacement-cyc...
> Sacconaghi says he expects 16 percent of Apple’s installed base — 900 million iPhones — will buy a new iPhone in fiscal 2019.
> Our customers are holding on to their older iPhones a bit longer than in the past,” Cook said
> He wrote, “In our view, the single most important controversy surrounding Apple today is the iPhone replacement cycle - despite the iPhone installed base growing +9% last year, we now expect units to be down -19% in fiscal 2019, implying a material pushout in upgrade rates.”
> Apple recently stopped disclosing how many iPhone units it sells each quarter. Instead, in its fiscal Q1 earnings report, Apple started to report an iPhone installed base that includes both new and used iPhones.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/08/apple-iphone-replacement-cyc...
> Sacconaghi says he expects 16 percent of Apple’s installed base — 900 million iPhones — will buy a new iPhone in fiscal 2019.
> Our customers are holding on to their older iPhones a bit longer than in the past,” Cook said
> He wrote, “In our view, the single most important controversy surrounding Apple today is the iPhone replacement cycle - despite the iPhone installed base growing +9% last year, we now expect units to be down -19% in fiscal 2019, implying a material pushout in upgrade rates.”
> Apple recently stopped disclosing how many iPhone units it sells each quarter. Instead, in its fiscal Q1 earnings report, Apple started to report an iPhone installed base that includes both new and used iPhones.
so basically:
- it wouldn't be a problem if Apple did use USB-C, because "good enough" USB-C chargers are "everywhere" (e.g. come with your laptop, tablet, previous phone, etc.). And aren't too expensive either.
- it wouldn't be a problem if Apple did use USB-C, because "good enough" USB-C chargers are "everywhere" (e.g. come with your laptop, tablet, previous phone, etc.). And aren't too expensive either.
Apple already bundles a USB-C to Lighting cable with the iPhones, so every USB-C charger is already good enough.
They certainly don't do that in the US.
Edit: I'm a jackass, and this is wrong.
Edit: I'm a jackass, and this is wrong.
Huh? Every iPhone for sale on Apples site today includes a usb-c to lightning cable. It works with all my usb-c chargers from other companies.
Well, don't I look like an ass. I haven't even pulled the cable out of the box in years, but I just checked the cable in the box from my iPhone 14 Pro and sure enough, it was USB-C to Lightning.
My recently-purchased iPhone came with just such a cable. You are confidently incorrect.
They do, it's written on every iPhone page on apple.com.
USB-C male to Lightning Male though?
The Apple charger I got with my Macbook Air is the only charger with usb-c female I've ever had. USB-A male to Lightning male or USB-C female to Lightning male would probable be better.
The Apple charger I got with my Macbook Air is the only charger with usb-c female I've ever had. USB-A male to Lightning male or USB-C female to Lightning male would probable be better.
Almost all modern chargers utilize USB-C female, at least from the major brands (Anker, Ugreen etc.)
Almost all cables have either USB-C male to USB-C male, or USB-C male to something else.
Almost all cables have either USB-C male to USB-C male, or USB-C male to something else.
Yet I have a variety of usb-c chargers which are not like this, that have a male end only. They are for phones for laptops, for my Switch, for a variety of things.
Can you post a link to any of those products?
A USB charger that is male would be so unusual, I can't even imagine what it would physically look like.
A USB charger that is male would be so unusual, I can't even imagine what it would physically look like.
Do you have a nintendo switch? The one that comes with it is like that - https://store.nintendo.com.au/au/nintendo-switch-ac-adapter....
See also Lenovo laptop chargers - https://www.lenovo.com/au/en/p/accessories-and-software/char...
I have a bunch of things like this around the house. I'm not trying to deny the existence of usb-c female power adapters, but IMHO they are a more recent phenomenon than usb-a female power adapters, and the male-ended usb-c power adapters that ship with many devices.
I'm not trying to justify whatever's going on in Brazil, but usb-c female to lightning or usb-a male to lightning would be generally easier to accomodate, for me. I also have (for instance) usb-a female sockets in the car.
See also Lenovo laptop chargers - https://www.lenovo.com/au/en/p/accessories-and-software/char...
I have a bunch of things like this around the house. I'm not trying to deny the existence of usb-c female power adapters, but IMHO they are a more recent phenomenon than usb-a female power adapters, and the male-ended usb-c power adapters that ship with many devices.
I'm not trying to justify whatever's going on in Brazil, but usb-c female to lightning or usb-a male to lightning would be generally easier to accomodate, for me. I also have (for instance) usb-a female sockets in the car.
Oh, I see what you mean now.
Those are chargers that have an integrated cable that of course ends in male.
I really didn't know those still existed. It seems like such atrocious design -- the vast, vast majority of consumer electronics has moved to separating the charger and cable when using USB, precisely so you can reuse chargers and replace worn cables. I'm pretty shocked Nintendo and Lenovo are so backwards on this. Is there really a significant cost savings or something for them? It's so user-hostile.
Those are chargers that have an integrated cable that of course ends in male.
I really didn't know those still existed. It seems like such atrocious design -- the vast, vast majority of consumer electronics has moved to separating the charger and cable when using USB, precisely so you can reuse chargers and replace worn cables. I'm pretty shocked Nintendo and Lenovo are so backwards on this. Is there really a significant cost savings or something for them? It's so user-hostile.
Both Lenovo and Nintendo did that initially because in the relatively early days of USB-C there had been quite a bunch of incorrectly produced USB-C cables on Amazone which kill your device.
Through it is without question pretty user hostile that they haven't updated their design wrt. this aspect in recent years.
Through it is without question pretty user hostile that they haven't updated their design wrt. this aspect in recent years.
I have a charger like that, I bought it when USB C cables were extremely expensive. So buying a charger with an integrated cable saved me a lot of money.
I do have a lot of chargers with the female port right on them, but they’re all A ports
USB-C is just now starting to be popular in Brasil. Most notebooks here use proprietary chargers.
USB-C notebooks are still very expensive here. I just brought a new Dell Inspiron. IT have greate specs but still uses the old dell charger.
USB-C notebooks are still very expensive here. I just brought a new Dell Inspiron. IT have greate specs but still uses the old dell charger.
> Brazillians WILL use chinese knockoffs that set themselves on fire, it is just the reality in the country where all tech is crazy expensive.
It would be a pretty interesting law: Supposing it were wealthy enough, what if the government gave everyone an iPhone?
It could have so many positive effects.
It would be a pretty interesting law: Supposing it were wealthy enough, what if the government gave everyone an iPhone?
It could have so many positive effects.
Would a toy manufacturer be sued in Brazil for selling toys without batteries? “Batteries not included” is such a common marketing phrase it was used as a major movie title… in 1987.
What if they required some “expensive” proprietary battery that was sold separately? (Power tools do this in the US)
For me, I don’t know anything about Brazil, but this lawsuit only makes sense if they misled the public into believing there would be a cable included. Likely, it was very clear about was actually included and people just didn’t read it or care enough (already deciding they’d buy a knock-off). I remember this moment in time and it was pretty well known in the US from my recollection. Even my non-tech friends knew about it and were kind of upset that it would cost them more and all their existing cables and accessories would be obsolete.
What if they required some “expensive” proprietary battery that was sold separately? (Power tools do this in the US)
For me, I don’t know anything about Brazil, but this lawsuit only makes sense if they misled the public into believing there would be a cable included. Likely, it was very clear about was actually included and people just didn’t read it or care enough (already deciding they’d buy a knock-off). I remember this moment in time and it was pretty well known in the US from my recollection. Even my non-tech friends knew about it and were kind of upset that it would cost them more and all their existing cables and accessories would be obsolete.
I own a number of power tools, I've never seen one come without a necessary component for basic operation. Maybe you can link to some brands that bare costs similar to an iPhone that are sold without basic components.
The problem is that you can't compare the US to other countries in this way. The salaries and what people take home are drastically different. Even inside the US, if anyone bothered to look, you'd probably find that most US citizens outside of wealthy areas give something up to get the next iPhone. Adding the charger on top of that likely has impact, just less so than a place like Brazil.
The problem is that you can't compare the US to other countries in this way. The salaries and what people take home are drastically different. Even inside the US, if anyone bothered to look, you'd probably find that most US citizens outside of wealthy areas give something up to get the next iPhone. Adding the charger on top of that likely has impact, just less so than a place like Brazil.
Search “tool only” and you’ll find tons of power tools with no batteries. You have to own their batteries already. For example, I own about 20 dewalt tools and only 3 batteries. When I buy a new tool, it’s usually cheaper for me to buy dewalt because I have the batteries. Most manufacturers do this, or the common ones you’ll find in big box retail. I’m not sure if it’s US only thing though.
I don’t buy the wealth/income factor. A company prices their products and if you can’t afford it, you shouldn’t buy it. That’s a pretty universal concept.
I don’t buy the wealth/income factor. A company prices their products and if you can’t afford it, you shouldn’t buy it. That’s a pretty universal concept.
>I own a number of power tools, I've never seen one come without a necessary component for basic operation.
it's very common for power tools to be sold "body only", i.e. without a battery or charger
it's very common for power tools to be sold "body only", i.e. without a battery or charger
To add to this clarification, the reason is that the power tools from one company typically have interchangeable battery packs, therefore if you have purchased a few full sets with battery and charger, often you do not need more, therefore tools can be purchased "body only".
Here is an example: https://www.homedepot.com/p/RYOBI-ONE-HP-18V-Brushless-Cordl...
Edit: GP asked for link to tool that costs similar to an iPhone that is body only, here's one priced at $2500: https://www.homedepot.com/p/Makita-18V-LXT-Lithium-Ion-Cordl...
Here is an example: https://www.homedepot.com/p/RYOBI-ONE-HP-18V-Brushless-Cordl...
Edit: GP asked for link to tool that costs similar to an iPhone that is body only, here's one priced at $2500: https://www.homedepot.com/p/Makita-18V-LXT-Lithium-Ion-Cordl...
Thanks for the link!
So, I own some Makita equipment. There's a big difference in what Makita is doing and what Apple is doing. Makita sells a baseline product with no battery for the reasons you mentioned at $2500, they sell a bundle with two 5 Ah batteries and a charger for an extra $100, and you can buy batteries and a charger separately for significantly more: https://www.homedepot.com/p/Makita-18V-LXT-Lithium-Ion-High-... (This is one battery with less amp hours)
Apple lets you buy the phone and charger separately; there is no bundle.
So, I own some Makita equipment. There's a big difference in what Makita is doing and what Apple is doing. Makita sells a baseline product with no battery for the reasons you mentioned at $2500, they sell a bundle with two 5 Ah batteries and a charger for an extra $100, and you can buy batteries and a charger separately for significantly more: https://www.homedepot.com/p/Makita-18V-LXT-Lithium-Ion-High-... (This is one battery with less amp hours)
Apple lets you buy the phone and charger separately; there is no bundle.
I asked for links. I've never bought something like a drill or battery operated saw that didn't come with a battery. Did they come with drill bits or a blade? Not always, but I think a customer can expect a battery and a way to charge it.
You can usually buy it both ways, with or without the batteries.
You can buy most cordless power tools “bare”, without battery+charger. Because those are a significant portion of the cost and if you already have several tools in that family, you probably don’t want to pay for another battery. (Or charger…. I admit to having a couple duplicate chargers, which bugs me.)
Let me fix that for you:
> Would a toy manufacturer be sued in Brazil for selling toys without a charging cable?
The answer is: Yes.
The answer is: Yes.
To add it further. If it required some cable that could be considered standard enough so people can buy it anywhere from anyone, then the answer would be "no".
AFAIK, technically nobody ever deemed any cable standard enough. I am confident (but IANAL) you would win the suit if you require a USB A to USB C cable, but you will probably get sued.
AFAIK, technically nobody ever deemed any cable standard enough. I am confident (but IANAL) you would win the suit if you require a USB A to USB C cable, but you will probably get sued.
Ok TIL. But still makes no sense to me if they informed you about what was in the box. I’m just stuck in that mental model I suppose.
Also doesn’t quite make sense why charging cables is different than any other power source. Batteries for toys, fuel for cars, etc. Seems kind of arbitrary.
Also doesn’t quite make sense why charging cables is different than any other power source. Batteries for toys, fuel for cars, etc. Seems kind of arbitrary.
> Also doesn’t quite make sense why charging cables is different than any other power source. Batteries for toys, fuel for cars, etc. Seems kind of arbitrary.
I mean, it seems pretty easy to distinguish between those two to me? One set are consumables ("batteries for toys", "fuel for cars"), while the other set are long-lived goods ("charging cables").
I mean, it seems pretty easy to distinguish between those two to me? One set are consumables ("batteries for toys", "fuel for cars"), while the other set are long-lived goods ("charging cables").
But why should one be included and the others can be excluded, the fact the cable was available for purchase should have been enough.
The law has to draw a line somewhere. Cars have to come with wheels, even if wheels are available for purchase. Appliances have to come with power cable, even if wires are available for purchase.
> What if they required some “expensive” proprietary battery that was sold separately?
Yes, in that case they would be sued.
Yes, in that case they would be sued.
Apple chargers prices are ludicrous everywhere.
They're also very high quality when compared to cheap Chinese chargers that can electrocute the user, catch fire, or only produce a small fraction of their rated power safely. Are they overpriced when you factor that in?
Here is a cost breakdown: https://www.righto.com/2015/11/macbook-charger-teardown-surp...
They are 8-10x a basic utility of your laptop. That breaks faster then my laptop. I travel a lot, cable generally lasts a year.
They are 8-10x a basic utility of your laptop. That breaks faster then my laptop. I travel a lot, cable generally lasts a year.
Is a man guilty of a crime if he knowingly lets another man climb a cell tower without a safety harness?
Yes, manslaughter.
The question is if Apple knew this was a problem and the degree to which they knew and made excuses or marketing for it.
Yes, manslaughter.
The question is if Apple knew this was a problem and the degree to which they knew and made excuses or marketing for it.
Number 4 is what I dont get.
Countries should not bother with fining Apple pennies, they should just make it clear that they are liable for the deaths and loss of property caused by their actions.
It's Apple's fault if people use knock-off chargers? (And you can't even argue that Apple wants that...)
Arguably. Selling an unusable device, that is turned into a fire hazard when you type "Iphone charger" into google, amazon, or alibaba in an attempt to get a fully working device has blame to go around but I would not say Apple is blameless. The most damning is really that Apple is the only individual here with an easy and cheap alternative, just sell fully usable devices.
Is the appliance maker responsible for faulty wall sockets? Is the wall socket maker responsible for faulty wiring? Is the toy maker responsible for faulty batteries? The automaker for faulty oil?
This makes no sense. The government should fix their charger regs and prosecute companies who don't comply, if the chargers are causing electrical fires.
This makes no sense. The government should fix their charger regs and prosecute companies who don't comply, if the chargers are causing electrical fires.
No reasonable person expects an iphone to come with a building or breaker, and many are bought by the homeless. An iphone charger is part of a functioning ipohne, a wall socket is not part of any appliance.
The government has little control over what random Chinese devices you order. Countries cannot even prevent people from just mailing cocaine, imagine if every random Chinese electrical device needed to be verified to have been engineered to a certain standard. No counry on earth had 1/100th the border agents necessary to do that.
The government has little control over what random Chinese devices you order. Countries cannot even prevent people from just mailing cocaine, imagine if every random Chinese electrical device needed to be verified to have been engineered to a certain standard. No counry on earth had 1/100th the border agents necessary to do that.
> 1. The lawsuit started when Apple dropped the chargers coming with the phone, but had just changed the cable connection, so you would need a new charger anyway.
That makes no sense, Lightning was introduced in 2012. And the older Dock Connector chargers had detachable USB cables (I don't remember Apple ever using bonded chargers), so you could have used your existing charger with a new cable.
And an other commenter reports that the judge commented:
> telling Apple that it could help the environment in other ways, such as giving its devices USB-C support.
But Lightning predates USB-C by 2 years. There was no USB-C to switch to when Apple introduced Lightning.
And I can understand and emphasise with immediately switching over from and obsoleting all the "brand new" Lighting-based docks & co.
Apple has started the switch with a few ipads (and obviously all the macs), and I've been expecting the deprecation of Lightning this year or the next, as it's been a decade, which is about how long the Dock Connector existed before the introduction of Lightning (though it survived Lightning for a few years in older devices and developing countries, IIRC Apple stopped selling the last dock connector device around 2015).
> 4. If Apple doesn't give the charger, or sell it really cheap, Brazillians WILL use chinese knockoffs that set themselves on fire, it is just the reality in the country where all tech is crazy expensive.
But how is that Apple's responsibility? And surely they'll do that either way so they can have multiple chargers?
That makes no sense, Lightning was introduced in 2012. And the older Dock Connector chargers had detachable USB cables (I don't remember Apple ever using bonded chargers), so you could have used your existing charger with a new cable.
And an other commenter reports that the judge commented:
> telling Apple that it could help the environment in other ways, such as giving its devices USB-C support.
But Lightning predates USB-C by 2 years. There was no USB-C to switch to when Apple introduced Lightning.
And I can understand and emphasise with immediately switching over from and obsoleting all the "brand new" Lighting-based docks & co.
Apple has started the switch with a few ipads (and obviously all the macs), and I've been expecting the deprecation of Lightning this year or the next, as it's been a decade, which is about how long the Dock Connector existed before the introduction of Lightning (though it survived Lightning for a few years in older devices and developing countries, IIRC Apple stopped selling the last dock connector device around 2015).
> 4. If Apple doesn't give the charger, or sell it really cheap, Brazillians WILL use chinese knockoffs that set themselves on fire, it is just the reality in the country where all tech is crazy expensive.
But how is that Apple's responsibility? And surely they'll do that either way so they can have multiple chargers?
If I remember correctly (I don't own an iPhone so to me this is kind all hearsay) what happened is Apple stopped shipping charges around the time chargers became USB-C, while their older ones used USB-A on the brick.
So the iPhone package would come with the phone itself, and a USBC-lightning cable, but the USB-C brick wasn't included and was ludicrously expensive, and nobody had one since it was new.
So the iPhone package would come with the phone itself, and a USBC-lightning cable, but the USB-C brick wasn't included and was ludicrously expensive, and nobody had one since it was new.
The comment you're replying to makes the point that if you already had a charger, you could use the old charger and the old cable. There is no requirement to use the new cable that it came with.
If you agree that people probably already had one from a few years ago, then they already had everything they needed to charge the phone. The 'new cable' did not stop anything from working that previously worked.
That is where point #3 comes in, being that Iphones are/where not very popular in Brazil (due to being prohibitively expensive), it is safe to assume that a significant number of sales are going to be first time Iphone buyers, who don't have a previous lightning cable.
It all comes down to: is the average buyer be reasonable expected to already have that fundamental piece at home? And in Brazilian market the answer to that is a clear no.
It all comes down to: is the average buyer be reasonable expected to already have that fundamental piece at home? And in Brazilian market the answer to that is a clear no.
Ah that's fair then, that would be an issue. Though it surprises me a touch: my iphone 11 came with an A->lightning cable (I just checked).
Maybe it's that more recently Apple switched the bundled cables from A to C, but didn't provide a charger brick, so people who still only had USB-A chargers were SOL? That would make a lot of sense as well, and I would understand the anger.
Maybe it's that more recently Apple switched the bundled cables from A to C, but didn't provide a charger brick, so people who still only had USB-A chargers were SOL? That would make a lot of sense as well, and I would understand the anger.
I think that was the first phone where they didn’t include the charger; after a decade+ of including a USB-A charger, that decision was probably fine for avoiding e-waste. Switching to USB-C on the wall side of the cable the next year was very iffy, since users were much, much more likely to need the new charger or an adapter.
If they were really worried about capacity (per shipping container) and reducing e-waste, they’d make the adapter available as an optional add-on at cost — making it free would likely generate more e-waste, since everyone would just go for the free charger.
If they were really worried about capacity (per shipping container) and reducing e-waste, they’d make the adapter available as an optional add-on at cost — making it free would likely generate more e-waste, since everyone would just go for the free charger.
> Apple switched the bundled cables from A to C, but didn't provide a charger brick, so people who still only had USB-A chargers were SOL
Yes, this is what happened on the iPhone 13 (may have been 12).
Yes, this is what happened on the iPhone 13 (may have been 12).
> Maybe it's that more recently Apple switched the bundled cables from A to C, but didn't provide a charger brick, so people who still only had USB-A chargers were SOL?
It started with the 11, but only for the Pro models. 12 everything was USB-C.
It started with the 11, but only for the Pro models. 12 everything was USB-C.
You could just use your old lightning cable? the port on the phone didn't change, you could use any existing lightning charger and it would work just fine. There's no requirement that you have to use the cable bundled in the box.
> You could just use your old lightning cable?
If you were switching from a Lightning iphone to a Lightning iphone, then yes. But say you were switching from an older Android phone, or a limping iphone still on dock connector?
If you were switching from a Lightning iphone to a Lightning iphone, then yes. But say you were switching from an older Android phone, or a limping iphone still on dock connector?
If you were using an iPhone with a dock connector, hats off for stretching one from 2012 (at best) to 2020, but that's hardly a large enough segment to count. Those things did not even have 4G, so the idea that a significant number of people were using one until 2020 and also decided to upgrade to an iPhone 12 is ridiculous.
Also, if you were using an older Android etc. you are still not required to use the USB-C to lightning cable. You can get a USB-A to lightning cable for cheap, and those aren't as liable to burn down your house as a cheap charge brick.
Also, if you were using an older Android etc. you are still not required to use the USB-C to lightning cable. You can get a USB-A to lightning cable for cheap, and those aren't as liable to burn down your house as a cheap charge brick.
I understand you based your answer on OP's comment, but you should not assume everyone has a charger that is compatible with the newer iPhones. And the prices are totally different as well.
There is a regulation in Brazil that determines newly purchased products should come with any components essential to the use of such (expensive, i.e., $1450+ in Brazil) products. In the case of iPhone, this means coming with a charger. Just like you, Apple assumed everyone in Brazil would have an Apple compliant charger sitting around, but the regulation exists exactly to avoid it.
I can see them using to constraint their warranty, so when a problem happens to the phone they would have an excuse not to fix it: "oh, we see here you haven't been using a compliant charger. Warranty voided."
There is a regulation in Brazil that determines newly purchased products should come with any components essential to the use of such (expensive, i.e., $1450+ in Brazil) products. In the case of iPhone, this means coming with a charger. Just like you, Apple assumed everyone in Brazil would have an Apple compliant charger sitting around, but the regulation exists exactly to avoid it.
I can see them using to constraint their warranty, so when a problem happens to the phone they would have an excuse not to fix it: "oh, we see here you haven't been using a compliant charger. Warranty voided."
>But how is that Apple's responsibility?
"Apple's responsibility" is determined, in countries with consumer protection laws, by that country's authority. In this case, it's Apple responsibility because Brazil says it's good for their consumers. It does stand to reason that having more high quality chargers from Apple is better than having fewer.
"Apple's responsibility" is determined, in countries with consumer protection laws, by that country's authority. In this case, it's Apple responsibility because Brazil says it's good for their consumers. It does stand to reason that having more high quality chargers from Apple is better than having fewer.
> "[...] The company cited environmental concerns for removing chargers with every purchase of the device and claimed that the decision will save 861,000 tons of copper, zinc and tin. The Brazilian Ministry of Justice remained unmoved by that reasoning, telling Apple that it could help the environment in other ways, such as giving its devices USB-C support."
Funnyly enough Apple's Brazilian PR team completely fumbled their response to the Ministry of Justice:
> Existem bilhões de adaptadores de energia USB-A já em uso em todo o mundo que nossos clientes podem usar para carregar e conectar seus dispositivos. [1]
> Translation: There are billions of USB-A power adapters already in use around the world that our customers can use to charge and connect their devices
Those "billions of USB-A adapters" however won't work with the cable provided in newer iPhones, which is lightning and USB-C.
[1] https://g1.globo.com/tecnologia/noticia/2022/09/06/ministeri...
> Existem bilhões de adaptadores de energia USB-A já em uso em todo o mundo que nossos clientes podem usar para carregar e conectar seus dispositivos. [1]
> Translation: There are billions of USB-A power adapters already in use around the world that our customers can use to charge and connect their devices
Those "billions of USB-A adapters" however won't work with the cable provided in newer iPhones, which is lightning and USB-C.
[1] https://g1.globo.com/tecnologia/noticia/2022/09/06/ministeri...
Someone should tell him that NOT firing the heads of the environmental agencies [1] of his country could make way more impact than iPhones having USB C
https://news.mongabay.com/2019/06/brazil-guts-environmental-...
https://news.mongabay.com/2019/06/brazil-guts-environmental-...
Well, he is a judge, he can’t tell the president how to do his job. It doesn’t seem a good excuse to interfere in his judgement either way too.
Yeah, that's hard to argue with assuming the fine does not include Apple devices that already use USB-C.
Presumably switching to a different cable would generate a one-off 'landfill event' as people throw out their old cables and buy new ones?
Not saying Apple shouldn't make the move switch (and it's seemed likely for a while that it'll happen next year)
Not saying Apple shouldn't make the move switch (and it's seemed likely for a while that it'll happen next year)
That seems high a really high amount of claimed saved metals. 2.2 billion iPhones have been sold ever globally, that is nearly one pound of metal per phone. I think these chargers weigh around 5oz, and that is not entirely metal.
But here we are only talking about Brazil. Maybe if they project 1000 of years of future sales the figure would make sense? It is also unreasonable to assume every charger is wasted. Some would be used or recycled.
But here we are only talking about Brazil. Maybe if they project 1000 of years of future sales the figure would make sense? It is also unreasonable to assume every charger is wasted. Some would be used or recycled.
Yea I guess clarification here would be good but the final product probably takes more metal to make than what is in it to start with.
I don't buy the judge's argument about USB-C because the cable that comes with the phone has USB-C on the end that goes to a charging block so there aren't really any compatibility issues. Unless of course that judge was suggesting that Apple shouldn't include a power cable as well using a similar argument for not including the charging block being that "there are plenty around".
I don't buy the judge's argument about USB-C because the cable that comes with the phone has USB-C on the end that goes to a charging block so there aren't really any compatibility issues. Unless of course that judge was suggesting that Apple shouldn't include a power cable as well using a similar argument for not including the charging block being that "there are plenty around".
USB-C chargers are not common in Brazil. It has only been more common from last few years only. This lawsuit predates that.
Is it? Most if not all phone chargers have detachable cables these days, so shouldn't Apple only need to bundle (or provide with any purchase) an A->Lightning or C->lightning cable?
And they do exactly that right now (include a C->Lightning cable).
They supply a USB-C->Lightning cable, but nothing into which to plug the USB-C end of things.
19 million dollars sounds like a lot of money to me, but it's minuscule to a company the size of Apple.
861,000 tons of copper, zinc, and tin sounds like a lot of metal to me. Is it minuscule at Apple's manufacturing scale?
861,000 tons of copper, zinc, and tin sounds like a lot of metal to me. Is it minuscule at Apple's manufacturing scale?
For comparison, annual production of copper in Brazil is ~~250,000 tons. So it's Brazil's economic interest that that copper gets mined and used.
> annual production of copper in Brazil is ~~250,000 tons
AKA, very small.
> So it's Brazil's economic interest that that copper gets mined and used.
No country has an interest on making cooper more expensive.
AKA, very small.
> So it's Brazil's economic interest that that copper gets mined and used.
No country has an interest on making cooper more expensive.
This seems like an easy problem to solve for Apple.
Just sell the iPhone for $30 more, and give people the option to not buy a charger with their phone for a $30 discount. Adds up to the same thing, but instead of paying extra for the charger, you get a discount if you don't take it in the name of "saving the environment".
Just sell the iPhone for $30 more, and give people the option to not buy a charger with their phone for a $30 discount. Adds up to the same thing, but instead of paying extra for the charger, you get a discount if you don't take it in the name of "saving the environment".
Yes, that’s part of the intention of the law in fact, so that a company can’t advertise a lower price than the consumer would actually pay.
Or just offer an option between a charging cable/brick, iCloud credit, or store credit for future purchase...
In Brazil, what other companies are doing is this: you buy the phone, you get the charger as a gift. It doesn't need to be in the same package, and sometimes it arrives by mail days after - as long as consumers get the charger, no one complains.
Yeah - I am coming around to the idea that chargers don't need to be included with the phone, but also you should be able to get it with the phone if you happen to need it. It should be an option you can pick whenever you buy the phone.
There are definitely situations now where I really don't need a new charger when I buy a device, so if I can just pick the "no charger" option, I will. But most likely - we won't get the choice. Because it costs more to Apple and other corporations.
I was a bit surprised that my S21 charged super slowly on my OnePlus 30W charger, so I had to buy a Samsung 25W charger. (There are others that work, but they were all roughly the same price as the official one.)
There are definitely situations now where I really don't need a new charger when I buy a device, so if I can just pick the "no charger" option, I will. But most likely - we won't get the choice. Because it costs more to Apple and other corporations.
I was a bit surprised that my S21 charged super slowly on my OnePlus 30W charger, so I had to buy a Samsung 25W charger. (There are others that work, but they were all roughly the same price as the official one.)
This is how it works. This is exactly how it works.
Behold: https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MHJA3AM/A/20w-usb-c-power...
Nineteen bucks, won't catch fire, gives a real 20W.
Now, it might be the case that you feel the price should be zero bucks with purchase of an iPhone.
Apple disagrees. They don't run promotions of that sort, or promotions, in fact. The price is the price, it's core to the brand.
Same with a case, same with headphones. Need a USB-A cable for charging instead of -C? You can buy that as well.
I'd make a snarky comment about expecting everyone else to pay for your free charger when we don't need one, but profit doesn't actually work that way.
Other entities sell iPhones, in fact, I believe that Apple only sells a minority of phones directly. Those merchants are welcome to toss in a charger, if that's the kind of thing the customer likes.
Behold: https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MHJA3AM/A/20w-usb-c-power...
Nineteen bucks, won't catch fire, gives a real 20W.
Now, it might be the case that you feel the price should be zero bucks with purchase of an iPhone.
Apple disagrees. They don't run promotions of that sort, or promotions, in fact. The price is the price, it's core to the brand.
Same with a case, same with headphones. Need a USB-A cable for charging instead of -C? You can buy that as well.
I'd make a snarky comment about expecting everyone else to pay for your free charger when we don't need one, but profit doesn't actually work that way.
Other entities sell iPhones, in fact, I believe that Apple only sells a minority of phones directly. Those merchants are welcome to toss in a charger, if that's the kind of thing the customer likes.
Note that in Brazil it's $40: https://www.apple.com/br/shop/product/MHJG3BZ/A/carregador-u...
And that's in a country where the median income is around $4,000/year. Imagine in America saving up and paying $10,000 for a brand-new phone and they ask you to pay another $400 for the charger.
And that's in a country where the median income is around $4,000/year. Imagine in America saving up and paying $10,000 for a brand-new phone and they ask you to pay another $400 for the charger.
Brazil is free to stop doubling the price of electronic goods with import duties at any time!
We both know that the median salary is irrelevant when considering Brazilian iPhone buyers. No one is spending two and a half years of scratch on just one phone.
A 17 Million (! Dr. Evil flourish!) USD fine, standing next to the doubled price Brazil's government inflicts on its citizens, paints a pretty stark picture here.
There's a problem. It isn't a phone charger problem or an Apple problem, but it's a real one. No pun intended.
A 17 Million (! Dr. Evil flourish!) USD fine, standing next to the doubled price Brazil's government inflicts on its citizens, paints a pretty stark picture here.
There's a problem. It isn't a phone charger problem or an Apple problem, but it's a real one. No pun intended.
> Now, it might be the case that you feel the price should be zero bucks with purchase of an iPhone.
It would be one thing if the form factor matched all the other chargers sold in the world. I have a pile of USB-C and micro USB cords, like most other people.
But if I bought an iPhone, I have no option to use a charger I already own. The extra purchase is absolutely required to make the device work. It's not the same charger as the other Apple devices I've owned. If your last phone wasn't also an iPhone, it's a required purchase.
It feels deceptive. If they were to "include" the charger, but offer a $19 discount if you didn't need it, that's fundamentally different than advertising a price for the device that is unusable to new customers without additional purchases.
> Apple disagrees. They don't run promotions of that sort, or promotions, in fact. The price is the price, it's core to the brand.
If it was core to the brand it wouldn't be news. I was an iPhone user back in the day and they all came with chargers and headphones. The decision to not include these things is not a branding one, but profit-driven and taking advantage of a captive customer base. Lots of iPhone customers are angry about these decisions, but the weight of changing ecosystems keeps them buying.
It would be one thing if the form factor matched all the other chargers sold in the world. I have a pile of USB-C and micro USB cords, like most other people.
But if I bought an iPhone, I have no option to use a charger I already own. The extra purchase is absolutely required to make the device work. It's not the same charger as the other Apple devices I've owned. If your last phone wasn't also an iPhone, it's a required purchase.
It feels deceptive. If they were to "include" the charger, but offer a $19 discount if you didn't need it, that's fundamentally different than advertising a price for the device that is unusable to new customers without additional purchases.
> Apple disagrees. They don't run promotions of that sort, or promotions, in fact. The price is the price, it's core to the brand.
If it was core to the brand it wouldn't be news. I was an iPhone user back in the day and they all came with chargers and headphones. The decision to not include these things is not a branding one, but profit-driven and taking advantage of a captive customer base. Lots of iPhone customers are angry about these decisions, but the weight of changing ecosystems keeps them buying.
> But if I bought an iPhone, I have no option to use a charger I already own. The extra purchase is absolutely required to make the device work. It's not the same charger as the other Apple devices I've owned. If your last phone wasn't also an iPhone, it's a required purchase.
Of course you do. I've not seen a cable-bonded phone charger in over a decade now.
You just need a lightning cable, all chargers will have either an USB-A or USB-C female plug.
Of course you do. I've not seen a cable-bonded phone charger in over a decade now.
You just need a lightning cable, all chargers will have either an USB-A or USB-C female plug.
> But if I bought an iPhone, I have no option to use a charger I already own.
Why? I have multiple chargers around my house, and only one of them is an Apple charger. The rest are Anker USB-C chargers. My phone came with a USB-C to Lightning cable, and it works fine with any of those chargers.
Why? I have multiple chargers around my house, and only one of them is an Apple charger. The rest are Anker USB-C chargers. My phone came with a USB-C to Lightning cable, and it works fine with any of those chargers.
> My phone came with a USB-C to Lightning cable,
That's interesting. I got a USB-C charger when I bought a Pixel phone, but it was the only one I've ever owned and it got lost pretty quick. I remember thinking how annoying it was that it didn't work with any other cables in the house. Every other USB-C device I've bought came with a USB-A charger and USB-A to C cable, including my current phone.
Apple is one of the last holdovers from an age where every phone company had proprietary cables and chargers. The way I see it, they are happy to make user and developer hostile decisions in the name of profit because they know their base is too entrenched to extract themselves. This particular one is annoying, and while probably not _that_ bad when viewed in a vacuum, but there is an undeniable trend.
That's interesting. I got a USB-C charger when I bought a Pixel phone, but it was the only one I've ever owned and it got lost pretty quick. I remember thinking how annoying it was that it didn't work with any other cables in the house. Every other USB-C device I've bought came with a USB-A charger and USB-A to C cable, including my current phone.
Apple is one of the last holdovers from an age where every phone company had proprietary cables and chargers. The way I see it, they are happy to make user and developer hostile decisions in the name of profit because they know their base is too entrenched to extract themselves. This particular one is annoying, and while probably not _that_ bad when viewed in a vacuum, but there is an undeniable trend.
> Every other USB-C device I've bought came with a USB-A charger and USB-A to C cable, including my current phone.
Wow, really? That is an interesting choice. One of the best aspects of USB-C is the increased power ability, which is unavailable if the head end of the cable is just connected to an old USB-A port. I mean, I get that Micro-USB was so awful that everyone abandoned it quickly when USB-C was invented, but why did they half-ass the solution?
I don't buy the argument that Apple is milking users with proprietary cables. They created a solution to Micro-USB when nobody else would, and they've stuck with that choice for 10 years. They have been moving iPads over to USB-C over the past few years, so clearly they will get there with the iPhone too, but you and I both know the bitching about that will be far louder than the complaints now that Lightning is proprietary. An original Lightning cable still works today.
Wow, really? That is an interesting choice. One of the best aspects of USB-C is the increased power ability, which is unavailable if the head end of the cable is just connected to an old USB-A port. I mean, I get that Micro-USB was so awful that everyone abandoned it quickly when USB-C was invented, but why did they half-ass the solution?
I don't buy the argument that Apple is milking users with proprietary cables. They created a solution to Micro-USB when nobody else would, and they've stuck with that choice for 10 years. They have been moving iPads over to USB-C over the past few years, so clearly they will get there with the iPhone too, but you and I both know the bitching about that will be far louder than the complaints now that Lightning is proprietary. An original Lightning cable still works today.
> Wow, really? That is an interesting choice.
It is interesting but very pragmatic for this situation: until somewhat recently most computers and chargers only had USB-A ports.
It is interesting but very pragmatic for this situation: until somewhat recently most computers and chargers only had USB-A ports.
> until somewhat recently most computers and chargers only had USB-A ports
Yes! In fact, the only computer I have without any USB-A ports is my work laptop, which is non-coincidentally, an Apple.
Yes! In fact, the only computer I have without any USB-A ports is my work laptop, which is non-coincidentally, an Apple.
I'm old enough to remember the first wave of outrage when Apple dropped the serial port (and floppy disk!) and started using this weird USB thing that only their devices supported.
What goes around comes around. Don't worry, in a few years you literally won't remember that you thought of USB-C as an "Apple thing". Or at least you won't mention it.
What goes around comes around. Don't worry, in a few years you literally won't remember that you thought of USB-C as an "Apple thing". Or at least you won't mention it.
Well I literally wouldn't pay money for an apple product these days, so maybe. Lol
Apple charge cables used the industry-standard USB-A for many years until they switched recently to the industry-standard USB-C. They have never required a proprietary charger block, not in the 15 years iPhone has existed.
They have always required a proprietary cable, which has always been supplied with the phone.
They have always required a proprietary cable, which has always been supplied with the phone.
I'm not from Brazil, but we have similar situation here with apple products where they're sold with extreme premium. The official first party lightning charging cable alone is $50. The store clerk literally told me to buy some 3rd party cables instead. And this is from a store chains authorized by apple (honoring warranty, official repair service, etc), not just some unauthorized reseller store.
> They don't run promotions of that sort, or promotions, in fact
FWIW, every year Apple does run back-to-school promotions where they'll give you airpods or something like that with a new mac.
FWIW, every year Apple does run back-to-school promotions where they'll give you airpods or something like that with a new mac.
I had a nagging feeling that there was an exception slipping my mind, thanks.
The freebie to get students hooked on a lifetime of product fits the model, they also offer (at least, used to) student discounts on services, like classes for the Apple Stores which have that. Or did? I have no idea if that's started up post-covid or not.
If they were going to give away a free charger, they may as well put it back in the box. They're good chargers, the number of people who would turn it down at checkout is a rounding error.
The freebie to get students hooked on a lifetime of product fits the model, they also offer (at least, used to) student discounts on services, like classes for the Apple Stores which have that. Or did? I have no idea if that's started up post-covid or not.
If they were going to give away a free charger, they may as well put it back in the box. They're good chargers, the number of people who would turn it down at checkout is a rounding error.
They also have/had "don't call it Black Friday Sale" Special Shopping Event that was just a flat out discount on everything by like a token $100 or something.
>> It should be an option you can pick whenever you buy the phone.
>> we won't get the choice. Because it costs more to Apple and other corporations.
> Nineteen bucks
I have a feeling that GP meant that the option of charger vs not should be free (otherwise it would not "cost more" to the seller).
Assuming I understood correctly, in that case the consequence would be that many would just pick the "with charger" option just because it's a freebie.
>> we won't get the choice. Because it costs more to Apple and other corporations.
> Nineteen bucks
I have a feeling that GP meant that the option of charger vs not should be free (otherwise it would not "cost more" to the seller).
Assuming I understood correctly, in that case the consequence would be that many would just pick the "with charger" option just because it's a freebie.
> Apple disagrees. They don't run promotions of that sort, or promotions, in fact. The price is the price, it's core to the brand.
That's not entirely true. I got my M1 in a promotion, with a discount. I also got my Watch "bundled" with the bracelet (the packages were literally bundled together), also with a nice discount. That was at a flagship Apple Store.
Also "the price" is not "core to the brand" in Brazil. It changes very frequently and is not a direct conversion of the American price.
That's not entirely true. I got my M1 in a promotion, with a discount. I also got my Watch "bundled" with the bracelet (the packages were literally bundled together), also with a nice discount. That was at a flagship Apple Store.
Also "the price" is not "core to the brand" in Brazil. It changes very frequently and is not a direct conversion of the American price.
Sounds like the dongle-hell of the Scully days.
I cannot possibly understand what you think you're saying here.
There are three ways to charge an iPhone, two wireless and one port, all of them run off USB, A or C, take your pick. The only wrinkle is that there are USB-C ports out there which don't speak the standard, something which Apple can't control.
Where's the dongle? Where's the hell?
There are three ways to charge an iPhone, two wireless and one port, all of them run off USB, A or C, take your pick. The only wrinkle is that there are USB-C ports out there which don't speak the standard, something which Apple can't control.
Where's the dongle? Where's the hell?
> dongle-hell
How so? You are precisely able to pick the charger with the port you want according to the cables you have (or want to buy), instead of having a charger with a port you don't choose (+ the cable matching the port you then don't want to have on the brick side).
How so? You are precisely able to pick the charger with the port you want according to the cables you have (or want to buy), instead of having a charger with a port you don't choose (+ the cable matching the port you then don't want to have on the brick side).
I agree. I personally have too many chargers around the house and would happily pass on another.
What the? Totally backwards.
Surely any lawsuit should be that you were compelled to pay a higher price because a charger was bundled with the phone, when you only wanted the phone - maybe because you already have a charger, or wanted to use a third-party one.
Surely any lawsuit should be that you were compelled to pay a higher price because a charger was bundled with the phone, when you only wanted the phone - maybe because you already have a charger, or wanted to use a third-party one.
So, raise the price by $20 and include a "free" charger with every order.
So they will shoot in their own foot.
There's already an Apple extra margin here over the US retail price.
A USD 1000 Dell notebook here is about BRL ~9000 with all taxes. A USD 1000 Apple MacBook is BRL ~20000.
So there's something they charge extra above the well known govt taxes.
That's why no one will say sorry to Apple.
There's already an Apple extra margin here over the US retail price.
A USD 1000 Dell notebook here is about BRL ~9000 with all taxes. A USD 1000 Apple MacBook is BRL ~20000.
So there's something they charge extra above the well known govt taxes.
That's why no one will say sorry to Apple.
It would've been helpful to tell everyone 9000 BRL is about 1705 USD, since they probably don't know the conversion rate off the top of their heads...
and 20000 BRL is 3788.84 USD.
and 20000 BRL is 3788.84 USD.
My rough math tells me they made $19,162,000 per hour in profit during 2021.
In fact, the fine would need to be way higher in order to perform any serious "educational" effect over Apple.
However, in Brazil this sort of fine has upper limits established by the consumers protection law -- the fine must be based on losses caused to customers; it can't be proportional to revenue or profits.
However, in Brazil this sort of fine has upper limits established by the consumers protection law -- the fine must be based on losses caused to customers; it can't be proportional to revenue or profits.
If that’s the case then it’s exactly the right amount, any money apple saves by not including the charger is lost. If that money actually makes it into the hands of the iPhone buyers is another story.
Why are tech products so expensive in Brazil? Are they taxed heavily?
Weak currency plus up to 78% importing tax on some types of products. When I worked at <big hardware company> in Brazil, our math was to multiply the user price in USD by 3.7x to establish the price in BRL.
iPhone: $800 iPhone in Brazil: $3000
Now with the currency in the toilet and companies "manufacturing" in Brazil (basically just assembling ready-made kits shipped from China) the multiplier is no longer valid, but still, an iPhone 14 basic model is $1461.
For purchase parity calculations: $1461 is about 7 minimum wages in BRL. If that held for the US, an iPhone here would cost some $7500.
Harsh.
When the currency was strong, it was even worse. When I moved back to BR in 2011, BRLUSD was something like 0.9 (strong BRL), and a VW Jetta cost around USD 45000.
Harsh.
iPhone: $800 iPhone in Brazil: $3000
Now with the currency in the toilet and companies "manufacturing" in Brazil (basically just assembling ready-made kits shipped from China) the multiplier is no longer valid, but still, an iPhone 14 basic model is $1461.
For purchase parity calculations: $1461 is about 7 minimum wages in BRL. If that held for the US, an iPhone here would cost some $7500.
Harsh.
When the currency was strong, it was even worse. When I moved back to BR in 2011, BRLUSD was something like 0.9 (strong BRL), and a VW Jetta cost around USD 45000.
Harsh.
There's a number of factors, but I'd say the most important ones are:
1. taxes, although it varies. Imported consumer electronics are taxed more heavily. However, there are regions with fiscal incentives for companies to install their factories here. Products manufactured in such regions are not as nearly expensive;
2. an excess of credit offered by banks. This created an extremely pernicious cultural habit: people don't evaluate the product's price, but the loan's installment size -- regardless of how expensive is the product, the interest paid to the bank, the number of installments etc.
3. there's a fetish for fancy and expensive stuff, they bring social status, and people are idiot enough to accept the prices -- and, with the aforementioned excess of credit, no lack of money can prevent them from shooting their own heads.
These are essentially the same reasons why cars are also so expensive here. Manufacturers say it's because taxes, and ~ 100% of customers buy this bullshit, but this has already been proved wrong a number of times. For any brazilians doubting it, I invite you guys to:
1. look up any article comparing prices of Brazilian-manufactured cars sold locally vs their prices when exported to Mexico. The difference on taxes don't explain the end prices, and the manufacturers and ANFAVEA never provided an explanation for that
2. a statement from Toyota's CEO when visiting Brazil, probably unaware of local idiosyncrasies and the fib told by manufacturers, including themselves: "why should we charge less for our cars if they are paying?"; and then he tried to fix it with a "the prices we charge in Brazil are the fair ones, it's the rest of the world that forces us to charge too little."
3. Nintendo closing its factory due to "an excess of taxes and bureaucracy" while Sony and Microsoft local factories were doing pretty well in the very same market
4. The small credit crisis from 2011 that made car prices to drop extremely sharply within 1 month or so
1. taxes, although it varies. Imported consumer electronics are taxed more heavily. However, there are regions with fiscal incentives for companies to install their factories here. Products manufactured in such regions are not as nearly expensive;
2. an excess of credit offered by banks. This created an extremely pernicious cultural habit: people don't evaluate the product's price, but the loan's installment size -- regardless of how expensive is the product, the interest paid to the bank, the number of installments etc.
3. there's a fetish for fancy and expensive stuff, they bring social status, and people are idiot enough to accept the prices -- and, with the aforementioned excess of credit, no lack of money can prevent them from shooting their own heads.
These are essentially the same reasons why cars are also so expensive here. Manufacturers say it's because taxes, and ~ 100% of customers buy this bullshit, but this has already been proved wrong a number of times. For any brazilians doubting it, I invite you guys to:
1. look up any article comparing prices of Brazilian-manufactured cars sold locally vs their prices when exported to Mexico. The difference on taxes don't explain the end prices, and the manufacturers and ANFAVEA never provided an explanation for that
2. a statement from Toyota's CEO when visiting Brazil, probably unaware of local idiosyncrasies and the fib told by manufacturers, including themselves: "why should we charge less for our cars if they are paying?"; and then he tried to fix it with a "the prices we charge in Brazil are the fair ones, it's the rest of the world that forces us to charge too little."
3. Nintendo closing its factory due to "an excess of taxes and bureaucracy" while Sony and Microsoft local factories were doing pretty well in the very same market
4. The small credit crisis from 2011 that made car prices to drop extremely sharply within 1 month or so
Ah, and I forgot to mention:
In 2011, when JAC Motors started to sell cars for cheaper, you saw what happened: government raised taxes over imported cars (maybe a result of a lobby from the other manufacturers?)
That's what happens when 1 manufacturer decides to sell cars for a fair price here.
In 2011, when JAC Motors started to sell cars for cheaper, you saw what happened: government raised taxes over imported cars (maybe a result of a lobby from the other manufacturers?)
That's what happens when 1 manufacturer decides to sell cars for a fair price here.
Yes, in theory around 40% -> 50%, with it fluctuating over time.
However in practice imported electronics tend to cost up to about 100% then their original price abroad for several reasons, usually but not exclusively related to difficulties in 3rd world countries e.g. bribes necessary to get the shipment, insurance over shipment theft, margin risk due to volatile forex, etc
For example, atm an iPhone 14 costs 800 USD in the US Apple Store and 7600 Brazilian Reais in the Brazilian one. With the current exchange rate at ~5.20, that's around 80% more. Not that bad actually, that ratio has been worse in the past.
However in practice imported electronics tend to cost up to about 100% then their original price abroad for several reasons, usually but not exclusively related to difficulties in 3rd world countries e.g. bribes necessary to get the shipment, insurance over shipment theft, margin risk due to volatile forex, etc
For example, atm an iPhone 14 costs 800 USD in the US Apple Store and 7600 Brazilian Reais in the Brazilian one. With the current exchange rate at ~5.20, that's around 80% more. Not that bad actually, that ratio has been worse in the past.
> e.g. bribes necessary to get the shipment, insurance over shipment theft, margin risk due to volatile forex, etc
Sorry but this is one of the many plain lies companies tell in order to justify their overpriced products.
Sorry but this is one of the many plain lies companies tell in order to justify their overpriced products.
It’s not just tech, that’s just the most obvious to us here. Anything that’s good quality that needs to be imported is usually almost twice the price there. I saw this especially with climbing equipment
[deleted]
Oh no, 19 million dollars, whatever will they do...
They could very easily just ignore this as a cost of doing business.
They could very easily just ignore this as a cost of doing business.
I wouldn't fool around. Judges don't take repeat offenders lightly.
They both know it's a symbolic amount for now.
They both know it's a symbolic amount for now.
It's not really symbolic. It's reparative instead of punitive.
Repeated offenders get punitive fines added to the mix.
Repeated offenders get punitive fines added to the mix.
I guess Apple just needs to put a sticker saying this is replacement phone or no charger on the front of the packaging coz this is clearly the case of an idiotic local regulator not of customers being idiots
I fail to see how writing "we still don't ship chargers" on the front will convince the same judges that just fined Apple.
It didn't work in Europe. What makes you think it will work elsewhere?
It didn't work in Europe. What makes you think it will work elsewhere?
Many people think this is Apple now having to give a charger with a new iPhone, when in fact now the customer has to buy a charger when purchasing an iPhone.
I would like to get a fuel pump with my next car purchase.
Most people already have chargers. They generally have a long lifespan. Why couple them with products that have a shorter lifespan?
Most tech people have chargers. Most everyone here is probably drowning in them. Not getting a new piece of garbage with every device seems like a feature to us.
But we aren't "most people". Surely there's a middle ground here.
And I have to say it, but one piece of the solution needs to be "Apple stops selling junk with proprietary connectors". The space of people who have an extra USB-C charger is MUCH larger than folks who have an extra lightning brick. I've stopped carrying extra bricks around when travelling with the family because the laptop charger does quadruple duty on all the devices.
But we aren't "most people". Surely there's a middle ground here.
And I have to say it, but one piece of the solution needs to be "Apple stops selling junk with proprietary connectors". The space of people who have an extra USB-C charger is MUCH larger than folks who have an extra lightning brick. I've stopped carrying extra bricks around when travelling with the family because the laptop charger does quadruple duty on all the devices.
>> Apple stops selling junk with proprietary connectors
I totally agree. Lightning was needed before USB-C existed but now it needs to go.
>> who have an extra lightning brick
I've actually never seen a lightning charging brick. Every Apple charger that I have is USB (C or the original/basic A type). Perhaps this is different in other countries.
I totally agree. Lightning was needed before USB-C existed but now it needs to go.
>> who have an extra lightning brick
I've actually never seen a lightning charging brick. Every Apple charger that I have is USB (C or the original/basic A type). Perhaps this is different in other countries.
There's no such thing as a 'lightning brick'. Apple used to include a usb-a to lightning cable with their phones (and sometimes a usb-a power brick). All iPhones sold from Apple today come with a usb-c to lightning cable, thus already satisfying the use case you present.
Apple phones come with USB-C to lightning cables. There are no lightning bricks that I'm aware of. I sometimes charge my iPhone on my Anker laptop charger with the cable that came with the phone.
As if a Brazilian court cares about consumer protection. I wouldn't be surprised if the courts are _happy_ Apple are still not shipping iPhones with the charger, now they don't have to invent another reason to fine Apple to "protect consumers". €19M is peanuts for Apple, this is obviously not going to change their behaviour.
That fine is sure going to line a few bureaucrats' pockets though!
That fine is sure going to line a few bureaucrats' pockets though!
My belief is this is an issue because iphones have a unique type of charging port. Maybe if they were USBc then nobody would have cared, or they would have been encouraged not to bundle it in, as most people probaby already have a USBc cable and charger. Looking forward to when the EU will force them to switch.
The cable is included.
Is it iphone specific at both ends? Or is it USBc to iphone?
If the latter then I really don't see why it would be a problem.
If the latter then I really don't see why it would be a problem.
For power user, probably not a problem. I have a bunch of charger and even USB C-to-A cable I got from various devices that I never use, since I have my own set of chargers and cables I prefer.
But most users don't. They use the included charger. They need the included charger. I frequently see people asking if it's okay to use other adapters and cable with their devices. They don't know and whether it's compatible and they don't want to risk their device.
But most users don't. They use the included charger. They need the included charger. I frequently see people asking if it's okay to use other adapters and cable with their devices. They don't know and whether it's compatible and they don't want to risk their device.
Ok so then the issue becomes: has Apple properly informed buyers they will receive a device without a charger, and they need to purchased one in the same basket if they want to have both at the same time delivered?
If not then the fine is justified. Otherwise I'm on Apple's side on this one.
And when all devices will have USBc cables and chargers I will be on the side of not bundling a charger with the product at all. It will just create waste.
If not then the fine is justified. Otherwise I'm on Apple's side on this one.
And when all devices will have USBc cables and chargers I will be on the side of not bundling a charger with the product at all. It will just create waste.
Maybe its in some fine print or on official product pages. But for at least 95% of the users it was still a nasty surprise when they couldn't find charger (this is true across spectrum, ie Samsung is currently doing the same). Those folks are simply not following all the news and releases. The expectation and reality for 2 decades was that all necessary to charge is in the phone package.
So they effectively hiked the prices of their phones by quality charger. The thing is, outside of US most people don't change phones every 1/2 years. Heck, most of my 90 colleagues who are IT geeks have 5+year old android/apple phones, mostly androids. So folks generally don't have good fast chargers for modern phones, or USB-C output on chargers at all.
I've grown fed up with this and bought a Anker 65W one, I can plug 3 devices at the same time, both classic USB and USBC, its tiny, doesn't heat up even under 65W. Manufacturers, including Apple and most Androids failed in this (although I grok the marketing aspect and overall possibly net income gain for them).
So they effectively hiked the prices of their phones by quality charger. The thing is, outside of US most people don't change phones every 1/2 years. Heck, most of my 90 colleagues who are IT geeks have 5+year old android/apple phones, mostly androids. So folks generally don't have good fast chargers for modern phones, or USB-C output on chargers at all.
I've grown fed up with this and bought a Anker 65W one, I can plug 3 devices at the same time, both classic USB and USBC, its tiny, doesn't heat up even under 65W. Manufacturers, including Apple and most Androids failed in this (although I grok the marketing aspect and overall possibly net income gain for them).
> Maybe its in some fine print or on official product pages
It's literally on the "what's in the package" page when you buy the phone. Do people here comment without even knowing what they're talking about?
It's literally on the "what's in the package" page when you buy the phone. Do people here comment without even knowing what they're talking about?
Right now when you buy a car you expect it to have wheels. This may change in the future when Apple starts selling cars and you'd need to check if it includes wheels or not. But it's not hard to imagine that people will continue to expect wheels in a new car for some time.
If you buy a car where the salesman literally says "Does not come with wheels" and expect it to have wheels, that's on you.
USB c isn't some universal charging standard. It's just a cable. Different chargers and protocols won't charge certain devices. USB power delivery helps with that but still isn't foolproof.
My car charger with USB pd can charge my Pixel phone for example but not my partner's Samsung. My bike light uses USB c but not power delivery and nothing except its own charger can seem to charge it. My headlight uses USB c and can be charged by everything I've tried.
It all depends on the implementation. USB c is a horrible anti standard in that regard... The cable fit doesn't tell you whether it's compatible at all.
My car charger with USB pd can charge my Pixel phone for example but not my partner's Samsung. My bike light uses USB c but not power delivery and nothing except its own charger can seem to charge it. My headlight uses USB c and can be charged by everything I've tried.
It all depends on the implementation. USB c is a horrible anti standard in that regard... The cable fit doesn't tell you whether it's compatible at all.
What would "iPhone specific at both ends" even mean?
The original iPhone charged from a cable with USB-A on the business end.
This was actually a big deal! Most phones were sold with a custom charger, sometimes a really weird one with thin wires, and God help you when it breaks: even the next version of that same phone probably doesn't use the same connector.
No iPhone has ever been sold with the not-iPhone end being anything other than standard USB, ever.
The original iPhone charged from a cable with USB-A on the business end.
This was actually a big deal! Most phones were sold with a custom charger, sometimes a really weird one with thin wires, and God help you when it breaks: even the next version of that same phone probably doesn't use the same connector.
No iPhone has ever been sold with the not-iPhone end being anything other than standard USB, ever.
USB-C to Lightning.
What would you do with a cable that's Lightning on both ends? Connect 2 iPhones? :D
What would you do with a cable that's Lightning on both ends? Connect 2 iPhones? :D
C to iPhone. Problem is, at least in my house (family of 4 with multiple iDevices each), they stopped including the brick before most people had C bricks. I have over 10 usb-a bricks just lying around and just 1 c brick from an old Android phone (which got lost by the teenager). The USB A bricks are ewaste now. I don’t agree with these law suits but it was very stupid timing on Apple’s part.
We've been doing iPhones & iPads in our family for a number of years now, so we have lots of USB-A bricks, but we also have a number of USB-A to Lightning cables. They don't charge as fast as the USB-C version, but it's still fine, and we're not throwing away the USB-A bricks just yet. Through attrition they will eventually all be replaced.
It's USB to lightning. When they stopped including the charger in the box they changed the USB end of the bundled cable from USB A to USB C at the same time, which I cynically think was to increase the chance you'd need to buy a new charger anyway.
It is USB-C to lightning (aka iphone). Before that, it was USB-A to lightning. Haven't seen a charging brick with a lightning port (or a double-ended lighnting cable, for that matter) ever in my life. I don't think they even exist tbh.
Mine came with a USBc to iPhone (lightning) cable.
The latter, so, yeah, this is a non-issue.
I'm sure Apple cares deeply about nineteen million dollars
Are they fining Tesla as well?
The fine seems a little crazy to me but maybe that is how you motivate a large company.
It is silly that you can buy a device and not be given a way to charge it in the box. And Apple seemingly randomly changes charging ports regularly. In a normal world customer outcry would have forced this issue.
But it is Apple and they care not a whit for their customers.
It is silly that you can buy a device and not be given a way to charge it in the box. And Apple seemingly randomly changes charging ports regularly. In a normal world customer outcry would have forced this issue.
But it is Apple and they care not a whit for their customers.
> And Apple seemingly randomly changes charging ports regularly.
They what now?
Lightning has been a thing for quite a while.
They what now?
Lightning has been a thing for quite a while.
Right. There have been exactly two ports in the history of iPhone.
In fact, for longer than USB-C.
I have noticed that those who complain about apple the loudest haven't ever owned or even used anything made by apple.
1. The lawsuit started when Apple dropped the chargers coming with the phone, but had just changed the cable connection, so you would need a new charger anyway.
2. Apple chargers often have ludicrous prices in Brazil.
3. Apple products in Brazil are in general expensive, people do not replace their iPhones every generation, it wouldn't be a stretch to guess that almost all iPhone purchases are first time purchases, or people replacing really old phones, thus as a rule, they don't have the appropriate charger.
4. If Apple doesn't give the charger, or sell it really cheap, Brazillians WILL use chinese knockoffs that set themselves on fire, it is just the reality in the country where all tech is crazy expensive.