3 ms·
The approach taken doesn’t make sense. A more reasonable approach that supports innovation, and helps to reduce e-waste, is a multi-part plan: - Require publi
by numbsafari 5y ago
The approach taken doesn’t make sense.
A more reasonable approach that supports innovation, and helps to reduce e-waste, is a multi-part plan:
- Require public disclosure of all technical aspects of physical connectors, whether it is a plug-in port or a magnetic/induction or wireless interface. Require licensing on an FRAND basis, but only for a very limited time period, say 5 years. This gets rid of the lock-in, but helps finance adoption, testing, etc., and also creates public disclosure to support right-to-repair, etc.
- Mandate which types of physical connectors must be supported by different device categories for all EU and member state purchasing regimes, which types of connectors will be provided for in public accommodations, etc., and create strict processes for any granted exceptions. This will help subsidize consolidation, penalize the experience of products that choose to not comply, etc., but it still allows for innovation and change without actually specifying product design choices.
- Lastly, require companies that sell electronics to pay into an e-waste fund on a per-unit manufactured basis. Charge the companies something that reflects the externalities of their choices and make them accommodate and evaluate cradle-to-grave impact of their innovative designs before they can enter the marketplace.
USB-C isn’t the perfect dream world of device interfaces, and Apple’s approach of “no ports” experimentation is neither proven, nor an actual solution to the problems the EU is concerned about.
- xupybd 5y agoExactly this, solve the problem without creating a new one.
- taylodl 5y agoBut it means the regulators will have to do their job rather than claim some pyrrhic victory over Apple. It was 9 years ago when Apple switched from the 30 pin connector to the Lightning connector. There was an uproar. I recall Apple promising they would keep Lightning for at least 10 years. Guess what? Next year is the 10 year mark. Meanwhile, what has changed in the market? Lightning inspired USB-C. Apple has adopted USB-C on their MacBook and iPad devices. Guess what next year's iPhone, released on the 10th anniversary of adopting Lightning, is likely to have? A USB-C port. This is really much ado over nothing. The regulators haven't actually done anything but they'll pawn it off that they took the fight to Apple and won. This is what passes for leadership these days.
- cblconfederate 5y agoit makes a lot of sense. so many (most?) devices already implement it without problems. Phones are not a novel thing anymore, the format of the connector doesnt seem to change a lot in size from mini/micro-usb to lightning to usb-c. It's reasonable to standardize the charging pins now and let future iterations improvise over it. Apple is singularly a source of waste here, which is disproportional given their minor market share in europe. What you re proposing would require a new generation of e-waste, while usbc is already here and working