4 ms·

The problem I have with legislating this type of stuff is in 5 years (or whatever period) there will be a successor to USB C but getting legislation updated wil

The problem I have with legislating this type of stuff is in 5 years (or whatever period) there will be a successor to USB C but getting legislation updated will be difficult and time consuming. So instead of being innovative and moving forward manufacturers will get caught on a standard for years after everyone knew it was no longer the right one. And yea, USB-C might last longer then 5 years of course, but there are things that just don't belong in legislation. I would have preferred that they made the text something more like manufacturers must all agree on a standard every 3 years or something along those lines, to allow for more rapid updates but still reduce the excess, waste and be more convenient for consumers. Not that this is a great solution either, but it at least seems less restrictive on innovation. To be fair, I haven't read the full text of the rule so maybe there is something to help minimize the delay on innovation, but seeing it came from a government body it doesn't make me optimistic.

namdnay 5y ago
So the original rule back in 2011 was for the industry to self-govern itself and align on a common standard (just like the aviation industry will align on how smooth a runway should be or what pressure jet fuel should be injected at). Every manufacturer agreed to align on micro-USB, except for ... Apple. So now unfortunately we have to rely on the nanny state to whip our childish businesses into line. Hopefully after this they can move to a self-governing standard
- davismwfl 5y ago
  Thank you, I didn't know that, interesting. I still think the better way would've been to force the industry to comply by stating whatever the agreement was any devices not meeting it would be barred from sales in the market. That would put teeth into the industry agreement but still keep technical implementation details out of the legislation. At least with what you are saying I get more why they moved this way, just wish it would've been slightly more logical and not so potentially innovation stifling. Hopefully there is something in the full text about the innovation cycle and future changes, but I doubt it.

namdnay 5y ago

So the original rule back in 2011 was for the industry to self-govern itself and align on a common standard (just like the aviation industry will align on how smooth a runway should be or what pressure jet fuel should be injected at). Every manufacturer agreed to align on micro-USB, except for ... Apple. So now unfortunately we have to rely on the nanny state to whip our childish businesses into line. Hopefully after this they can move to a self-governing standard

davismwfl 5y ago
Thank you, I didn't know that, interesting. I still think the better way would've been to force the industry to comply by stating whatever the agreement was any devices not meeting it would be barred from sales in the market. That would put teeth into the industry agreement but still keep technical implementation details out of the legislation. At least with what you are saying I get more why they moved this way, just wish it would've been slightly more logical and not so potentially innovation stifling. Hopefully there is something in the full text about the innovation cycle and future changes, but I doubt it.