Apple iPhone 13 Pro Charger Not Supplied

iPhone 13 Pro does not come with a charger to accept a USB-C connector. This is known as a “tie sale” where a product does not operate without having to purchase an additional product. It is an illegal commercial practice. A Brazilian court recently ruled against Apple for this very reason.

Apple tries to justify the practice on environmental reasons, expecting consumers to use their existing cables and chargers. This of course assumes that consumers have existing iPhone cables and chargers (which is a huge and arrogant assumption). Furthermore, even if they are existing iPhone consumers and have the older cables, they cannot benefit from the faster charging capabilities of the new chargers, unless they pay for it.

Why is it that Australian authorities continually allow corporations like Apple to get away with such practices?

I hope that CHOICE takes on this issue.

1 Like

Yeah, nah. It’s the other way round. It would be illegal to supply a charger … in the EU. So Apple is just adapting to new EU laws.

Yes. You are expected to have an existing USB-C charger … which you may or may not have.

The benefit to consumers is that theoretically any random USB-C charger will work and a random USB-C charger will probably cost a third of the amount that Apple would charge for the same item.


The other benefit is waste. One of the reasons the EU introduced such laws is the amount of wasted chargers created by each purchase. A standardised charger (USB-C) can also be used across multiple devices meaning that not as many chargers are needed.

A charger, if looked after, will last for many years, far more than the life of a smart device. If a new charger is provided with every purchase, then this creates an accumulation of chargers overtime sitting in one draw or being thrown out.


Except the charger required can also be a generic product. It is not unique to Apple.

Look to other rechargeable products. Perhaps a DJI branded Mini drone product. Does it come with a full kit of everything you need? Tongue in cheek - of course - NOT! You will need to provide a suitable device, EG Android Smartphone, iPhone of a suitable revision to have vision from the gimbal camera, link the controller and adjust nearly every flight setting. And don’t forget the USB-C capable 230V plug pack (Aka charger adapter), 18W minimum recommended. Supply your own or add a DJI branded one to your accessory order.


Adding to my previous post, these new EU laws apply to a range of portable electronics, not just mobile phones. So expect to see more of this.


I hope we do. We have many chargers accumulated over the years and it is difficult to find a ‘new home’ for them as no one seems to want them as they are also in the same boat…excess chargers around the home.

This article summarises the recent EU changes:

And BTW, Brazil has also indicated it wants to also adopt the EU stance on chargers:


I have mixed feelings.

I understand the consumer benefit and the environmental benefit but I also know that there is a gap between USB-C theory and USB-C practice (and I fully expect lots of complaints from confused users about how they used their existing USB-C charger with device XYZ but it didn’t work so is the problem with the charger or the device? with the resulting finger-pointing by the vendor of the charger and the vendor of the device).

USB-C is very complex, some would say over-engineered as a specification, and in addition there are lots of partial or buggy implementations.

It simply is not the case that you can take any USB-C charger and use it with any device that accepts power via USB-C. However it is likely that any working USB-C charger will be able to charge your “Apple iPhone 13”, albeit maybe more slowly than you would like.

Charging via USB-C also increases your security risk if you use a charger that you have not retained custody of at all times. (Exactly when this security risk applies and when it does not may be beyond the scope of this topic.)

Apple hates this change because they wanted to go “all in” with wireless charging and they are now effectively prevented from doing so.


How can you possibly say this? Wikipedia has a table that clearly illustrates the different specifications including, as shown below, cables.

How could anyone possibly find this confusing?



Considering this a universal solution intended to meet all needs into our futures. Is the ground connection A1, B1, A12, B12 really Tin-plated?

Surely it should meet at least a “Gold” Standard? Tin plate is what the cheap toys of bygone eras were made from.
/possibly humour

If I had a preference - contactless charging and wireless connectivity would win over physical ports. One less point of environmental failure. .

Wireless and contactless are incredibly inefficient. You are using a lot more electricity than would be used by direct electrical contacts.

1 Like

The relative losses though are very very small.
Especially when compared with how we use electrical energy to meet so many other needs. :shushing_face:

When one day off in the never never of the NBN they replace my inefficient wireless service with a low energy Optical Fibre, it may be more relevant around here. Although the convenience of WiFi in the home suggests inefficiency is built in to our wants.


Another benefit is a benefit to the company … they only need to have one model.

With the traditional arrangements, every mains-powered-gadget company had to have a model for each type of wall plug and voltage - because the supplied power adapter would be dependent on that. So, at minimum, a model for Australia/NZ, a model for the UK, a model for Europe. You get the idea. Over time, they at least finessed the voltage requirement by providing a universal voltage AC/DC adapter (100V-240V) and some companies partly hacked around the plug problem. However the underlying problem doesn’t go away.

By removing the need to supply a charger at all and having a single global standard for power input connector (USB-C), the company can simplify that down to one model for the whole world.

That even benefits the consumer potentially because it makes it easier to import the device yourself, if you reckon you can get a better price overseas (almost certainly true) and you don’t care about the risks (e.g. no Australian consumer protections, warranty may not be worth the paper it’s written on).

On the down side, specifically for mobile phones, that still doesn’t necessarily work because the powers that be in their infinite wisdom do mobile on different frequency bands in different countries and, worse still, for different carriers. Maybe one day …