In the EU, the MacBook Pro comes without a charger in the box unless you opt to add one at purchase. — Apple
On Oct 15, Apple introduced a slate of new devices built around its latest processor, the M5. There’s a new 14-inch MacBook Pro, a refreshed iPad Pro, and even a new Vision Pro. None of them looks radically different from what came before. The story is mostly about what’s inside: The M5 is faster, more efficient, and built for Apple’s growing focus on on-device AI.
I’ll have more to say about the devices once I have a chance to spend some time with them, but there’s one change that isn’t about performance at all – and it’s making a bunch of people mad. In the European Union, the new MacBook Pro no longer comes with a charger in the box.
Laws have unintended consequences
Apple stopped including chargers with the iPhone years ago, arguing it cut down on electronic waste and packaging. This time, however, Apple didn’t remove the charger because it wanted to. It did it because the European Union basically told it to.
Under the EU’s Common Charger Directive (2022/2380), electronics like phones, tablets, and laptops must use USB-C for charging. That part of the law got most of the attention when it passed. What got less attention is the second piece: Companies must offer consumers the option to buy a device without a charger.
The point is to reduce e-waste and prevent people from ending up with drawers full of duplicate chargers. The EU isn’t saying that Apple can’t sell you a charger in the box – it just says it must also offer a version without. Apple’s solution was the simplest possible: In the EU, the MacBook Pro comes without a charger in the box unless you opt to add one at purchase.
Technically, that meets the requirement. It also makes a lot of people angry.
The problem here is a perfect example of unintended consequences. The EU wanted companies to give consumers the freedom to choose. Apple is giving them exactly what they asked for, but it turns out that customers don’t love the idea that they now have to pay more for something that literally used to be in the box. Especially since, if you buy it in Chicago or Tokyo, it still comes in the box. In practice, European customers get less for the same price.
No one looks great here
The optics aren’t great. It looks like punishment for the EU’s interference, wrapped in sustainability language. But it actually raises an interesting question: Who should decide? By that I mean, who should make product decisions: companies or governments?
Sure, Apple probably would have switched to USB-C on the iPhone eventually. The standard is better, faster, and used by basically every other electronic device you can buy today. But the EU forced the timing, leaving Apple little choice. Now it’s deciding how Apple packages its products.
That’s the tension here. The EU’s goal of standardisation and giving users a choice is fine. I don’t think anyone is arguing against that. The thing is, there are a lot of ways you can make that happen and generally it seems best to let customers make their preference known by their buying decisions. That’s not what’s happening here. Instead, the government is making choices, and we’re seeing exactly what happens when regulatory goals collide with big-tech priorities. You don’t get a better product; you get a box missing something you expected to be there.
This feels different
There’s also a psychological element. When Apple removed the iPhone charger, it softened the blow by introducing MagSafe and new accessories. It told a story about how the tradeoff made sense. With the MacBook Pro, there’s no new feature to distract from what’s gone.
Customers simply notice they’re paying the same price for less. That’s never a good story. Especially when they can look across the Atlantic and see buyers in the US getting a charger for free.
From the EU’s perspective, this is exactly what it wanted – for customers to have control and choices. Except, the problem is that the optics cut both ways. When governments micromanage product details, they risk alienating the very people they’re trying to protect. The EU’s law was meant to empower consumers. In practice, it might just make them frustrated with both Apple and the regulators who forced its hand.
This charger issue might seem small, but it highlights the tension between two forces that both claim to act in the consumer’s best interest – Apple’s design philosophy and Europe’s regulatory bureaucracy.
When those collide, no one wins. You end up with what we saw today: a powerful new MacBook Pro, built with cutting-edge silicon, shipping in a box that feels a little emptier than it should. Maybe that’s progress. Or maybe it’s just politics disguised as sustainability. Either way, Apple is giving the European Union exactly what it wants, and no one is going to be happy. – Inc./Tribune News Service
