iPhone 17 Air Tipped To Be First Apple Phone Without USB-C
Listen to article
Apple is reportedly poised to take a bold step into a wireless future, with the upcoming iPhone 17 Air expected to ditch the USB-C port entirely, ending cable charging for good.
The move would make the iPhone 17 Air Apple's first fully portless smartphone, relying entirely on Qi2-certified MagSafe wireless charging and cloud-based data syncing.
According to various media reports that cite industry insiders, Apple sees this as the beginning of a broader transition to cable-free mobile devices.
Read more: Leaked images suggest iPhone 17 features, specs ahead of launch
While previous reports suggested Apple had delayed the shift due to concerns about European Union regulations, the European Commission has now clarified that such a portless phone is fully legal under current law.
'If a phone does not offer wired charging, then it is not required to have a USB-C port,' said Commission spokesperson Federica Miccoli. The clarification clears a key regulatory hurdle, paving the way for Apple to lead a new generation of wireless-only devices.
Apple was previously required to switch from its proprietary Lightning port to USB-C to comply with the EU's Common Charger Directive. In the past, the European Union mandated the adoption of USB-C ports for all mobile devices to reduce electronic waste and streamline the consumer experience. But the law applies only when a physical charging port is present.
Read: Apple iPhone 17 Air: What we know so far
By removing the USB-C connector entirely, Apple effectively opts out of the mandate, provided the wireless charging experience is as seamless and efficient as a traditional cabled connection.
Apple's Qi2-compliant MagSafe technology, now standardised and adopted by other manufacturers, appears to satisfy those expectations. The company has already removed SIM card slots in some models and is expected to eliminate more physical components to further reduce thickness and improve design.
Also read: Leaked designs for Apple's foldable iPhone 17: What to expect and how much will It cost?
The iPhone 17 Air is expected to be the slimmest iPhone ever made and will debut in September. Analysts say it could set the tone for future iPhones – and the broader smartphone industry – by initiating the complete phasing out of physical charging ports.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
Tesla's $380b wipeout marks biggest 2025 loss
Listen to article Tesla is the worst-performing large-cap stock this year, thanks to declining electric vehicle demand, Chief Executive Elon Musk's political controversies over his ties to far-right groups, and now, his public feud with President Donald Trump. Tesla shares slumped on Thursday, after Trump on social media threatened to cut off government contracts with Elon Musk's companies, following Musk's sharp criticism of the president's signature tax and spending bill on his X social media platform. The market capitalisation of Tesla Inc has fallen 29.3% to $917 billion so far this year, the biggest drop among big companies in the world. Tesla, which ranked eighth globally in market capitalisation at the beginning of the year, slipped to tenth as of June 5. The company's shares rose in early trading on Friday, as investors took some comfort from White House aides scheduling a call with Musk to broker peace after a public feud with Trump. Apple, which began the year as the world's most valuable company, has slipped to No 3 this year, dragged down by weak demand in China, Trump's tariff threats, and slower progress in AI. Its market capitalisation has declined over 20% this year, falling to $2.99 trillion as of Thursday. Meanwhile, Microsoft has claimed the No 1 spot in market capitalisation, driven by surging demand for AI services, including its partnership with OpenAI and the integration of tools like Microsoft 365 Copilot. Tesla shares clawed back from steep losses on Friday, as a war of words between CEO Elon Musk and US President Donald Trump appeared to cool amid report that White House aides were scheduling a call to help broker peace. Shares were up 5% in premarket trading after Musk signalled on X he was open to easing tensions with Trump, agreeing with comments from hedge fund manager Bill Ackman calling for a detente. The spat between the world's most powerful man and its richest erased more than $150 billion from Tesla's market value on Thursday, the company's biggest drop in one session. Short-sellers, or investors betting against the stock, pocketed nearly $4 billion from the drop, the second-biggest single-day of profit on record, according to data from Ortex. Tensions escalated after Musk stepped up criticism of Trump's sweeping tax and spending bill, which proposes largely ending the popular $7,500 EV tax incentive by the end of 2025. In response, Trump suggested cuts to the government's contracts with Musk's companies, including rocket maker SpaceX. "It might be a bit too hopeful to think their relationship will ever go back to what it once was, but if cooler heads prevail and the tension eases, that would definitely be a big improvement for Tesla," said Tesla shareholder Matthew Britzman, who is an analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown. An open clash with Trump could pose multiple hurdles for Tesla and the rest of Musk's sprawling business empire. The US Transportation Department regulates vehicle design standards and would have a big say in whether Tesla can mass-produce robotaxis without pedals and steering wheels. Tesla stock is down 29.5% this year after a 14% drop on Thursday. Still, the shares trade at 120 times expected earnings, a lofty multiple compared to other automakers and even tech giants such as Nvidia. The shares have been on a turbulent ride since last July when Musk backed Trump's White House bid. They surged initially as investors bet on less regulatory pressure for robotaxis, but tumbled due to soft sales and brand fallout from Musk's political stance. Some analysts said the rift was likely to blow over as it would be detrimental to both the president and his biggest backer. "Those are obviously threats that are unlikely to come into fruition," said City Index analyst Fiona Cincotta. "I don't expect this to blow out into anything more serious than a war of words for a couple of days."
Express Tribune
5 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Apple of discord
Listen to article When Jon Stewart does a segment on international politics or economics, you pay attention. My apologies for the double negative in the next sentence, but it conveys my sentiment adequately: there is nothing not to like there. Stewart and John Oliver both remain prescient in their comedic timing, activism and political acumen. Recently, Stewart hosted a segment with author and journalist Patrick McGee, who has written a book on the relationship between China and Apple. It is called Apple in China: The Capture of the World's Greatest Company. The explosive book claims Apple accidentally built China into a tech superpower while trapping itself in the process. Based on 200+ interviews with former Apple executives, it posits that Apple's $275 billion investment in China exceeded the Marshall Plan that rebuilt Europe. Starting in 2003, Apple's pursuit of cheap manufacturing evolved into something unprecedented under Tim Cook. The company trained 28 million Chinese workers and transferred cutting-edge knowledge through what McGee calls "the Apple Squeeze" — sending thousands of engineers to educate suppliers like Foxconn. This massive technology transfer inadvertently supported China's plan for technological independence. Ironically, Apple created its own competition. Chinese companies it trained now outcompete Apple domestically, while Apple has discovered it can't easily leave — replicating operations elsewhere would cost hundreds of billions. As Apple grew more successful, it became politically captured, removing VPN apps and storing Chinese data locally to maintain access. McGee believes the world's most valuable company became trapped by its own success, transforming from a symbol of innovation into the unwitting architect of its biggest rival's rise. The book doesn't outright present a solution or reset to fix this paradox. The reason I mentioned the Jon Stewart interview at the outset rather than the book itself is that, in that interview, McGee seems to offer some alternatives. They discuss President Trump's desire to reshore the industrial base — agreeing with the principle, but noting it may not be possible given business bottom lines and balance sheets. McGee goes on to say: "I'm a big fan of friend-shoring rather than reshoring. Right, we should be doing what we did in China, but with allied nations like India, like Mexico." I'll get back to the idea of "friend-shoring" in a bit. But you have to appreciate that his timing is perfect. The world was still taking stock of the "deepseek moment" when more surprises were sprung: Chinese advances in quantum computing; the tough competition Tesla is facing from BYD and other Chinese EV companies; and, last but not least, the short-lived India-Pakistan war which tanked Dassault's stocks while skyrocketing Chengdu's. It's definitely a question on every analyst's mind: how did we end up here? Wouldn't it be nice if we lived in a world of magical realism and some twist of fate presented you the 'culprit' on a platter? I find McGee's quest to do just that. But the real world doesn't work that way. In fact, I remain highly sceptical of people who come bearing gifts of simplistic explanations. You are entitled to question my assertion that the explanation here is simplistic. This, of course, is a very well-crafted and documented book, full of internally consistent nuances. But there lies a problem too. Despite so much neatly packed information, the book has a broader contextual deficit. Remember, there is a very effective strategy to influence a reader's mind if you are a clever writer — and it involves the exploitation of the cognitive load theory. The theory states that our working memory can only hold a small amount of information at any one time, and that instructional methods should avoid overloading it to maximise learning. This method does the opposite. You subject the reader's mind to information overload. While too many details build your credibility, shock, horror (depending on the nature of information), and confusion can break your mental defences and leave you prone to the author's manipulations. Even if we want to put a positive spin on this, McGee's work has a context problem, an agency problem, and a resolution problem. Context problem — because there is hardly any in-depth inquiry into why other markets in the same price range (India, Mexico) lost this opportunity to China. India's case is quite interesting, by the way. It's not as if India wasn't in competition. In fact, an entire book can be written on how Maruti Suzuki and the service industry built India's economy today. But in the end, it's a matter of priorities: automobiles over smart technology; services over manufacturing; low-hanging fruit over strategic planning; training over immediate profit. We know who chose what. Agency problem — because at least its central thesis robs China of its agency. A cultural distinction has to be made. Perhaps a better rebuttal of this two-dimensional image of China is presented by Kai-Fu Lee in his brilliant book, AI Superpowers. It tells the story of original, intense entrepreneurial competition and innovation, strategic planning and investment, cultural factors that drive rapid iteration and risk-taking, and indigenous innovation capabilities. You can see why I'm suspicious. Resolution problem — because third-world problems are presented both as the diagnosis and the resolution. Friend-shoring, so to speak. This is what I hear: "Hey, this idea didn't work the first time. Let's do it all over again in similar situations and not learn anything from the mistakes. We invested in a third-world country and now it's giving us tough competition. Let's now pick another one with an emergent democracy deficit and replicate the model. What could go wrong?" I'm not a big fan of decoupling, but even if a de-risking effort has to be made, here's what I would have done: brought Apple's infrastructure to Canada near the US border. Canada has a lot of land and a smaller population. Then, in consultation with the Canadian and US governments, I would have brought in foreign, cheaper labour to the new plants and cities. This way, high-paying jobs like designing and engineering could be kept in the US, while building a product and labour value chain with total customisation options. This way, the US regains control of its technology and reshoring becomes feasible. Canada and the US move closer, talent from third-world countries gets a better life even in these anti-immigration times, and Canada adds to its working population. But for some reason, these guys won't tell you such solutions exist. India has an even stronger lobby than I originally thought.
Business Recorder
14 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Russian Urals oil to India sells at narrowest discounts since 2022, traders say
MOSCOW/NEW DELHI: Discounts for Russian flagship Urals crude oil for delivery to Indian ports in July hit their narrowest levels since 2022 as spot supplies have tightened, four traders involved in the market said on Friday. Narrowing discounts and tight spot supplies are nudging Indian refiners to scout for alternatives through buying tenders. Spot discounts for Urals crude narrowed to $2.25 per barrel on average for cargoes arriving in India in July, from $2.70 to $3.10 per barrel to dated Brent on delivery ex-ship (DES) basis in the previous month, the sources said. That is the narrowest discount for Urals oil cargoes sold to India since the Ukraine war broke out in 2022. India became the largest buyer of Russian seaborne crude after Moscow diverted its energy supply away from the European Union which imposed a ban. India's GAIL sells LNG cargo as early monsoons cause weak power demand, say sources Some Indian refiners which do not have long-term supply agreements with Russian oil companies are not getting enough Urals oil in July, the sources said. India's largest private refiner, Reliance Industries, locked in a term supply contract with Russian oil giant Rosneft last year, which reduced the availability of Urals in the spot market, they said. Russian oil traders cited higher demand for the grade from refiners in Turkey, which has recently increased buying, boosting competition with Indian refiners over the supply. Turkey's largest oil refiner, Tupras, resumed buying Urals in April after stopping earlier this year, because of tougher U.S. sanctions on Moscow. Two of the traders also said improving refining margins globally also helped boost Russian oil demand as refiners are eager to increase crude runs. India remains the biggest buyer of Russian Urals oil by sea, with imports hitting a 10-month high in May.
