3 ms·

I can’t imagine the headlines if the USB consortium tried to enforce a restriction on the shapes of products people are allowed to create. Remember when people

I can’t imagine the headlines if the USB consortium tried to enforce a restriction on the shapes of products people are allowed to create. Remember when people were mad about Apple patenting rounded corners? This would be as bad.

Dylan16807 6y ago
Round corners happen by coincidence, and Apple wouldn't let you use round corners even if you met their spec. Someone making a port the exact size and shape of a USB-C port (within tolerances) is doing it for the purpose of being compatible, and telling them to meet the (non-onerous) spec to be allowed would not get nasty headlines.
- derefr 6y ago
  > Someone making a port the exact size and shape of a USB-C port (within tolerances) is doing it for the purpose of being compatible People put TRS (3.5mm audio) jacks on random proprietary wall-chargers. They don't do it so that the charger can "be compatible with" the analog-audio ecosystem (what do you want to do; plug your charger into an amplifier?) No, these manufacturers use TRS jacks, because TRS jacks (and sockets) are cheap parts. (Remember, they're not making these parts; they're just ordering them, in bulk, from some supplier that has a warehouse full of them. And that supplier doesn't care what they're used for; they just want to get them sold.) USB-C connectors are now also seemingly beginning to be cheap parts.
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    I keep hearing about USB-C ports being significantly more expensive to use than previous versions, so I guess let me know when you see someone do that. I'll be surprised to see anything mass-produced that uses a USB-C port for something entirely different. But even if they want to, it would be better if someone stops them.
bleepblorp 6y ago
There's a middle ground between Apple's rounded corner land grab and allowing non-compliant electrical devices that can cause property damage. Consider the situation with standard NEMA 5-15R receptacles. As far as I'm aware, the design is not legally protected, but any manufacturer who made a '5-15R' receptacle that couldn't carry 15A--or any device manufacturer who decided to re-purpose the pins such that the ground conductor carried 240V--would have legal problems if they brought their product to market. This is where USB-PD should be: in a situation where physical connector compatibility brings with it enough design assurances that any pairing of legally-available devices won't blow up, catch fire, or burn out. Ideally, any USB-PD device pairing should work, but at the moment the bare minimum needs to be that any device pairing is safe.

Dylan16807 6y ago

Round corners happen by coincidence, and Apple wouldn't let you use round corners even if you met their spec. Someone making a port the exact size and shape of a USB-C port (within tolerances) is doing it for the purpose of being compatible, and telling them to meet the (non-onerous) spec to be allowed would not get nasty headlines.

derefr 6y ago
> Someone making a port the exact size and shape of a USB-C port (within tolerances) is doing it for the purpose of being compatible People put TRS (3.5mm audio) jacks on random proprietary wall-chargers. They don't do it so that the charger can "be compatible with" the analog-audio ecosystem (what do you want to do; plug your charger into an amplifier?) No, these manufacturers use TRS jacks, because TRS jacks (and sockets) are cheap parts. (Remember, they're not making these parts; they're just ordering them, in bulk, from some supplier that has a warehouse full of them. And that supplier doesn't care what they're used for; they just want to get them sold.) USB-C connectors are now also seemingly beginning to be cheap parts.
- Dylan16807 6y ago
  I keep hearing about USB-C ports being significantly more expensive to use than previous versions, so I guess let me know when you see someone do that. I'll be surprised to see anything mass-produced that uses a USB-C port for something entirely different. But even if they want to, it would be better if someone stops them.

bleepblorp 6y ago

There's a middle ground between Apple's rounded corner land grab and allowing non-compliant electrical devices that can cause property damage. Consider the situation with standard NEMA 5-15R receptacles. As far as I'm aware, the design is not legally protected, but any manufacturer who made a '5-15R' receptacle that couldn't carry 15A--or any device manufacturer who decided to re-purpose the pins such that the ground conductor carried 240V--would have legal problems if they brought their product to market. This is where USB-PD should be: in a situation where physical connector compatibility brings with it enough design assurances that any pairing of legally-available devices won't blow up, catch fire, or burn out. Ideally, any USB-PD device pairing should work, but at the moment the bare minimum needs to be that any device pairing is safe.