EU rules on common chargers apply to laptops from today. It means that all new laptops sold in the European Union must now support USB-C charging.
In December 2024, the rules came into force for mobile phones, tablets, digital cameras, headphones, videogame consoles, and portable speakers.
Laptop manufacturers were given a longer lead in time to allow for redesign and transition to the common charging system.
You must log in or register to comment.
- Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish21 minutes
The source of law here is Directive 2022/2380 (which amends Directive 2014/53), in Article 2 a grace period until 2026-04-28 is defined for the category of laptops. This has now expired, which explains the renewed wave of articles being published.
The directive itself is not that interesting to read, as a lot of it is just empowering the Commission to make a decision on the specifics. The result is in the Commission Delegated Regulation 2023/1717. Although it seems to me like something is missing. I can’t find more though.
A very interesting Q&A from their Commission Notice – Guidance document:
- Are laptops and other radio equipment that require more than 240 W of charging power exempted from the ‘common charger’ rules?
No. They are not exempted. Radio equipment which is subject to the ‘common charger’ rules must incorporate the harmonised charging solution.
The Commission has updated (in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/1717), the references to the standards cited in Annex Ia to the latest version of the European standards. Therefore, due to the amendments introduced by this delegated regulation, radio equipment subject to the ‘common charger’ rules must incorporate the harmonised charging solution up to their maximum charging power or up to 240W if their maximum charging power is above 240W (as opposed to 100W in the previous versions of the standards concerned).
The Commission will continue to update the technical specifications set out in Annex Ia, in order to reflect scientific and technological progress or market developments provided that such developments meet the objectives of the common charging solution.
But then also
- Are proprietary charging receptacles allowed in addition to a USB-C receptacle?
Yes. The RED only requires radio equipment subject to the ‘common charger’ rules to be equipped with the USB-C receptacle. The use of other receptacles is therefore not prohibited as long as the covered radio equipment is also equipped with a harmonised charging (USB-C) receptacle.
That means those hefty laptops going up to 350 W or whatever, now need to accept 240 W over USB PD, but they may still include additional proprietary charging solutions that are rated higher.
Also I don’t think the 100 W limit that some outlets report is actually in force since 2023/1717 has replaced the references to ‘EN IEC 62680-1-3:2021’ by those to ‘EN IEC 62680-1-3:2022’
Reading on, yes they make that explicit further down:
- Is a radio equipment allowed to charge above 240 W when using an additional charging protocol?
Yes. If the radio equipment proprietary charging solution requires more than 240 W (e.g. 300 W), the concerned radio equipment must also support USB PD up to 240W.
The Commission has updated, via Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/1717, the references to the standards cited in Annex Ia to the latest version of the European standards. The updated version of the standards will apply as of the date of applicability of the relevant rules introduced to the RED by the Common Charger Directive, i.e. for handheld mobile phones, tablets, digital cameras, headphones, headsets, handheld videogame consoles, portable speakers, e-readers, keyboards, mice, portable navigation systems and earbuds, as of 28 December 2024 and, for laptops, as of 28 April 2026. This means that as from those dates a radio equipment, if it listed in Annex Ia and is capable to be recharged by means of wired charging at power above 240 W, must incorporate the harmonised charging solution up to 240 W.
The Commission will continue to update the technical specifications set out in Annex Ia, in order to reflect scientific and technological progress or market developments provided that they meet the objectives of the common charging solution.
- parson0@startrek.websiteEnglish3 hours
I just love the EU. Not perfect of course, but this kind of stuff is great.
- themurphy@lemmy.mlEnglish3 hours
Nothing is perfect, but the EU is by far the best government entity for consumers right now.
2 hoursthe best
Low bar though. I’ll not forget Chat Control. Dieselgate, Qatargate, or Ursula’s unelectedness.
- lepinkainen@lemmy.worldEnglish17 minutes
“Unelected Ursula” is directly from the Russian disinformation playbook btw.
- themurphy@lemmy.mlEnglish2 hours
Chat Control was still a proposal made by a few politicians in a big continent. Never a EU made innitiative of any kind, and never voted through.
And I think you should read about the democratic system in the EU, if you want to challenge how she was elected.
She’s elected how most of European countries elect their presidents. You vote for parties, and then after; one among them will be president. Typically the head figure from the biggest party.
We should be very glad it’s not an election like in the US. Awful way of giving “power” to the people, by putting a single person in charge by popular vote.
The way Ursula obtained that re-election was not pretty. Perhaps not as unsightly as Trump’s second rise to power, but still not a resounding show of democracy.
Referring to member states that don’t have their shit in order is as weak as the low bar set by OP.
- themurphy@lemmy.mlEnglish43 minutes
If you want democracy, you have to expect and accept disagreement. Even if it’s as shitty and fucked up as chat control.
Which the majority doesnt want.
- RisingSwell@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish3 hours
Glad you did, because I was gonna make a comment about how high end gaming laptops are now illegal in the EU.
Not sure there’s a 330w USB C going around I could use.
- cecilkorik@piefed.caEnglish3 minutes
Even if they had left out that condition, I’m sure there would be ways around it for gaming laptops and they wouldn’t necessarily even have to be stupid ways: I could imagine a stupid way of complying being a charging cable with USB-C for the first 100W and proprietary port for the other 200W+.
Just because a law might say that it’s got to be technically able to charge from USB-C probably doesn’t imply that has to be the only charging port and method, nor even the normal/recommended one. Even on a 200W+ gaming laptop it would be nice sometimes to be able to charge it from USB-C, without pulling out the full charger. If mine supported USB-C charging I could see using it like that when I travel, I might only be using it for half an hour or an hour a day, the 100W would significantly extend the battery runtime, the rest of the time it could be sleeping or off and charging happily back to full from USB-C, so I wouldn’t even need to bring the (literal) charging brick.
- Zedstrian@sopuli.xyzEnglish12 minutes
The limit should really be 240W, because that’s what the USB-C PD 3.1 spec goes up to.
Edit: Per reply, the regulation is designed with 240W accounted for, and updatable in case of further improvements to the standard.
- Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish35 minutes
It is 240 W actually. Seems Techpowerup was wrong. See my first comment: https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/59511400/25528592
- themurphy@lemmy.mlEnglish3 hours
When you make minimum requirements, you dont go for max. All laptops shouldnt be able to take 240W.
- Zedstrian@sopuli.xyzEnglish2 hours
Laptops can be rated for whichever power level the manufacturer prefers; USB-C PD is used between the power supply and device to negotiate the maximum power level allowed for by both, so a consumer that purchases a 100W or 240W cable and power supply could still use them with a lower-rated device.
A 60W USB-C laptop can therefore stay at 60W without issue, but if a 240W laptop is produced, it should also be made to use USB-C under such a regulation.
- themurphy@lemmy.mlEnglish27 minutes
Fair point. But it will still be overkill to require 240W for a device that will never take it.
I know it will regulate output. But requirements should make sense.
- Alcoholicorn@mander.xyzEnglish3 hours
Gaming laptops can continue to use the typical barrel power connector on models that exceed 100 W of power
- RisingSwell@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish2 hours
The limit is apparently 100w, so they would need 4 charging ports. But also, who is gonna want to plug in their laptop to the wall twice, even if it’s 2x240w?
- ViatorOmnium@piefed.socialEnglish1 hour
USB-C can take 240W. The law just says all laptops under 100W need to use USB-C, not that others are not allowed.
- Alex@lemmy.mlEnglish3 hours
How big a niche is that - because when I think high end gaming a laptop has all sorts of trade offs to make anyway.
- cynar@lemmy.worldEnglish28 minutes
Luggables are quite common for gamers who travel a lot. I can’t take a tower into hotels easily, but most of my free gaming time is on the road. I know quite a few people with portable gaming systems.
My current laptop is rocking a 4080, with a water cooling loop. It has to fall back to internal graphics when on battery. The batteries just can’t provide the current required.
- RisingSwell@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish3 hours
They sell more than you’d expect, tons of companies do them.
The trade offs are high price and low battery, comparitavely.
On the plus side, I have a easily movable PC that will run new games at ultra settings and it takes about 20s to fully pack up.
- 2 hours
Oh no the innovation will suffer! How are the laptop makers going to screw the consumers now?
