Welcome to our weekly summary of all the Apple news you may have missed this week, stuck in the pieces. We call it Apple Breakfast because we think it goes well with a cup of coffee or tea in the morning, but it is also good if you read around for lunch or dinner. This week, a reminder from Brazil of the controversial Apple global crisis – or, at the very least, a slight reversal in 2020.
That was the year when Apple decided, referring to the environmental impact, to pair the chargers with newer iPhones. You will also get the USB cable, but the wall charger will not be available, resulting in slimmer packaging and lower production and delivery costs for the company. (But it’s not a low-cost mark, note — unless we start to notice that the price will have gone up if we hadn’t removed the charger, which is as far as I know even Apple didn’t try to ask. ) The idea is. that a lot of people have chargers at home, and a lot of packaged chargers are ending up in the dumpster.
It is fair to say that this argument was not well received worldwide at the time, but in many parts of the world it was finally accepted as one of those things; predicting a number of Android manufacturers took the opportunity to do exactly the same thing and cut their own costs while as usual letting Apple take the PR flak. But the Brazilian government was unwilling to let the matter go, claiming the practice was illegal and paid the company $ 2m in March 2021. And this week (as reported by Insider) the company has been authorized to pay a specific Brazilian customer on a regular basis. of $ 1,081 for selling your iPhone without a charger. Apple may see that money by cutting back on Craig Federighi’s hair budget, but will be careful about the size of the bill if it starts having to do the same thing for everyone.
I am not an expert on Brazilian law, but legal arguments as reported seem more difficult. The judge ruled in favor of the “sale of the tie,” in which Insider shone as a customer had to buy two of the company’s products so that one of them could work – however, as Apple itself points out, the iPhone and the cable sold will have. works well with compatible plugs provided by any number of third-party manufacturers. Doubtless lawyers are on every kind of detail.
The long-term consequences of the judgment are uncertain. Would it be the first of its kind in such cases? Will Apple be forced to make changes in what it sells? Or will the company, as usual, end up doing much of what it likes? I know what to expect.
In any case, it is a fascinating reminder of the much-forgotten controversy in the US and UK. Whether you approach the issue from the perspective of environmental concern or personal choice, it is always wise for Apple to unlock the phone and the charger (and headphones, for that matter). If you already have a charger, as many iPhone buyers do, why should the extra costs and material costs of one another be a factor in the deal? The issue is one of presentation. The notion is that Apple is taking something away, when it should have been presented as it does not require you to pay for something you do not need. A discount coupon for a charger from your store or a small discount to show low prices would have helped. But that would be a disappointment, and until recently they were something Apple did not do.