3 ms·
I don't see it as matching the situation with USB-C. USB-C has way, way too many subtypes (Power delivery, Displayport over USB-C, Thunderbolt 4, USB 3.2 Gen-2
by tehbeard 5y ago
I don't see it as matching the situation with USB-C.
USB-C has way, way too many subtypes (Power delivery, Displayport over USB-C, Thunderbolt 4, USB 3.2 Gen-2x2.6467764, USB-C form factor but only wired for USB 2.0/3.0) and needs "smart" cables to make half these work (which, while only some resistors, still means a manufactuer has to weight spending on resistors vs just on copper and plugs) and for most use cases "2.0 micro-B" works well enough.
IPv6 instead is slow to adopt because there is a LOT of infastructure (almost like it's a global spanning network) that needs upgrading, and companies will absolutely wring out the value of their original IPv4 purchases as long as possible before spending on upgrades.
- usui 5y agoI feel like it wouldn't be too hard to come up with software IP-equivalents analogies to the USB-C woes you mentioned, don't you think so? Not really the same, but relatable in terms of entrenchment and adoption speed? I agree that IPv6 adoption will be made even more difficult by the fact that companies will try their hardest to hold onto IPv4 and the money associated with it.