Apple Not Offering USB-C AirPods Pro Cases As a Standalone Purchase

[fuchsdh]

I find it kinda funny how people actually believe the lack of a USB-C port on these were really for environmental purposes.

People upgrading their perfectly-working AirPods cases just for a new connector aren't being green, either. Someone taking potshots at Apple about their environmental record and still upgrading their phones every year likewise have no ground to stand on.

 

[cyanite]

I use a USB-C to Lightning cable to charge my 2nd gen AirPods Pro. Will it not let me charge them from an iPhone 15? And unless the AirPods Pro being sold with the USB-C charging case are different than mine, why would I need a new pair to work with the Apple Vision Pro?

We don't know. If yes, it will be because they updated the AirPods themselves, not because of the case, I bet.

So much for environmental friendly.
Planned obsolescence at it's finest.

That comment makes no sense, as already explained by others. Your existing products continue working as normal, and all newer existing charging cables have USB-C in the other end.

Can't believe there are still people who defend Apple's decision to switch to USB-C. They did it to make us buy all the accessories once again. It's pure planned obsolescence and you're defending this.

They did it tp harmomize the ports, because it's mandated by EU legislation and because it's the right thing to do.

The transition to USB C could been made seamless and frictionless by making it easy for those of us (all of us?) heavily invested in the Lightning connector infrastructure.

How isn't it? Nothing stops working, and existing Lightning cables have USB at the other end.

 

[joshuaiz]

I want a metal case. The plastic case seems cheap anyway.

 

[elvisimprsntr]

I want a metal case. The plastic case seems cheap anyway.

And you have a Faraday cage! Good luck checking the case battery status or location via BT.

 

[elvisimprsntr]

Not sure why this is news.

Apparently nobody else uses a MagSafe Qi charger.

 

[OneBar]

If you replace your case, what becomes of the original case? Oh, it's e-waste. If you have an OG case, you have the cable that came with it. Just use it and shut up already. You aren't missing out on anything.

 

[Andrew Gr]

If they're charging $29 for a usbc-lightning dongle then I bet they'd be charging at least $129 for the standalone case which would be enough for me not to buy it anyway.

 

[Lakersfan74]

It’s been known for some time that Apple would change the case to usb-c so people were warned

 

[Apple_Tiger]

Pretty disappointed that apple has not done this. They clearly should have sold the case standalone. Ill just keep my current Airpods Pro gen 2 with lightning for now.

 

[ChromeCloud]

Actually, you can buy the new charging case separately. It just requires a bit of out-of-the-box thinking...

Just go to the AirPods support page and claim that you have lost the charging case. Then you can buy it for $99.

The USB-C charging case is already listed as one of the available options:

Now the real question is... who is really going to spend $99 just to get a different connector on a stupid charging case? Is it really bothering you so much to carry one extra lightning cable when you're travelling?

 

[kozz]

I wonder what case you would get if doing an Apple Care + claim….after all my dogs like to chew things….

 

[Tagbert]

just asking, why do you need AirpodsPro with the Vision Pro? I thought it has integrated speakers and mics?

The built-in speakers are open-air. They don't block external sounds and the audio playing is audible outside the headset.

You can connect a pair of AirPods for a more self-contained audio experience.

 

[Tagbert]

this is confused. No one believes Apple was doing it for environmental purposes. The law that all devices have to adopt a standard charger was brought in for environmental purposes, and you can criticise the nativity of the lawmakers for thinking Apple would ever make this transition in an environmentally sustainable way, but really the criticism here should all be on Apple. This is really indefensible.

You can also see this move to not sell the stand-alone charging case as more environmentally friendly. This means that people will not be able to just buy a new charging case and discard/recycle their old case.

 

[t0rqx]

And miss out on that sweet revenue and profit if people buy the whole product. Of course not! And it adds numbers to the sales, which in turn is positive fuel for the stockmarket. Not to forget people maybe turning their old model in to the Apple meat grinder to resell as sprinkles for Watchbands.

 

[9081094]

Money, money, money 🤑🤑

 

[nfl_brah]

So the *new* 2nd gen AirPod Pros are exactly the same as the *old* 2nd gen AirPod Pros minus the USB-C charging case?

 

[maxfromdenmark]

just asking, why do you need AirpodsPro with the Vision Pro? I thought it has integrated speakers and mics?

Maybe Just in case if someone wants to use head instead speakers. You know, privacy or not disturbing everyone around.

 

[sppunk]

I’ll be honest I don’t fully understand the uproar here. You can get USB C to lightning cables for like $9. Sure you might have an extra cable but - so?

For travel we use tiny 15w foldable socket pligs that are usb c and have the C to lightning cable for our devices that aren’t the iPad Pros. I’ll keep carrying it …

 

[Darth Tulhu]

While I agree that Lightning should have gone away a long time ago, it is useless to complain about it during the transition period.

Adapters have to be offered to bridge the gap, and there is no avoiding the necessary initial cabling mismatch.

In truth, nothing changes from a consumer perspective; you already have all the Lightning cables you needed, and if you have a Mac or PC or modern game console then the same goes for USB-C.

In reality, the impact of the switch is minor.

 

[ethanwa79]

If you ever find yourself in the "Apple does what's best for the users" camp, here is one way they are showing they are clearly not.

They want to use the inconvenience of having both Lighting and USB-C cables around to push you to upgrade your devices. They aren't going to make it easy for you. This is by design and is anti-user, pro-sales.

And to the "just buy an adapter" crowd.... how about the richest company in the world just offer a USB-C case? Stop being apologists for mega-corps.

Apple knows exactly what they're doing and it works every time.

 

[progx]

they have to buy the lightning to usb-c adapter

And I did! For my PowerBeats Pro, AirPods Pro and Battery Pack.

 

[nicolas_s]

If you ever find yourself in the "Apple does what's best for the users" camp, here is one way they are showing they are clearly not.

They want to use the inconvenience of having both Lighting and USB-C cables around to push you to upgrade your devices. They aren't going to make it easy for you. This is by design and is anti-user, pro-sales.

And to the "just buy an adapter" crowd.... how about the richest company in the world just offer a USB-C case? Stop being apologists for mega-corps.

Apple knows exactly what they're doing and it works every time.

True. This is exactly why they switched to USB-C. They'll re-release every product unchanged with a USB-C port instead of Lightning so you can buy them again. It's easy money.

 

[alFR]

Apple forgot to mention this change in their 2030 goal event.

What a ****** move. Care about preventing waste and the environment at all my a$ s!!!!
When I see stuff like this I disgust myself for actually having liked and still like their products.

Please explain how it’s worse for the environment for existing AirPods Pro users to buy a usb- c to lightning cable (which, even if you don’t want to buy the Apple one, can be had for pretty cheap from Amazon) instead of throwing away their perfectly good charging case containing a battery, U1 location chip, Bluetooth chip, etc. and buying a whole new one? Especially as they don’t need to anyway, because they’ll already have a perfectly good lightning cable and charger that they’re using right now. The only reason to want to be able to charge these via USB-C is for convenience/to allow charging direct from a usb-c equipped Apple device which, as I’ve already pointed out, can be achieved with a £17 cable (if you buy the official Apple one, Anker etc. are cheaper).

 

[alFR]

True. This is exactly why they switched to USB-C. They'll re-release every product unchanged with a USB-C port instead of Lightning so you can buy them again. It's easy money.

Maybe you missed all the stories about the EU mandating it? And all the thousands of posts on here over the last couple of years demanding that they change (probably made by many of the same people now moaning about having to buy new cables)?

 

[Analog Kid]

I find it kinda funny how people actually believe the lack of a USB-C port on these were really for environmental purposes.

Mother Nature wont be happy, they’re about as green as my red shirt.

It seems like enough people have pointed out the absurdity of this argument that I don't need to. USB-C doesn't suck carbon from the atmosphere, or filter lead from our water supply. USB-C has no environmental impact one way or the other.

True. This is exactly why they switched to USB-C. They'll re-release every product unchanged with a USB-C port instead of Lightning so you can buy them again. It's easy money.

This is why? Not because the EU would ban their products otherwise but because customers are going to spend thousands of dollars so they can charge the same stuff at the same rate through a connector with a marginally different shape?